Offical Impeachment Thread

[eagle1462010]

He spins them up like a top.........They deserve it.

 

[BluesLegend]

He spins them up like a top.........They deserve it.

Its hilarious. Dem's have been trash talking Rep presidents for decades with complete immunity in the liberal media. Suddenly there's this guy Trump from NY who can out trash talk the Dem's and they are freaking out.

 

[WEATHER53]

No evidence nor witnesses because no one saw anything.
Lots of bruised egos from disobedient know it alls and a few tears.

 

[Dick Foster]

Once the Democrats vote to send this thing to the Senate, they better be ready for the witness list I'm sure the Republican leadership is assembling. This is where we'll find out if the rubber meats the road,

DOA in the Senate

Not until a lot of demodummie and deep state bodies have piled up.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You better come to terms with facts and not fantasy.

The Durham investigation turned criminal only a very short time after the start. That means he has something, and he has something good. It means there will be indictments, there will be charges, their will be criminal prosecutions.

The IG released a statement that he will testify to Congress on December 11th about his report. That means his report will be out long before that so it can be read, redacted, and ready for presentation for such questioning. If it favored Democrats, he wouldn't be expecting to be hauled into Congress to answer anything. Apparently, he knows what his report shows are really going to piss of Piglosi, Schiff Face, and Shoemaker.

Given the amount of people in the coupe, the first few subpoenaed into court will be the start of the dominos falling, and most people will do anything to avoid going to prison, because they all know that Trump has the next election almost blindfolded, and there will be no pardons for people that worked against him in the election.

Do we know this? Not with his approval rating. And all that BS done, he won't be facing Biden afterall. It looks like he's going to be facing Mayor Pete. And Rumps backers wouldn't vote for Mayor Pete anyway even if Mayor Pete were endorsed by Rump, or would they?

Of course not. But if we can both agree that Biden didn't stand a chance, then we can also agree that Trump holding up foreign military aid was not for personal gain, because Trump even knew (like most Americans) that Biden would likely not be his contender for the White House. And BTW, Trump's approval rating is back up to 50%.

Even Fox isn't giving him a 50% rating. Sites like Breitbart does but that's a conspiracy site who will say just abut anything. He's still running between 42 and 46 depending on what flavor the ice cream. I made a prediction almost 2 eyars ago that Biden would not be and candidate. It looks like I was right. It would be some dark horse. Mayor Pete may very well fulfill that prediction. Even Warren is starting to sound more like Mayor Pete lately and less like Bernie. Mayor Pete fills all the boxes for being a President. The only thing that may stand in his way is that he's gay. And after Rump, that's only a huge problem with the Rump Followers who wouldn't for for Jesus Christ if he ran against Rump. If Bernie gives his support to Mayor Pete that means Mayor Pete will have almost total support of Women who really don't have a problem in that area. Warren is NOT the choice of Women. It's a tossup between Bernie and Mayor Pete. Rump has a minority support of Women. It all dpends on if Women will get out and vote.

GEtting this back into perspective of the impeachment, I am watching a retransmission of it right now. Most of the discussion by both sides is BS. Here is my take.

IF Trump brought up the Ukrarians were asked to do an investigation of Biden by the Ukranians then the Professional Diplomats all find that that was wrong. Even mentioning that in a conversation would be uncomfortable. None of them said they would have been party to a Biden investigation in any way shape or form.

And we all know it did happen. You can spin it any way you want to but Rump should NEVER have even brought it up even as a favor. He's done it before with Israel. No matter what I think of the 4 outspoken Congress Women, he should have never asked for a favor from the Israeli Leader like that. It's not Ukraines or Israels business. We need to police out own. If there is a crime, that's why we have the DOJ and our Court System. The President of the United States has just too much Power over these countries to be asking for any kind of personal favor other than, maybe, what the best recipe for their favorite food.

We can agree or disagree whether what Trump asked for was right or wrong, but one thing that it's not, is grounds for impeachment.

Since Trump has the right to ask anybody for anything, the commies are trying to attach the word "bribery" to it, as if Biden didn't do that when he was VP. But bribery involves personally getting something back, which Trump didn't do for himself or the country.

