Lt. Rob Polans ret.

No Pete, you're never proud of killing a child. However, when he's wearing a suicide vest, you damn sure will shoot or die. I had that choice too many times. One is too many. Why did the muzzieskeep sending kids to certain death? That's what's called collateral damage or casualties of war. Did I like it? Hell no. I don't think any sane one would.

Lt. Rob Polans ret.

I don't think it's correct. Vindman (who the meme promoted) or his identical twin brother is just a desk jockey who wears the uniform to look important. That's one reason I didn't like Bo Bergdahl. The bigger reason was he went transgender when it suited him. To really be transgender he'd have to live as a woman for at least a year, that's the law and what lgbtq wants you to not see.

Sew_What

To refute you about "the truth" lets consider the whistleblower, here are a few points to consider.

The whistleblower—or “whistleblower” if you prefer—filed a complaint with the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community (ICIG), claiming to have it on good authority that President Trump had attempted to coerce Ukrainian President Zelenskyy into providing dirt on his (Trump’s) highest-polling political opponent for the 2020 presidential election, that he predicated continuation of foreign aid to Ukraine on that act from Zelesky, and that the White House had then attempted to conceal that evidence by placing the notes from the conversation on a server reserved for sensitive information:

-Donald Trump, the president, confirmed the whistleblower’s account. ??????
-Rudy Giuliani, the president’s personal attorney, confirmed the whistleblower’s account. ??????
-Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House Chief of Staff, confirmed the whistleblower’s account. ??????
-Fiona Hill, the former top White House Russia advisor, confirmed the whistleblower’s account.
-Michael McKinley, former top aide to the Secretary of State, confirmed the whistleblower’s account.
-Gordon D. Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the EU, confirmed the whistleblower’s account.
-William Taylor, the senior U.S. diplomatic official in Ukraine, confirmed the whistleblower’s account.
-Laura Cooper, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Russia, Ukraine, and Eurasia, confirmed the whistleblower’s account.
-Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the National Security Council’s head of European Affairs, confirmed the whistleblower’s account. What did he lie about?

All of the above are facts.

Now with those in mind, let me answer your question by posing some other questions to consider.

1. What does “there is not an actual whistleblower accusing President Trump” even mean? Clearly, someone filed the complaint with the IGIC, who deemed it credible. Someone also wrote a letter outlining the complaint to Sen. Burr and Rep. Schiff. (We’ve all seen the letter.) Whoever wrote that letter is the whistleblower. If it was actually Schiff who wrote it, or actually the IGIC who wrote it, then that person is a whistleblower.
2. If “there is not an actual whistleblower accusing President Trump,” then so what? Who wrote the letter, and who filed the complaint, and indeed whether anyone did, is at this point irrelevant. The credibility of the “whistleblower’s” claims is not in question: His claims have not only been confirmed, they have been confirmed by the president himself. There is no longer any hearsay: Lt. Col. Vindman was listening in on the president’s call with Zelenskyy and agrees with what the whistleblower says about it. (For that matter, the summary of the call that the president himself released also agrees with what the whistleblower says about it.)

So to summarize: it’s awfully hard to make a case that a whistleblower doesn’t exist, and if they don’t, it doesn’t matter, because everything that non-person said has been proven true several times over.

padremike Loc: Phenix City, Al

You forgot to include "in the whistleblower's OPINION" etc, etc, etc, etc. Aren't you smarter than a Soviet style court?- guilty until proven innocent - where only the prosecution is allowed to present their own witnesses?

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Your first paragraph blows your entire argument. No evidence for it at all an so what? The dems and Biden were in it up to their necks. The don't get a pass on corruption.

promilitary

And rightly so.