Schumer asks Army to provide Vindman same protections as whistleblower

[bomberfox]

Did you treat Flynn the same way?

Nobody cares about your whataboutery.

 

[bomberfox]

Like I said, you lack attention to detail. Section 11-2 specifically states "fore-in-hand knot" and only states "fore-in-hand knot".

Only you can self pwn this badly.

 

[apdst]

For a class A.

But you keep making a hill of beans about tie knots to disparage this active military member with impeccable creds. :lol:

It says that for the Dress Blues, too. Read it and weep. :lamo

Impeccable creds? He's been passed over for promotion to O-6 multiple times. His career has peaked. He's joining forces with the Democrats to get something going for himself.

 

[SLC]

Nobody cares about your whataboutery.

That is because you are hypocrites. :lol:

 

[HumblePi]

Schumer asks Army to provide Vindman same protections as whistleblower | TheHill

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) is asking the Army to provide an officer who testified as part of the House impeachment inquiry the same protections against retaliation that a whistleblower would receive.

Schumer sent a letter on Wednesday to Secretary of the Army Ryan McCarthy and Chief of Staff of the Army General James C. McConville raising concerns that Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman could face retaliation for his testimony on Tuesday.
================================================
Retaliation? This poor guy, for doing his job, now has a target painted on his back that states 'NEVER TRUMPER.' Without protection, like being sent to some remote radar station in Greenland, his days are numbered. Remember, Trumpists love guns.

Eventually we'll have more US Marshals protecting people giving damaging testimony about Trump than we had Army assisting the Kurds in Syria.

 

[SLC]

So you know it's specific military policy that he cannot wear his dress uniform to a house intelligence hearing. Interesting can you show me your proof?

Oh no, no, no, YOU were the one that said he was "following military policy." Exactly what military policy was he following?

 

[year2late]

18USC1924: unauthorized sharing/mishandling classified information.

If he kept notes of the phone call, he removed classified information from it's proper place.

He also failed to utilize his chain of command: a violation of Article 92 of The UCMJ.

Sounds like he tried to be a whistle blower....even if he was not the original one.

 

[bomberfox]

That is because you are hypocrites. :lol:

Nice meme. Whataboutery is a deflection tactic.

 

[apdst]

Sounds like he tried to be a whistle blower....even if he was not the original one.

Sounds like he leaked classified material. That's a crime, even if a whistleblower does it.

This all explains why Schiff wants so badly to keep the WB's identity a secret.

 

[HAL9000]

Because he is trying to hide from criticisms by wearing his uniform.

What's that? A lieutenant colonel serving on the National Security Council, hiding from criticisms by testifying before Congress in uniform? Lemme just google that.

This picture is of Vindeman from yesterday right?... Right? How shameful. Look at this man, he's obviously hiding something. I'm shaking my head so hard right now that my neck hurts.

 

[American]

Then what's he doing in a shabby suit in the Ukraine during a presidential inauguration?

Looks like you just blew Rogue Valley right out of the water. :lol:uch:

 

[American]

What's that? A lieutenant colonel serving on the National Security Council, hiding from criticisms by testifying before Congress in uniform? Lemme just google that.
View attachment 67267340
This picture is of Vindeman from yesterday right?... Right? How shameful. Look at this man, he's obviously hiding something. I'm shaking my head so hard right now that my neck hurts.

So you're saying that North did the same thing.

 

[poweRob]

Oh no, no, no, YOU were the one that said he was "following military policy." Exactly what military policy was he following?

You are trying to reword jt so as to mean the policy forced him to which i never said. He followed policy that allows him to wear his blues at congressional hearings. You're going to have to try a different dishonest angle. This one is broken for you.

 

[HAL9000]

So you're saying that North did the same thing.

I'm saying nobody cared about North's uniform, even though, when North appeared before Congress, he was defending himself against accusations unethical behavior. No one is accusing Vindman of anything unethical.

 

[HAL9000]

Then what's he doing in a shabby suit in the Ukraine during a presidential inauguration?

What's Oliver North doing here in Congress in uniform? and look he wore a suit somewhere else the very same year. No one cared then. Why do you give a **** about this now? This isn't an impeachment of Vindman's character in the slightest.

 

[American]

I'm saying nobody cared about North's uniform, even though, when North appeared before Congress, he was defending himself against accusations unethical behavior. No one is accusing Vindman of anything unethical.