Polls are funny, because they always seem to favor the Democrats......that is up until a week before the election, then they start telling the truth so they can maintain credibility. In the meantime,they are designed to try and convince people how the political atmosphere is, instead of just telling us what it is.

So much like last time, you can hang your hat on the polls. As for myself, I'm convinced people are much happier today with Trump than they were before him.

You underestimate the stupidity and partisanship of the average American. To most people politics is like a game of football, they will root for their team endlessly while somehow failing to realize that it isn’t really their team at all.

Leftists love to act like they're enlightened intellectuals, but in truth the average democrat has the cognitive capacity of a chimpanzee. Not saying the average boomer ziopublican is much better, but still. Reality doesn’t matter in an era where journalists are all activists, headlines are more important than the actual body of an article and people think reaction gifs of negresses on Twitter constitutes a legitimate political debate.

To be totally honest, I don't think most Americans follow politics. But I do believe they lay all the credit--good or bad, on the US President.

We have a booming economy, people bringing home more money from their paycheck, getting higher tax refunds, and most don't investigate as to why. So they just assume the President is responsible for all their good fortunes, and will likely vote that way.

Liberals read the polls, and just assume they are accurate. They coincide with their environment. I'm a liberal, most of my friends are liberal, most of my family are liberals, and so are al the people at Starbucks, therefore, most people in the country must be liberal. So when they lose an election, the DNC and MSM create all kinds of fables as to how they really won, but were cheated somehow.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So with the conversation between Trump and the Ukraine president where was the wrong

If you can't see it then you never will. Even after Rump is no longer in office.

It's really hard to see something that was never really there.

 

[Kilroy2]

what does the transcript says

Need a link for this. Kilroy2

 

[task0778]

What I've seen is a whole lot of insinuations and innuendo, conjecture and supposition, but no hard facts or evidence. If they had anything concrete we'd have heard of it long ago, but I think the truth is that they've got nothig and are hoping against hope somebody turns up something derogatory about Trump. Even if it ain't true, I don't think the Dems give a shit about truth and justice.

 

[Zorro!]

Sen Johnson Letter Details His Ukraine Involvement, Says Key Witness is Anti-Trump, Leaker.

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a National Security Council (NSC) official who publicly testified before Schiff’s kangaroo court Tuesday morning, maybe among the government bureaucrats who are coordinating against Trump “by leaking to the press and participating in the ongoing effort to sabotage his policies and, if possible, remove him from office.”

How does the US Code of Military Justice view officers trying to drive the CIC from office?

Johnson confirms that Vindman is a never-Trumper. He went after Vindman’s opening statement in the secret part of the Schiff committee:

Quotes from the transcript of Vindman’s opening remarks and his deposition reinforce this point and deserve to be highlighted. Vindman testified that an “alternative narrative” pushed by the president’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, was “inconsistent with the consensus views of the” relevant federal agencies and was “undermining the consensus policy.”​

The last line was significant in itself. There is no such thing as a consensus policy. Foreign policy comes from the President–it is a consensus of one:

Vindman’s testimony, together with other witnesses’ use of similar terms such as “our policy,” “stated policy,” and “long-standing policy” lend further credence to the point I’m making. Whether you agree with President Trump or not, the Constitution vests the power of conducting foreign policy with the duly elected president. American foreign policy is what the president determines it to be, not what the “consensus” of unelected foreign policy bureaucrats wants it to be. If any bureaucrats disagree with the president, they should use their powers of persuasion within their legal chain of command to get the president to agree with their viewpoint. In the end, if they are unable to carry out the policy of the president, they should resign. They should not seek to undermine the policy by leaking to people outside their chain of command.​

 

[Zorro!]

what does the transcript says

Trump

we do ·a lot for Ukraine. We spend a lot of effort and a lot.of time.
the United States has been very very good to Ukraine. He talks about some server that belongs to the DNC that somehow ends up in Ukraine and Crowdstrike. Clearly he is watching to much FOX news and reading repub bloggers. Why would Ukraine have that server? He then moves on to an investigation and the Bidens

He has laid out what the US does for them and also casting doubt on the Europeans wanting to do things for Ukraine thus who can you count on

Trump and the Ukraine Prez admits in the transcript that US is more of an important player than the EU

given the fact that Ukraine is up against Russia in Crimea and we know Russia has way more resources. Ukraine needs this aid. Yet we know that the aid is already on hold. Trump does not mention this.

