SpecialOlympian wrote:Adam Schiff: You're all afraid to speak against the president because of how vindictive he is.
The GOP: HOW DARE YOU, SIR, HOW DARE YOU. Never speak to me or my large adult POTUS ever again! (Please notice me defending you Mr. President you are so kind and gracious and good.)
*Days later*
The GOP: It's a good thing you did that Mr. Potus. A very good thing. You're such a good boy.
Lt. Col. Vindman, CIA “Whistleblower” Source #1Amid increased calls from House Republicans to force the testimony of the CIA “whistleblower”, the Washington Post, the primary outlet for CIA misinformation and public relations, began shaping the “whistle-blower” as a hero.
Because the overall effort involves multiple parts of the deep state apparatus, to see through the construction it is important to note which media outlet holds equity for agency talking points within the coup. The Washington Post is primary PR for the CIA and IC writ large. The New York Times is primary PR for the FBI; and CNN is primary PR for the State Dept. This pattern has been consistent throughout.
Over time it has become clear the first confidential human source for the CIA Ukraine dossier, written by CIA analyst Eric Ciaramella and also known as the “Whistleblower report”, is Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman a Ukraine expert inside the National Security Council on assignment from the Dept of Defense intelligence unit.
Within his deposition the ideology of Lt. Col Vindman is clear. Vindman’s mission focus was/is to shape U.S. policy toward Ukraine (and by extension NATO) regardless of the actual policy view of President Trump. Within his deposition Vindman admitted to giving countermanding instructions to his Ukraine counterpart two weeks after understanding opposite policy objectives from his commander-in-chief.
During his deposition Lt Col Vindman also admitted -with considerable angst and attempts to deflect from his legal advisors provided by the Dept. of Defense- that he was intentionally usurping the chain of command in an effort to follow his own ideological agenda; and perhaps that of his DoD leadership.
By itself that level of admitted and direct insubordination should be alarming for many reasons; not the least of which is his lineage within the U.S. Military. Indeed Vindman’s intent and purpose explains why he appeared for his deposition in full military uniform.
CIA Agent Eric Ciaramella never delivered his dossier briefing to the upward chain-of-command within the CIA. Instead Ciaramella subverted the formal process and transmitted his hearsay complaint, derived from material provided by Vindman, directly to principal officials who could assist in the removal of the President.
During his testimony Lt. Col. Vindman testified that he did not know the leaker but refused to answer questions on the leaker after saying he did not know who the leaker was. Vindman said he went around his chain of command and did not go through his boss Tim Morrisson. Vindman insisted he was in charge of Ukraine policy but then said he wasn’t.
His boss Tim Morrison earlier testified that he did not trust Vindman and that he suspected Vindman was a leaker. (He was!)
Vindman was unreliable and had questionable judgment, according to his own outgoing superior, Tim Morrison, the National Security Council’s senior director for European affairs.
In fact, Morrison viewed Vindman as so untrustworthy that he opted to exclude him from his conversations with William Taylor, the senior US diplomat in Ukraine.
Vindman had an “unfortunate habit,” Morrison thought, of defying the sprawling executive branch’s carefully delineated chain of command. Vindman’s testimony vindicates Morrison’s dripping disdain for his former subordinate.
Vindman, who testified that he has never spoken directly with the president, nonetheless admitted to advising Zelensky as to how to comport himself in his communication with Trump. Vindman testified that he did not have time to express his concerns directly to Morrison, but he apparently found the time to express his concerns to both Deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Kent and an unnamed individual (Eric Ciaramella?) in the intelligence community.
Vindman is not at all a hero to be idolized who has given us a high moral example to follow. It’s actually quite the opposite. Vindman is traitorous and has opened up our nation to more division and wasted resources.
?
So to put it in the modern vernacular, according to Mark again, his family wanted to have him sectioned and he disowned them. Pope Benedict, hardly a radical liberal theologian, wrote a thesis, long before he became Pope, essentially arguing that the nativity stories are later additions bearing no basis in historical events.
- By QatzelOk
- By Tainari88