The left is in another uproar over Liet. Col. Alexander Vindman haing been removed from his job, escorted out of the White House. Media pundits and Democrats (I know, redundant) are massively triggered (again), calling for more investigations (shocking), accusing the president of witness retaliation which will surely lead to the immediate demise of our Republic.
Apparently because there won’t be enough deep staters left to undermine Trump. And with the 2020 election on the horizon, as Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., pointed out during impeachment hearings, we can’t trust you deplorable rubes — Ahhh — you American voters to choose the next president.
Liberal gnashing of teeth notwithstanding, punting Lt. Co. Vindman out of his sensitive position is precisely what had to happen. Vindman, by his own admission, violated his chain-of-command and leaked details of a presidential phone call with another head of state to others outside of his chain of command, including someone who quite likely was the so-called whistleblower.
Under questioning by Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., Vindman admitted to voicing his "concerns" to George Kent at the State Department, as well as another individual in the intelligence community. When Nunes tried to drill down as to where the individual worked, Rep. Schiff abruptly shut down the questioning so as not to out the so-called whistleblower. Because, without knowing the identity of the whistleblower, Schiff knew the identity of the whistleblower.
They don’t call him "Shifty Schiff" for nothing.
Here’s a little military insight: Chain-of-command is at the core of good order and discipline in the armed forces. In combat it can mean life and death. Violating the chain-of-command is reserved for those rarest-of-rare instances when one’s superior is issuing illegal and/or immoral orders. Vindman violated the chain-of-command, repeatedly, not because laws were being broken, but because he didn’t like the president or his policy.
Such wanton side-stepping of his boss is enough to question Vindman’s motives and judgement, not to mention his ethics and loyalty. Which won’t sit well with his future chain-of-command.
Vindman doesn’t get to decide foreign policy, the guy who was elected president of the United Staes by 63 million American voters does. If Vindman didn’t like it he could have taken it up with his chain-of-command. Instead he did the exact opposite. Or, if he had felt strongly enough, he could have submitted his retirement paperwork (more on that below).
What he should not have done was to flout his chain of command and leak to other deep staters who clearly share a similar animus against the president.
So, removing his access to classified information and escorting him from the building was the one prudent, responsible action for the White House to take. Moreover, VIndman knew it. Which engendered more leaks.
A few hours before Vindman was removed, a reporter raised the issue with Trump. And then when Vindman was escorted out later that day, his attorney had a lengthy manifesto attacking Trump at the ready.
Naturally, the mainstream media gleefully ran with it. Clearly all of a set piece.
That Vindman, who is still on active duty, chose to make a big splash by publicly attacking the commander in chief (through his attorney), accusing him, among other things, of lying, speaks volumes about Vindman’s character and motive. Moreover, it treads perilously close to being a court-martial offense. Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice states:
“Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress…shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”
Civilian control of the military is a core principle of our Republic, which is why it's imperative that members of the military not make public political statements for or against elected officials. I didn’t hear any media pundits, let alone Democratic politicians, making an issue of Vindman’s attack.
Vindman’s military career is likely over.
Again — not because of witness retaliation or presidential vengeance that the left would have you believe. It turns out that the military officer corps is a small, tight-knit community. Loyalty, selflessness, honor, and trust are the coins of the realm.
When you give your integrity away, it’s gone for good.
However, Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman’s cache on the likes of CNN and MSNBC is only waxing. He can retire and head for the mainstream media where he’ll be venerated as a hero who stood up to Trump and fought the good fight to overturn the 2016 election. And that’s just fine; go rant to that ever-dwindling, Trump Derangement Syndrome-riddled liberal echo chamber.
At least the now former-director for European Affairs for the United States National Security Council will no longer be in a position to leak classified information, undermine his chain-of-command, and divide the nation.
The swamp just got a little less deep.
Patrick Murray (colonel, U.S. Army, retired) was part of a military-diplomatic exchange program between the Pentagon and Department of State, where he served in the Bureau of Political Military Affairs in Washington, D.C. In 2005, Murray became the U.S. representative to the Military Staff Committee at the United Nations in New York under Ambassador John Bolton. After retiring from the Army in 2009, Patrick became the Republican nominee for U.S. Congress in Northern Virginia. He is the author of "Government is the Problem." For more of his reports, Go Here Now.
© 2021 Newsmax. All rights reserved.