The Ukrainian president even mentions the need for more Javelin missiles

clearly this is laying out what Ukrainian needs (the aid)

Trump
I would like you to do us a favor though
because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a
lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with
this whole situation with Ukraine

Trump is asking for a favor after setting up the guy with how much they need the US

The transcript clearly says that Trump he want him to meet with Rudy G

Rudy G is not a government official and is Trumps personal lawyer

Trump then talks about Biden and Biden's son and how Biden supposedly stop an investigation in Ukraine

Thus suggesting an investigation and then casually throws in the Biden's

This is what you can do for me restart an investigation that wasn't about Biden or Biden son but about this Ukrainian energy company being corrupt but he clearly mentions Biden

Repubs want to hold out that they eventually got the money and there was no quid pro quo

well part of the quid pro quo was them getting the money and assistance

and trump getting an investigation not because he is worried about some some Ukrainian energy company but dirt on the Biden's

Time line

April 25, 2019 Joe Biden announces he is running for president

July 3 the aid was on hold

July 10
A meeting at the White House with Ukrainian officials is cut short when Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, says he has an agreement with the acting White House chief of staff that Ukraine’s president would get a meeting with Trump if Ukraine agreed to launch investigations.

July 18
In a secure call with national security officials, a staff member of the White House Office of Management and Budget announces there’s a freeze on Ukraine aid until further notice, based on a presidential order to the budget office.

Presidential order

July 25th the phone call to Ukraine's president

So he has already frozen the money yet he is bragging about the aid that the US provides

Catherine Croft, the special adviser for Ukraine at the State Department, says two Ukrainians reach out to her to ask about the status of the military assistance. She told lawmakers she couldn’t recall the exact dates, but believes the outreach took place before the Aug. 28 publication of a Politico article detailing the hold.

A whistleblower files a formal complaint addressed to Congress that details concerns over the July 25 phone call and the hold placed on the military aid. The complaint is withheld from congress.

late Aug
Politico publishes details that the military aid to Ukraine is on hold, setting off a scramble among diplomats in Ukraine and the United States.

The lid is coming off
William Taylor, the acting U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, testified that he did not know the aid had been withheld until after the Politico article appeared, when he started receiving “desperate” calls from Ukrainian officials.

“The minister of defense came to me,” he said. “I would use the word ‘desperate,’ to try to figure out why the assistance was held.”

Taylor said the minister thought if he spoke to Congress, or the White House, he could find out the reason and reassure them of whatever was necessary to get the aid. If the money wasn’t provided by Sept. 30, it would be lost.

Sept 9 the investigation begins
allegations that Trump, his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, and possibly others, tried to pressure the Ukrainian government to help the president’s reelection campaign by digging up dirt on a political rival.

All of the sudden on Aug 11 the release on the aid is lifted
The funds are suddenly released. Senate Republicans said that happened in part because Sen. Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, threatened to block $5 billion in Pentagon spending for 2020 if the aid wasn’t given to Ukraine. They said the aid was held up while Trump looked into whether Zelenskiy was serious about fighting corruption. Taylor and other diplomats involved in Ukraine were not
given a reason for the aid being released.
Taylor said Ukraine’s president was planning to do an interview with CNN in which he would make a public statement on the investigations that Trump had pushed for.

Taylor was concerned about the interview and its potential to play into “domestic U.S. politics,” and on Sept. 13 asked Ukrainian officials about it.

The interview never happens and was cancelled by Ukraine's president

So they were about to announce an investigation that Trump had suggested in prime time in the US media. Yet since the aid being withheld, the call for a favor and the investigation were now in the spotlight. Oh never mind.

I thought trump was interested in this investigation about corruption and was withholding the aid.

But here we are in November and no investigation.

So clearly what happen Trump and his crew knew what he was going to be said and to prevent a total disaster they released the money.

