Vindman Escorted From White House After Trump’s Senate Acquittal

Did you miss the SOTU speech?

 

What was the purpose of the Vindman/WB/Schiff scheme then?

 

A crime doesn’t have to be committed to let someone go who works for you.

 

Well you should, now and then.

 

Yes we do. And they argue, no Trump had to keep him and consult him on the matters of foreign policy.

 

Which escort did he use, Stormy Daniels or Karen McDougal?

 

I would not. I call him soldier who' decided he's the one who should be making foreign policy and not the President of the United States

 

That isn't what happened.

 

Vindman is not kicked out of the Military, is he? He'll get another assignment within. What's the Big ****ing Deal?

 

Was Vindman disagreeing with our foreign policy or not?

 

No evidence he leaked anything. Quite the opposite. His testimony was that he only discussed that call with people with the appropriate classification.
Plotted with a foreign official? You’re going to have to back that up with specifics.
Your boss being not entirely happy with you does not make you a traitor.

Face it - you guys hate him because he told the truth, and the truth makes Trump look bad.

 

Perhaps not. But he's entitled to reassign the employee to a different job. Is it not what has happened?

 

“Scheme”? Not a scheme.

People raised their legitimate concerns through appropriate channels. The alternative - which you seem to support - is that there are no checks on the president whatsoever. Whatever he does is ok. Anything at all.

 

Yep. Trump has the right to reassign him. Personally I think it’s petty and vindictive (so an accurate reflection of Trump) but he absolutely has the right.

That’s not what I’m talking about. I’m challenging people to support their assertions that he’s a traitor. He isn’t. He’s a patriot.

 

He was trying to make US foreign policy and was loudly complaining when told he can't do so.

 

Why? Would not you do the same to an employee who has lost your trust?

 

Most everyone, Court Jester, most everyone.. Especial in government and most of all internet and forums ¯\_(º¸º)_/¯

 

trump did not fire vindman for revenge

let me repeat that .

trump did not fire Vindman for revenge

Vindman was fired because he did not skirt his responsibilities

all Vindman did was report improper behavior at the orders of John Bolton

the next time trump does something underhanded and trump will do something underhanded

trump dont want anybody around that will again report or question his behavior

vindman was fired because he is honest

Sondland is the best one though

trump made him pay a million bucks for job

then fired him for being honest

 

His testimony was based on perceived notions of Trumps intentions. None of which were actually said by Trump. i.e. Trump never said he desired an investigation for a partisan election play. What we have is hearsay and inference. That is not proving guilt.

The colonel was more interested in retaining peace and diplomacy with the new leaders of Ukraine, and care little about any potential corruption as it would potentially strain relationships with Ukraines new administration.

At the end of the day, the colonel made accusations and suggested guilt where it could not be proven, and worse against his own boss. If he was my employee, he would be pounding sand too.

 

Let me give it to you straight. Trump is briefed on the hundreds of pages bogus reports dems have produced trying to take him out. He doesn't reference page numbers. He has people for that. He knows what he said on his call but probably can't recite it line by line, why should he, there are people that transcribe it for him. Vindman was on the call. Trump probably listened to parts of his testimony or was briefed on it.

He as said he didn't like the guy. He doesn't know Vindman personally but doesn't want people hanging around the WH who he can't trust. That includes but is not limited to suspected rats and moles.

It is a privilege to work at the WH, not a right. He doesn't need any reason to fire WH staff or anyone assigned to the WH from another agency. He gone from the WH. It is up to the Army to deal with him now.

 

None of that, even if true, makes him a traitor, as people are calling him.

 

Let me guess. You would allow known enemies to work in your white house? Obviously you want the unelected swamp to continue running the country.

 

He wasn't insubordinate, just foolish for agreeing to get involved in the debacle. It isn't effective for a president to have people in his organization that do not support his policies. Those who do not, should keep it to themselves if they wish to keep their jobs.

 

"That's it."

That is definitely NOT "it".

Why do you continue to overlook the fact that his involvement in the plot started well before his testimony?

Your abject refusal to admit to the existence of a widely known fact is stunning.

 

What others say is their business. What I respond to, I believe to be true. What I have said regarding the mention of treason can be found in my post #257.