rumitoid

It is so sickening, beyond the pale. Actually, horrific. That they are more concerned about party than country as to allow the president to illegally deface and disgrace the office and ignore the law of the land in not cooperating with a duly Constitutional probe, is...no words to describe such un-American activity.

BigMike Loc: yerington nv

...chopped up in soundbites and presented by our completely trustworthy media!

archie bunker Loc: Texas

Rumi, I haven't watched haven't listened, and don't care. I've been busy with more un American activity than you can imagine.
You know, t*****r Iike things, such as, working long hours to take care of my responsibilities, spending my limited time with my amazing wife, family, and friends, and helping make a better world with my limited time, and resources.
I'm as Anti-American as they come. I believe in traditional marriage (one man one woman) core family, father, mother, and a home provided by hard work, and personal responsibility, and the Constitution of The United States of America.
I am also a proud Texan with down home values, and lots of guns.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again.

As Anti-American as I am, I'm blessed!

I live in a free country. (for now)

I have a pretty good wife.

Some pretty good kids, and grandkids.

A pretty good horse.

And a DAMN good dog!!

I'm doing everything I can to destroy the America you seem to want, if that's how you want to look at it.
I'm not insulted, shamed, or anything else about it. It is what it is.....

BigMike Loc: yerington nv

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Damn Arch, I’m joining your m*****a.

proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA

Me too!!!

archie bunker Loc: Texas

You're already a member Jim. You get up every morning, d**g your ass to work, and take care of your own life.
Things like dogs, cats, horses, your own home, and slapping the wife on the butt on your way out the door, chewing a piece of bacon are only a few of the perks that come with membership.

2bltap Loc: Move to the Mainland

All I know Rumi is that based on all of your most recent posts, you seem to be very concerned that your very own views on all of this must be extremely must be falling apart at the seems. Otherwise your views on the impeachment of our great president would have already have come to fruition with all of the so called proof you seem to have. Just sayin.
Mike

PeterS

Vindman, said something today about why he contacted his superiors about the president's call that I thought was really powerful. "Vindman: Because it was my duty!" He didn't say because his ideology dictated but that his duty to his country required him to speak up. Now the sad thing is, and I have to include liberals in this, is that for both conservatives and liberals ideology far too often trumps our duty to our country.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

I think Vindman thinks his country is the Ukraine. HIs duty was to take any complaints up the chain of command. He didn’t. He went to an attorney. He’s a bit to self important and politically motivated to be a fact witness. Besides he didn’t see a crime either. His opinion means nothing.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

"I, Alexander Vindman, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, offered testimony this week about his concerns over the call, saying he did not think it was appropriate for the president to pressure a foreign country's leader to investigate a U.S. citizen.


UCMJ 10 U.S. Code § 888. Art. 88. Contempt toward officials.

Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

The military is perhaps not the best career choice for someone bent on the vigorous exercise of civil liberties. As countless drill sergeants have informed their new recruits, "We're here to defend democracy--not to practice it."

Qualities valued by an open society--respect for the individual, independent thinking, skepticism about leaders, the nobility of principled dissent--do not tend to thrive in a military environment. For obvious reasons, self-sacrifice, discipline, order and obedience to authority tend to be emphasized instead. without respect for the chain of command, a military organization would simply disintegrate in the heat of battle. So it is not surprising that the free speech rights of soldiers are sharply curtailed when it comes to criticizing their superiors.

An Army lieutenant was successfully court-martialed for marching in an antiwar demonstration while carrying a sign that assailed President Johnson's "ignorance" and "f*****t aggression."

More recently, a number of military officers faced disciplinary action after drawing attention to deficiencies in President Clinton's moral character - an activity which for civilians seemed to constitute a hearty national pastime throughout the 1990s. These cases, while relatively few in number, became emblematic of Clinton's difficult relations with the military, particularly its professional officer corps.

For example, Maj. Gen. Harold Campbell was compelled to retire after referring to the "gay-loving," "womanizing," "draft-dodging" and "pot-smoking" President Clinton in a speech at an Air Force banquet. Other officers received reprimands for characterizing their Commander-in-Chief as a "lying draft dodger," a "moral coward," and an "adulterous liar" in letters to their local newspapers.

Even retired officers may be at risk when they speak out - as Lt. Col. Michael J. Davidson noted in his July 1999 Army Lawyer article, "Contemptuous Speech Against the President." Davidson noted that Article 88 may apply to retired commissioned officers by virtue of other articles of the UCMJ.

As an active duty Army officer, Vindman's "duty" is to honor his oath. In being a sniveling snitch, Vindman disgraced himself and his status as an officer in the US Army. His testimony can easily be interpreted as an official US Army opinion.

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

Well said...

I'd like to be in that m*****a too

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

This is interesting... Thanks

JW

What is sickening, rumi, is the Democrat cabal systematically destroying the rule of law in this country. What is sickening is the constant propaganda coming from the MSM and the Democrat leadership. What is sickening is the abrogation of God given rights being attempted and in some cases effectively choked by the Left. What is sickening, rumi, is the constant drum beat of political hatred coming from your side of the aisle. What is most sickening, though, is what that behavior is doing to the Right in how we are choosing to respond to it.

rumitoid

Yes, in their own words.