Well I suppose NO quid pro quo would be a better argument for repubs

instead of the more serious issues of campaign finance law violations, bribery, extortion, and conspiracy

You want to impeach the President based on your mind-reading? Never going to happen. Oh well, you might impeach him, but the American People will never support removal based on hear-say and Democrat mind-reading and no treason, bribery or high crimes.

Not to mention an inherently unfair process. Even if you had crimes you would need an unquestionable bipartisan process and you guys have the Schiff Kangaroo Court. You're screwed, it now comes down to how you will face up to that and extricate yourself from this tar baby.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You better come to terms with facts and not fantasy.

The Durham investigation turned criminal only a very short time after the start. That means he has something, and he has something good. It means there will be indictments, there will be charges, their will be criminal prosecutions.

The IG released a statement that he will testify to Congress on December 11th about his report. That means his report will be out long before that so it can be read, redacted, and ready for presentation for such questioning. If it favored Democrats, he wouldn't be expecting to be hauled into Congress to answer anything. Apparently, he knows what his report shows are really going to piss of Piglosi, Schiff Face, and Shoemaker.

Given the amount of people in the coupe, the first few subpoenaed into court will be the start of the dominos falling, and most people will do anything to avoid going to prison, because they all know that Trump has the next election almost blindfolded, and there will be no pardons for people that worked against him in the election.

Do we know this? Not with his approval rating. And all that BS done, he won't be facing Biden afterall. It looks like he's going to be facing Mayor Pete. And Rumps backers wouldn't vote for Mayor Pete anyway even if Mayor Pete were endorsed by Rump, or would they?

Of course not. But if we can both agree that Biden didn't stand a chance, then we can also agree that Trump holding up foreign military aid was not for personal gain, because Trump even knew (like most Americans) that Biden would likely not be his contender for the White House. And BTW, Trump's approval rating is back up to 50%.

Even Fox isn't giving him a 50% rating. Sites like Breitbart does but that's a conspiracy site who will say just abut anything. He's still running between 42 and 46 depending on what flavor the ice cream. I made a prediction almost 2 eyars ago that Biden would not be and candidate. It looks like I was right. It would be some dark horse. Mayor Pete may very well fulfill that prediction. Even Warren is starting to sound more like Mayor Pete lately and less like Bernie. Mayor Pete fills all the boxes for being a President. The only thing that may stand in his way is that he's gay. And after Rump, that's only a huge problem with the Rump Followers who wouldn't for for Jesus Christ if he ran against Rump. If Bernie gives his support to Mayor Pete that means Mayor Pete will have almost total support of Women who really don't have a problem in that area. Warren is NOT the choice of Women. It's a tossup between Bernie and Mayor Pete. Rump has a minority support of Women. It all dpends on if Women will get out and vote.

GEtting this back into perspective of the impeachment, I am watching a retransmission of it right now. Most of the discussion by both sides is BS. Here is my take.

IF Trump brought up the Ukrarians were asked to do an investigation of Biden by the Ukranians then the Professional Diplomats all find that that was wrong. Even mentioning that in a conversation would be uncomfortable. None of them said they would have been party to a Biden investigation in any way shape or form.

And we all know it did happen. You can spin it any way you want to but Rump should NEVER have even brought it up even as a favor. He's done it before with Israel. No matter what I think of the 4 outspoken Congress Women, he should have never asked for a favor from the Israeli Leader like that. It's not Ukraines or Israels business. We need to police out own. If there is a crime, that's why we have the DOJ and our Court System. The President of the United States has just too much Power over these countries to be asking for any kind of personal favor other than, maybe, what the best recipe for their favorite food.

We can agree or disagree whether what Trump asked for was right or wrong, but one thing that it's not, is grounds for impeachment.

Since Trump has the right to ask anybody for anything, the commies are trying to attach the word "bribery" to it, as if Biden didn't do that when he was VP. But bribery involves personally getting something back, which Trump didn't do for himself or the country.

Polls are funny, because they always seem to favor the Democrats......that is up until a week before the election, then they start telling the truth so they can maintain credibility. In the meantime,they are designed to try and convince people how the political atmosphere is, instead of just telling us what it is.

