Will Vindman face courts martial?

[OscarLevant]

Ahhh shucks. I did ask for some kind of expert to reply. Did you miss that part.

Vindman definitely would have been totally fired for what he did had he done it to Obama.

Obama never attempted to shake down an ally in need of military aid to benefit his reelection campaign.

Therefore, your point is moot.

I cited how he treated Gen. McChrystal and indeed what he did to General Petraeus too.

What, exactly, did Vindman do that he was not obligated to do?

He testified to the truth as he witnessed it. That would be expected of any soldier.

And provide evidence.

If Vindman did something that was worthy of a Court Martial, you can bet Trump, given who he is, would see to it.

Not happening. What does that tell you? I'll tell you what it tells you: you're blowin' smoke.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

sigh...

Officers who deliberately and actively act to undermine their superior officers...and that includes their civilian superiors...are damaging their superior's abilities and responsibilities. Furthermore, such actions are in violation of the UCMJ. Regardless your rhetoric, ALL military personnel are subject to the UCMJ. Seriously...it has NOTHING to do with rhetorical nonsense like "owe personal fealty", "protect from criticism".

Look...I'm not a lawyer, but even I can see the possibility of Vindman...and his brother, to a lesser degree...being charged with at least these violations of the UCMJ:

Article 107 Making False Official Statements | Military Defense Lawyer

Article 133 - Conduct Unbecoming an Officer and Gentleman

Article 134 - Interference with Adverse Administrative Proceedings

Article 134 - Disloyal Statements | Military Defense Lawyer

However, there are always political considerations...especially under the current circumstances...that come into play. Like I said...Vindman won't face court martial. (but I believe he should)

:lamo

Silly Mycroft, you don’t know squat about the UCMJ. You hunt through articles looking for any you think could apply and then post them as “proof” of Vindman’s supposed misconduct without explaining what specific actions you believe apply to what articles you’ve linked.

Your failed case is dismissed.

 

[Mycroft]

Schiff prevented Republicans from outing the whistleblower.

He did more than that. He prevented, especially in Vindman's case, a whole line of questioning about who Vindman talked to and what he said...even though the questions that the Republican House member asked didn't mention "whistleblower" at all. In fact, it was Schiffty who mentioned "whistleblower".



btw, Schiffty has maintained that he doesn't know the identity of the whistleblower, yet he prevented Jordan from asking questions about someone Vindman called a CIA employee and Schiffty referred to him as the whistleblower. That means that Schiffty is a goddamned liar.

 

[Mycroft]

:lamo

Silly Mycroft, you don’t know squat about the UCMJ. You hunt through articles looking for any you think could apply and then post them as “proof” of Vindman’s supposed misconduct without explaining what specific actions you believe apply to what articles you’ve linked.

Your failed case is dismissed.

I said nothing about "proof".

What part of "possibility" do you not understand?

You are dismissed. (see my sig)

 

[CaughtInThe]

Hahahah spare me. The guy in your picture was chums with a bona fide nail bomb making, America hating, bomb detonating terrorist.

^ That's how you divert attention away from supporting a mafia dude like Trump.

Bravo Rush.

 

[Luckyone]

Sorry I don't do conspiracy nutter stuff. I just laugh at it. It's hilarious he went from a Russian agent to mafia boss now. Absolutely crackpot fun here.

Unfortunately for you, none of these stories are conspiracy ones. Trump did work with and used Mafia backed businesses in New York and was known to have paid as much as 3 times more for some things (like concrete) that these Mafia businesses offered. In addition, it is public record that Trump did get into an association in 2001 with the Bayrock Group, which was known to be Russian Mafia backed.

So all your posts does is suggest that you have no value for facts and data and that you BLINDLY follow a man that has a long history of dealing with crooks. This is all FACT!

I feel sorry for you given that reality always gives people that don't seek itm a rude awakening.

 

[jpn]

I do confess that said Officers had the dignity to complain then depart the job they must have loved. Probably to collect a fat lifetime pension. Today I call on any officer like Vindman to also follow their lead and resign.

There is no reason people who do their duty to the nation should have to resign. He did nothing wrong. Having kept silent would have been wrong.

 

[AlphaOmega]

Unfortunately for you, none of these stories are conspiracy ones. Trump did work with and used Mafia backed businesses in New York and was known to have paid as much as 3 times more for some things (like concrete) that these Mafia businesses offered. In addition, it is public record that Trump did get into an association in 2001 with the Bayrock Group, which was known to be Russian Mafia backed.