How do you know that no one cared about North's uniform. That was 30 years ago. Is that the most recent example you have? :lol:

 

[American]

What's Oliver North doing here in Congress in uniform? and look he wore a suit somewhere else the very same year. No one cared then. Why do you give a **** about this now? This isn't an impeachment of Vindman's character in the slightest.

View attachment 67267372
View attachment 67267373

First off, Democrats loathe the military, so they are definitely into theatrics and relish someone who hates Trump. They stage that chicken eater at a House hearing.

Congressman Brought a Bucket of Fried Chicken to Hearing | Time

 

[slick]

First off, Democrats loathe the military, so they are definitely into theatrics and relish someone who hates Trump. They stage that chicken eater at a House hearing.

Congressman Brought a Bucket of Fried Chicken to Hearing | Time

The only news that matters coming out of Alexander Vindman’s Tuesday impeachment testimony is that he once again proved President Trump has done absolutely nothing impeachable, or even close to it.

Vindman, who is obviously all wound up to overturn the 2016 election and have Trump removed from office, could only testify that
the transcript of Trump’s now-famous July 25 phone call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky was missing a couple of details.

Boy, that sounds ominous! Did Trump conceal the true nature of his phone call??? Did Zelensky also aid in
the cover-up by repeatedly claiming he never felt pressured by Trump????

Another big, fat nothing burger

 

[Casper]

What? Military people should not wear their uniforms at the White House?

Are you serious?

Probably because trump hasn't got his from his Taylor yet, but his will have all kinds of big shiney medals on it. He plans on wearing it at his Yuuug military parade. Can't outshine the donald.

 

[Casper]

The only news that matters coming out of Alexander Vindman’s Tuesday impeachment testimony is that he once again proved President Trump has done absolutely nothing impeachable, or even close to it.

Vindman, who is obviously all wound up to overturn the 2016 election and have Trump removed from office, could only testify that
the transcript of Trump’s now-famous July 25 phone call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky was missing a couple of details.

Boy, that sounds ominous! Did Trump conceal the true nature of his phone call??? Did Zelensky also aid in
the cover-up by repeatedly claiming he never felt pressured by Trump????

Another big, fat nothing burger

Details like Investigate the Bidens or no soup for you?

 

[joko104]

He should be booted out for insubordination.

His entire testimony could be summarized as this:

"I am the designated expert on Ukraine and Ukraine was being delivered to Russia by the previous administration - with Eastern Ukraine and all of Ukraine's Crimea given to Russia by President Obama. President Trump defied the pro-Russia policies against Ukraine without my permission. This really upset me and I told the Democrats how upset I was.
No, I did not hear the President threaten to withhold any money, but in MY opinion that's what the President was thinking when he defied my authority over him."

Given the President is Commander In Chief that is clear cut insubordination.

Of course, Democrat Chuck Schumer just announced that he - not President Trump - is Commander In Chief, not the President, trying to give orders to the Army as if he is.

 

[HAL9000]

How do you know that no one cared about North's uniform. That was 30 years ago. Is that the most recent example you have? :lol:

Of a Lieutenant Colonel serving on the National Security Council Testifying before Congress? It's not only the most recent example I have, it is the most recent example that was reported on. If no one reported on it, nobody cared.

I know no one cared because I know how to google the terms "Oliver North" and "Uniform" from the years 1986 and 1987.

 

[American]

With Democrats filibustering the defense bill tomorrow, Trump should say say there's no budget to protect the sum'bitch. [emoji23]

Also, and here's the kicker, the Democrats will filibuster the same program to fund Ukraine that they're trying to impeach Trump on.

Sent from Hillary's private email server.

 

[apdst]

Of a Lieutenant Colonel serving on the National Security Council Testifying before Congress? It's not only the most recent example I have, it is the most recent example that was reported on. If no one reported on it, nobody cared.

I know no one cared because I know how to google the terms "Oliver North" and "Uniform" from the years 1986 and 1987.

Col. North was wearing the correct uniform.

 

[Casper]

First off, Democrats loathe the military, so they are definitely into theatrics and relish someone who hates Trump. They stage that chicken eater at a House hearing.

Congressman Brought a Bucket of Fried Chicken to Hearing | Time

BS ... Eat your chicken.