So much like last time, you can hang your hat on the polls. As for myself, I'm convinced people are much happier today with Trump than they were before him.

The proper channel was for Rump to turn it over to the DOJ and have them open the investigation. Again, a President has tremendous power over countries through foreign aid. To even ask for a favor to have them "Look into a Political Rival" usually means, do it or else. You can word it any way you wish but that's how it's going to come across. In Mob Boss lingo that Rump speaks, that means Do it or Else. He demonstrates that even with people that cross him in the United States. So it or else.

Which is where the stupidity enters the debate. Words mean things, and not what Democrats decide they mean at the time. Now I know you've seen my multiple post of the definition of the word "favor" with the dictionary link of course.

Rational people define the word as it is in the dictionary. Leftists define the word in the way they see fit. You replied with a perfect example of that. Instead of the dictionary definition of favor, which is doing something out of good will, with no remuneration, the Democrats ignore all that, and claim what you just did: better do it or else; your military aid depends on it, and nothing of the sorts was ever said or hinted. How many times have the Democrats in the hearings used the word "demand?" There was never any demand.

Trump never asked for an investigation by Ukraine, he asked for a favor, which I defined above. A demand (also in the dictionary) is an ultimatum, and Trump never did that either. So what this impeachment is all about is the way Democrats are re-defining words. And again, remember, if Democrats can create new definition of words, so can Republicans.

 

[Zorro!]

Democrats don’t want public to know origins of Ukraine investigation like they didn’t want public to know origins of Russia investigation.

Why are House Democrats stonewalling questions about the identity of the Trump-Ukraine whistleblower?​

Beyond a limited prohibition applying to the inspector general of the intelligence community, no law bars anyone, in politics, media, or anywhere else, from revealing the whistleblower’s identity.​

Should the whistleblower have connections to prominent Democrats, exposure of his identity could be embarrassing to the party. And perhaps most of all, reading through the impeachment investigation depositions that have been released so far, it’s clear that cutting off questions that could possibly relate to the whistleblower has also allowed Democrats to shut off any look at how the Trump-Ukraine investigation started. Who was involved? What actions did they take? Why did some government employees think President Trump’s July 25 call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky represented wrongdoing requiring congressional investigation?​

Democrats do not want the public to know. And in that, their position is familiar to anyone who has watched Washington for the last two years: The Democrats’ determination to cut off questions about the origins of the Trump-Ukraine investigation is strikingly similar to their determination to cut off questions about the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation. In both cases, they fought hard to keep secret the origins of investigations that have shaken the nation, deeply divided the electorate, and affected the future of the presidency.​

Democrats were rattled by Republican efforts to uncover the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation. The Steele dossier, the use of spies and informants to target the Trump campaign, the Carter Page wiretap, the murky start to the Crossfire Hurricane investigation — Democrats resisted GOP attempts to reveal them all. But in 2017 and 2018, Republicans controlled the House. Then-Chairman Devin Nunes used the power of the House Intelligence Committee to unearth key parts of the story. Nunes’ efforts eventually led to a Justice Department inspector general investigation whose results, expected in the coming weeks, could further damage the Democratic Trump-Russia storyline. And then there is the ongoing criminal investigation led by U.S. Attorney John Durham.​

But Democrats now control the House.​

Well, that needs to come to an end.

 

[OKTexas]

what does the transcript says

Need a link for this. Kilroy2

Both Volker and Morrison said the less than two month delay of the aid had no effect on Ukraines defensive capabilities. And the Javelin missile sale was apart form that aid.

.

 

[blackhawk]

This sums it up.

 

[Faun]

Do we know this? Not with his approval rating. And all that BS done, he won't be facing Biden afterall. It looks like he's going to be facing Mayor Pete. And Rumps backers wouldn't vote for Mayor Pete anyway even if Mayor Pete were endorsed by Rump, or would they?

Of course not. But if we can both agree that Biden didn't stand a chance, then we can also agree that Trump holding up foreign military aid was not for personal gain, because Trump even knew (like most Americans) that Biden would likely not be his contender for the White House. And BTW, Trump's approval rating is back up to 50%.