So all your posts does is suggest that you have no value for facts and data and that you BLINDLY follow a man that has a long history of dealing with crooks. This is all FACT!

I feel sorry for you given that reality always gives people that don't seek itm a rude awakening.

Obama worked with a bona fide terrorist. Is he them a terrorist as well? Or will you say no and prove your hypocrisy to me.

 

[jpn]

Obama worked with a bona fide terrorist. Is he them a terrorist as well? Or will you say no and prove your hypocrisy to me.

The difference is that Obama isn't a terrorist. Trump, on the other hand, has shown again and again that he is as crooked as a dog's hind leg.

 

[AlphaOmega]

The difference is that Obama isn't a terrorist. Trump, on the other hand, has shown again and again that he is as crooked as a dog's hind leg.

Yea...hilarious...Trump is a mafia boss but Obama isn't a terrorist despite being open chums with one. You guys really do not see the mental illness at work here do you?

 

[jpn]

He did more than that. He prevented, especially in Vindman's case, a whole line of questioning about who Vindman talked to and what he said...even though the questions that the Republican House member asked didn't mention "whistleblower" at all. In fact, it was Schiffty who mentioned "whistleblower".
btw, Schiffty has maintained that he doesn't know the identity of the whistleblower, yet he prevented Jordan from asking questions about someone Vindman called a CIA employee and Schiffty referred to him as the whistleblower. That means that Schiffty is a goddamned liar.

Schiff was protecting the identity of the whistleblower because he believes that whistleblowers perform an important function in a free nation.

And spare us your pretend outrage at what you interpret as lying. Republicans left that station long ago.

 

[jpn]

Hahahah spare me. The guy in your picture was chums with a bona fide nail bomb making, America hating, bomb detonating terrorist.

Meanwhile Trump lies down with dogs like Putin.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

He did more than that. He prevented, especially in Vindman's case, a whole line of questioning about who Vindman talked to and what he said...even though the questions that the Republican House member asked didn't mention "whistleblower" at all. In fact, it was Schiffty who mentioned "whistleblower".
btw, Schiffty has maintained that he doesn't know the identity of the whistleblower, yet he prevented Jordan from asking questions about someone Vindman called a CIA employee and Schiffty referred to him as the whistleblower. That means that Schiffty is a goddamned liar.

Don’t try to bull**** me, Mycroft. The questions Schiff refused were all constructed to out the whistleblower.

I said nothing about "proof".

:roll: More attempted bull****.

Your message was crystal clear. You posted ignorant assumptions/assertions based on your very biased viewpoint.

sigh...

Officers who deliberately and actively act to undermine their superior officers...and that includes their civilian superiors...are damaging their superior's abilities and responsibilities. Furthermore, such actions are in violation of the UCMJ. Regardless your rhetoric, ALL military personnel are subject to the UCMJ. Seriously...it has NOTHING to do with rhetorical nonsense like "owe personal fealty", "protect from criticism".

Look...I'm not a lawyer, but even I can see the possibility of Vindman...and his brother, to a lesser degree...being charged with at least these violations of the UCMJ:

Article 107 Making False Official Statements | Military Defense Lawyer

Article 133 - Conduct Unbecoming an Officer and Gentleman

Article 134 - Interference with Adverse Administrative Proceedings

Article 134 - Disloyal Statements | Military Defense Lawyer

However, there are always political considerations...especially under the current circumstances...that come into play. Like I said...Vindman won't face court martial. (but I believe he should)

If you aren’t willing or able to support your assertions with facts, don’t expect to go unchallenged when you play stupid semantic games.

 

[jpn]

Yea...hilarious...Trump is a mafia boss but Obama isn't a terrorist despite being open chums with one. You guys really do not see the mental illness at work here do you?

The difference, which is plain to see, is that Trump doesn't just know crooks. He is one.

 

[AlphaOmega]

Meanwhile Trump lies down with dogs like Putin.

Back to the Russia agent again so soon? Did you forget that is now a proven hoax? God...this leftist mass hysteria is so fascinating.

 

[jpn]

A military man doing that to ANY President should end their career.

Ah, sounds like you would be really at home in Germany in 1935.

 

[Evilroddy]

sigh...

Officers who deliberately and actively act to undermine their superior officers...and that includes their civilian superiors...are damaging their superior's abilities and responsibilities. Furthermore, such actions are in violation of the UCMJ. Regardless your rhetoric, ALL military personnel are subject to the UCMJ. Seriously...it has NOTHING to do with rhetorical nonsense like "owe personal fealty", "protect from criticism".

