LTC Vindman retires, was he right or wrong? What about the second and third order effects?

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 01 Aug 2020 17:15:53 -0400

LTC Vindman retires, was he right or wrong? What about the second and third order effects?

Aside from the usually partisan (and superficial) comments regarding LTC (R) Vindman, is there a lesson to be learned here? We had a sitting US senator holding up promotion for 1000 senior officers to allow for his promotion. Whistleblowing. Polarizing politics and the politicalization of the military seems to be here for the duration. While the retired could easily just take pot shots from Ft. Living Room, here's my question. How can currently serving members truly remain apolitical? In a world where one callus post can end your career, use some judgment if you elect to weigh in. Was he right? Would you have done the same? Was he dead wrong?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/alexander-vindman-in-fiery-op-ed-upon-military-retirement-i-believe-that-in-america-right-matters/ar-BB17s1rL

ar-BB17s1rL

Response by SPC Nancy Greene made Aug 1 at 2020 5:34 PM

SPC Nancy Greene — Sat, 01 Aug 2020 17:34:25 -0400

IMHO, as an Active Duty Officer his ‘oath’ precludes him from saying or doing anything negative towards the Commander in Chief.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 1 at 2020 5:34 PM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 01 Aug 2020 17:34:36 -0400

So.......
The LTC was right to report his concern. However, what transpired was a circus that placed the military in the middle of a political firestorm. The LTC should immediately been removed from his position and sent back to the Pentagon for his and the Army’s protection. As a service member, working in that political arena, you have to be cognizant of your actions and how they effect DOD, your service, and you. His supervisor shouldn’t have waited for the White House to make the move. That office should have made the move immediately. Perception is reality and once he lost the perception of being apolitical he was of no use to the Nation in that position. If you are going to fall on your sward and expect to get bloodied. The Senator was wrong to not understand how punishing innocent service members to make a political point and to not understand why the LTC has to be removed. She displayed exactly the opposite of leadership and I for one am glad she is no longer in our formation. Every rotten apple creates more rotten apples. She has terrible leadership, if you can even call it that, qualities. She proved to be a military user, not a defender.

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Aug 1 at 2020 5:36 PM

MCPO Roger Collins — Sat, 01 Aug 2020 17:36:14 -0400

I’m from a generation that a red notation of PI on your service record was the kiss of death to a military career. It’s difficult to see in today’s military for someone to not realize the ramifications of going against the CINC. The old saying is if you shoot an elephant, better kill him comes to mind. Commissioned Officers at senior levels have been removed from their positions for far less if they are considered disloyal or don’t carry out their duties as desired by said leaders. Sorry to say it? But an O-5 isn’t critical enough to tolerate what could be thought as disloyalty. Given that he was passed over for promotion, others agree. Oh well, CNN or MSNBC will hire him.

Response by MSG Stan Hutchison made Aug 1 at 2020 5:51 PM

MSG Stan Hutchison — Sat, 01 Aug 2020 17:51:54 -0400

Our oath is to the Constitution, not an individual. Show me one place in that oath that says we have to cover up for the CinC. This LTC was honoring his oath and this nation. Trump caused his poor treatment.

Response by Cpl Benjamin Long made Aug 1 at 2020 6:48 PM

Cpl Benjamin Long — Sat, 01 Aug 2020 18:48:25 -0400

Wrong... He lied on federal document.. Commuted perjury, and contempt to a public official

Response by LTC Orlando Illi made Aug 1 at 2020 7:46 PM

LTC Orlando Illi — Sat, 01 Aug 2020 19:46:43 -0400

He was a disgrace

Response by Maj John Bell made Aug 1 at 2020 8:09 PM

Maj John Bell — Sat, 01 Aug 2020 20:09:02 -0400

If I thought a senior had crossed the line, I'd give him a chance to fix it. If he/she didn't fix it in short order, hold my beer and give me a whistle. Nothing sucks as bad as knowing you should have done the right thing and did not.