Even Fox isn't giving him a 50% rating. Sites like Breitbart does but that's a conspiracy site who will say just abut anything. He's still running between 42 and 46 depending on what flavor the ice cream. I made a prediction almost 2 eyars ago that Biden would not be and candidate. It looks like I was right. It would be some dark horse. Mayor Pete may very well fulfill that prediction. Even Warren is starting to sound more like Mayor Pete lately and less like Bernie. Mayor Pete fills all the boxes for being a President. The only thing that may stand in his way is that he's gay. And after Rump, that's only a huge problem with the Rump Followers who wouldn't for for Jesus Christ if he ran against Rump. If Bernie gives his support to Mayor Pete that means Mayor Pete will have almost total support of Women who really don't have a problem in that area. Warren is NOT the choice of Women. It's a tossup between Bernie and Mayor Pete. Rump has a minority support of Women. It all dpends on if Women will get out and vote.

GEtting this back into perspective of the impeachment, I am watching a retransmission of it right now. Most of the discussion by both sides is BS. Here is my take.

IF Trump brought up the Ukrarians were asked to do an investigation of Biden by the Ukranians then the Professional Diplomats all find that that was wrong. Even mentioning that in a conversation would be uncomfortable. None of them said they would have been party to a Biden investigation in any way shape or form.

And we all know it did happen. You can spin it any way you want to but Rump should NEVER have even brought it up even as a favor. He's done it before with Israel. No matter what I think of the 4 outspoken Congress Women, he should have never asked for a favor from the Israeli Leader like that. It's not Ukraines or Israels business. We need to police out own. If there is a crime, that's why we have the DOJ and our Court System. The President of the United States has just too much Power over these countries to be asking for any kind of personal favor other than, maybe, what the best recipe for their favorite food.

We can agree or disagree whether what Trump asked for was right or wrong, but one thing that it's not, is grounds for impeachment.

Since Trump has the right to ask anybody for anything, the commies are trying to attach the word "bribery" to it, as if Biden didn't do that when he was VP. But bribery involves personally getting something back, which Trump didn't do for himself or the country.

Polls are funny, because they always seem to favor the Democrats......that is up until a week before the election, then they start telling the truth so they can maintain credibility. In the meantime,they are designed to try and convince people how the political atmosphere is, instead of just telling us what it is.

So much like last time, you can hang your hat on the polls. As for myself, I'm convinced people are much happier today with Trump than they were before him.

The proper channel was for Rump to turn it over to the DOJ and have them open the investigation. Again, a President has tremendous power over countries through foreign aid. To even ask for a favor to have them "Look into a Political Rival" usually means, do it or else. You can word it any way you wish but that's how it's going to come across. In Mob Boss lingo that Rump speaks, that means Do it or Else. He demonstrates that even with people that cross him in the United States. So it or else.

Which is where the stupidity enters the debate. Words mean things, and not what Democrats decide they mean at the time. Now I know you've seen my multiple post of the definition of the word "favor" with the dictionary link of course.

Rational people define the word as it is in the dictionary. Leftists define the word in the way they see fit. You replied with a perfect example of that. Instead of the dictionary definition of favor, which is doing something out of good will, with no remuneration, the Democrats ignore all that, and claim what you just did: better do it or else; your military aid depends on it, and nothing of the sorts was ever said or hinted. How many times have the Democrats in the hearings used the word "demand?" There was never any demand.

Trump never asked for an investigation by Ukraine, he asked for a favor, which I defined above. A demand (also in the dictionary) is an ultimatum, and Trump never did that either. So what this impeachment is all about is the way Democrats are re-defining words. And again, remember, if Democrats can create new definition of words, so can Republicans.

"Instead of the dictionary definition of favor, which is doing something out of good will, with no remuneration, the Democrats ignore all that, and claim what you just did: better do it or else"

Dumbfuck. Yeah, words do have meaning. Sadly, that eludes most of you rightards...

"I would like you to do us a favor though..."​

 

[Meister]

At the end of this day, it didn't go well for the democrats game being played.