Look...I'm not a lawyer, but even I can see the possibility of Vindman...and his brother, to a lesser degree...being charged with at least these violations of the UCMJ:

Article 107 Making False Official Statements | Military Defense Lawyer

Article 133 - Conduct Unbecoming an Officer and Gentleman

Article 134 - Interference with Adverse Administrative Proceedings

Article 134 - Disloyal Statements | Military Defense Lawyer

However, there are always political considerations...especially under the current circumstances...that come into play. Like I said...Vindman won't face court martial. (but I believe he should)

Mycroft:

Articles 107 and 134 would be impossible to prove as they go to intent and Vindman's intent is unknowable as a prerequisite for charging him. In 134 President Trump is not the United States of America and so the article does not apply. The only hope for your desired prosecution is conduct unbecoming (133) which is a catch-all charge of last resort which can be applied to just about everyone in the US military.

What is interesting however is that all of these charges could be preferred and could easily get convictions against Presiident Trump if the UCMJ applied directly to him.

You still have not answered why Vindman's twin brother should be prosecuted or dismissed. What did he do to deserve such treatment?

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

 

[Mycroft]

Schiff was protecting the identity of the whistleblower because he believes that whistleblowers perform an important function in a free nation.

And spare us your pretend outrage at what you interpret as lying. Republicans left that station long ago.

That's no reason to prevent finding out what Vindman was doing and who he was talking to.

Whistleblowers will STILL perform an important function...even if they are identified, as all but Ciaramella have been.

Face it. The only reason to not identify the whistleblower and to prevent any question being asked of anyone who talked to him is to prevent the truth about Schiffty's corrupt actions from being revealed.

 

[Mycroft]

Ah, sounds like you would be really at home in Germany in 1935.

Or in the previous President's administration.

 

[AlphaOmega]

The difference, which is plain to see, is that Trump doesn't just know crooks. He is one.

Yeah...I'm sure its crystal clear to those on the left. That's fascinating to us normal people. First it was crazed sex addict, then rapist, then it was racist, then it was secret Russian agent, then it was quid pro quo, then it was bribery, then back to quid pro quo, then obstructor or justice.....and now.....mafia boss. The descent into complete and utter madness by those on the left is scientifically fascinating as there are a great many of them suffering from mental illness. Corona has nothing on this disease.

 

[Mycroft]

Mycroft:

Articles 107 and 134 would be impossible to prove as they go to intent and Vindman's intent is unknowable as a prerequisite for charging him. In 134 President Trump is not the United States of America and so the article does not apply. The only hope for your desired prosecution is conduct unbecoming (133) which is a catch-all charge of last resort which can be applied to just about everyone in the US military.

What is interesting however is that all of these charges could be preferred and could easily get convictions against Presiident Trump if the UCMJ applied directly to him.

You still have not answered why Vindman's twin brother should be prosecuted or dismissed. What did he do to deserve such treatment?

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

The President is the face of...the representative of...the United States.

Furthermore, it's more about the effect of the disloyal statements.

The statement impairs and/or interferes with the morale, the discipline or loyalty towards the United States, of a member or multiple members of the US armed forces.

The nature of the statement was such that it brings upon discredit to the US armed forces or it disrupts the discipline and the good order of the armed forces.

As I said...I, a non-lawyer, see a possibility of charges...but that political considerations come into play. Don't worry...the guy is safe. (though his military career is toast)

 

[jamesbyoung]

This is about Trump not the Vindmans.

Here is a story to illustrate the point.

Donald Trump walks into a bar carrying an otter.

The bartender says "Hey, you can't bring a weasel in here."

Trump says, "It's an otter, dummy."

The bartender says "I wasn't talking to you."

 

[JacksinPA]

Vindman told the truth under oath. Where is the infraction that warrants a court-martial? The man is a decorated career soldier with Purple Heart he received for being wounded in combat.

 

[Luckyone]

Obama worked with a bona fide terrorist. Is he them a terrorist as well? Or will you say no and prove your hypocrisy to me.

Obama is not our president now and not a problem that needs to get resolved. I am not going to research your contention simply to get into a pissing war with you. I am telling you the story of Trump because he is using Mafia tactics now and that cannot be allowed.

If you are truly interested in this type of information and are against it, why don't you do something about it now? If you do and Trump gets thrown out of office, I will gladly then discuss both president's actions, from a debate point of view. My whole thrust right now is to solve the problems we are living with now.

Or is it that all you want to do is piss and not do something about the problems?

 

[jamesbyoung]

Since Trump is the CiC of the military and since he lies like crazy endangering the nation, the military has the authority to relieve him from command.