Response by SPC Erich Guenther made Aug 2 at 2020 12:40 AM

SPC Erich Guenther — Sun, 02 Aug 2020 00:40:17 -0400

Honestly, if I had no UCMJ pending over my past duty, I would have at least stuck around to see what the promotion board did. Though I could never see myself as an Officer, I liked the Enlisted path better. It's his decision though to stay on or resign, I have no idea what the other inputs were to his decision so I can't really fault him for retiring when he did but by the same token I reject the narrative that he had no other choice because he retired before the other shoe dropped sort to speak.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 2 at 2020 1:06 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 02 Aug 2020 13:06:20 -0400

Tempest in a teapot, if you ask me.
The whole episode was overblown by zealous partisans who were smarting from the ignominy of the Mueller Report.

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Aug 2 at 2020 2:51 PM

CAPT Kevin B. — Sun, 02 Aug 2020 14:51:42 -0400

Interesting enough Ltc. Vindman should have never continued in that job given the previous obvious perceived conflict of interest. When the Ukrainian official offered him the Defense Minister job, you immediately need to remove him from any position that apparent conflict creates. At lower levels, we're taught to say no and report it. At the highest levels, even that risk is too great. Under pressure later on, the Ukrainian said it was a joke. Well that official needed to be fired too for the suicide vest job he pulled on Vindman. The honorable thing for Vindman to do was retire and then keep his mouth shut. He hasn't done the later. It's cash in time and he's on a roll. I've had my negative brushes with high upline for which I was rewarded by not receiving an offer to join the Flag Club. Wouldn't want to be a part of that rats nest anyways. However, I've never had a thought to air any laundry. Unlinke Vindman, I've kept my retirement mouth shut.

Response by LCDR Joshua Gillespie made Aug 3 at 2020 9:08 AM

LCDR Joshua Gillespie — Mon, 03 Aug 2020 09:08:13 -0400

Let me put it this way... If you're going to fall on your sword, it better be worth the price you're asking everyone else to pay. In this case, I don't think it was. Personally, I think some Americans are living in a fantasy world where everyone is either "good" or "bad". The truth is that a great many "bad" people are acting daily for the common "good"... even though both are sometimes very difficult to define. Who are the "good guys"; Chechen "freedom fighters" who follow Islam... or Russian conscripts carrying Orthodox crosses? Which dictators should we oppose... those who gas their own citizens; or those who fund global terrorism? Vindman inserted himself into a political arena presumably because of conscience... so be it. He doesn't seem to have come out too bad for it either... as I suspect we won't be going to work at Walmart next week. Again, it's just my opinion... but if he wanted to make full bird or even flag, he would've had to realize that those promotions require political pragmatism-and Trump's a limited-time offer.

Response by SSgt Steve Crane made Aug 3 at 2020 12:40 PM

SSgt Steve Crane — Mon, 03 Aug 2020 12:40:04 -0400

Vineland should've just op'ed out of the interview, because of a breach of Officers edicate. The Military is not a place to make your boss, CinC look bad, especially on National TV. I don't give a shit what the subject is. Vindman is a Traitor to the Army, his peers, and to our Country. If it was me in President Trumps place, I would have locked his traitorist ass in Leavenworth. Shouldn't have been allowed to Retire. What a POS!

Response by PVT Brian Desormeaux made Aug 3 at 2020 1:31 PM

PVT Brian Desormeaux — Mon, 03 Aug 2020 13:31:04 -0400

If indeed, the LTC had 100% confirmation of the information he “overheard”, I could maybe see him being in the right. However, he conveyed hearsay...under oath.

Also, I’m pretty certain his security clearance was either TS/SCI or TS/SAP...of which, by running his mouth for his 5 mins of fame...he violated.

This LTC had a history of poor leadership and bad decisions. He was a “FUMU” officer.