 

[The Purge]

Report: Disaster For Dems as Alexander Vindman Admits He Made up Parts of Trump Call Summary

Vindman admitted under oath that he made up elements of President Trump’s call with Ukranian President Volodymyr Zelensky in his official summary. Gee, sounds just like Adam Schiff, who also made up a call between the two leaders and then read it on national TV. Prior to the call, Vindman included a discussion about corruption in the talking points provided to the president but Trump did not use them in the call. The summary Vindman wrote after the call read included his corruption talking points that were never discussed. Adding those would certainly make the call seem more “ominous,” right? Especially because nobody thought President Trump would release the transcript.

 

[WEATHER53]

No evidence nor witnesses because no one saw anything.
Lots of bruised egos from disobedient know it alls and a few tears.

See my lawn maintainence guy is the expert in grass, I don’t tell him how to do it.
BUT-if I tell him not to cut the grass and he does then even though he might know best, he is disobedient and less trustworthy and has made a problem for himself.

 

[lennypartiv]

Ukraine eventually got the aid. There are no grounds for impeachment.

They did not get the aid until the whistleblower complaint went public.
If I shot at your head with the intention to kill you, and I missed, did I not commit a crime?
That's the kind of illogic you are using.

Illogic???

 

[The Purge]

Tweets of Retired U.S. Army Lt. Colonel Jim Hickman regarding LTC Alex Vindman
Twitter ^ | 10-31-2019 | U.S. Army Lt. Colonel Jim Hickman (Ret.)
Posted on 11/19/2019, 9:53:53 AM by servo1969

Retired U.S. Army Lt. Colonel Jim Hickman

LTC (R) Jim Hickman on Twitter

I know LTC Alex Vindman from a Combined US-Russian exercise called Atlas Vision 12 in Grafenwoher, GE.

He worked w/the Russian Embassy & I was assigned to the JMTC (Joint Multinational Training Command), w/in USAREUR (US Army Europe). He worked coordination w/the Russian 15th Peacekeeping Brigade, & I was in charge of all Simulations planning, as well as assisting the USAREUR Lead Planner as the Senior Military Planner.

The following account of LTC Vindman’s words & actions are completely accurate to the best of my recollection & have been corroborated by others.

We interacted on several different occasions throughout the planning cycle, but it was during the actual execution of the exercise, that we had an issue relevant to his recent testimony.

As stated earlier, Atlas Vision 12 was conducted at JMTC in the VBS2 (Virtual Battle Simulations 2) Classrooms for Simulation. Vindman, who was a Major at the time, was sitting in one of the classrooms talking to the US & Russian Soldiers, as well as the young Officers & GS Employees about America, Russia, & Obama.

He was apologetic of American culture, laughed about Americans not being educated or worldly, & really talked up Obama & globalism to the point of uncomfortable.

He would speak w/the Russian Soldiers & laugh as if at the expense of the US personnel. It was so uncomfortable & unprofessional, one of the GS employees came & told me everything above. I walked over & sat w/in earshot of Vindman, & sure enough, all was confirmed.

One comment truly struck me as odd, & it was w/respect to American’s falsely thinking they’re exceptional, when he said, “He [Obama] is working on that now.” And he said it w/a snide ‘I know a secret’ look on his face. I honestly don’t know what it meant, it just sounded like an odd thing to say.

Regardless, after hearing him bash America a few times in front of subordinates, Russians, & GS Employees, as well as, hearing an earful about globalization, Obama’s plan, etc…I’d had enough. I tapped him on the shoulder & asked him to step outside.

At that point I verbally reprimanded him for his actions, & I’ll leave it at that, so as not to be unprofessional myself. The bottom-line is LTC Vindman was a partisan Democrat at least as far back as 2012. So much so, junior officers & soldiers felt uncomfortable around him.

This is not your professional, field-grade officer, who has the character & integrity to do the right thing. Do not let the uniform fool you…he is a political activist in uniform. I pray our nation will drop this hate, vitriol & division, & unite as our founding fathers intended





I need to make a slight correction on my statement, it was actually Atlas Vision 13 when the incident occurred. I was thrown off, as the next year Russia invaded Crimea. Also, I was promoted to Chief, Regional, Joint & Combined Exercises Branch, USAREUR, over many exercises.