Response by COL Lawyn Edwards made Aug 3 at 2020 3:12 PM

COL Lawyn Edwards — Mon, 03 Aug 2020 15:12:03 -0400

It has nothing to do with oath to the Constitution rather than the person who is president. Vindman is an LTC hired to a particular job. The President is his boss. The Constitution also says the President makes foreign policy. LTCs are not mentioned in it nor do they set policy. The President can by 100% wrong, but we do it his way because he is the decision maker. This guy set the Army up to ridicule and was used as a political pawn by others trying to belittle one person. No matter which party you are or whether you like this guy or not, it was not within the LTC's job description. He should have been disciplined, but he got away scot free. He'll be well compensated by the other side.

Response by Tonya Reynolds made Aug 3 at 2020 3:12 PM

Tonya Reynolds — Mon, 03 Aug 2020 15:12:09 -0400

Vindman absolutely showed himself as a partisan hack which has no place in the military. He's an embarrassment to the uniform and the country. Maybe Ukraine will hire him.

Response by Cpl Stephen Toth made Aug 3 at 2020 3:20 PM

Cpl Stephen Toth — Mon, 03 Aug 2020 15:20:27 -0400

Political hack. A disgrace to the uniform

Response by SA Carrington Bibuld made Aug 4 at 2020 1:04 PM

SA Carrington Bibuld — Tue, 04 Aug 2020 13:04:03 -0400

He was summoned by congress. He followed his oath to the American people. His integrity is intact. I question those who would have had him testify othen than he did.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 4 at 2020 2:58 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 04 Aug 2020 14:58:40 -0400

My rank here camouflages my age here. It seems to me the worst place for a LTC to be assigned is the WH. Ask Oliver North.

Response by COL David Turk made Aug 4 at 2020 7:39 PM

COL David Turk — Tue, 04 Aug 2020 19:39:34 -0400

Was he correct or wrong on what? There were a lot of issues surrounding the LTC.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 5 at 2020 5:14 AM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 05 Aug 2020 05:14:38 -0400

When 38% of America follows a moron who is a puppet to a formidable enemy and former KGB agent, the the institutions Of democracy.are shaken.
LTC V will be alright.

Response by CWO3 Jim Grindstaff made Aug 5 at 2020 10:48 AM

CWO3 Jim Grindstaff — Wed, 05 Aug 2020 10:48:21 -0400

Vindman’s place as a military officer was to follow the orders of the CIC. It is not his place to ignore the chain of command because he disagreed with the President. Greater men and officers than he will ever be have forgotten their place and were sent packing. Recall a general who decided he knew better than then President Truman? Vindman is lucky to have been able to simply retire.

Response by SFC Casey O'Mally made Aug 5 at 2020 3:54 PM

SFC Casey O'Mally — Wed, 05 Aug 2020 15:54:49 -0400

90% wrong. He was right in his convictions, wrong in his interpretation an, more importantly, execution. His actions afterwards are also wrong.

Response by CPT Thomas Monahan made Aug 5 at 2020 4:39 PM

CPT Thomas Monahan — Wed, 05 Aug 2020 16:39:35 -0400

He was right to report his concern, but he placed himself in the middle of the circus. How did Shift find out about him? He also had the clash w/ being offered to be the Ukraine’s Defense Minister. This made him look to have conflict as an Army Officer and involvement in a foreign government.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Aug 6 at 2020 7:30 AM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Thu, 06 Aug 2020 07:30:42 -0400

Lesson: integrity is only a virtue until you anger those in power.

Response by HN Rick Strul made Aug 6 at 2020 8:11 AM

HN Rick Strul — Thu, 06 Aug 2020 08:11:00 -0400

TREASON is not right. The military is under civilian control in the UNITED STATES. It must subordinate itself to the lawful exercise of that control. Moreover, it must never be in the pockets of foreign interests as Vindman was. And to participate actively in a coups attempt by the communists...! He needs to be in front of a military tribunal charged with TREASON and conspiracy against the Constitution, Republic, and the Liberty of the People NOW! Retirement is a disgrace.

Response by HN Rick Strul made Aug 6 at 2020 8:18 AM

HN Rick Strul — Thu, 06 Aug 2020 08:18:48 -0400

The LTC LIED to Congress and the American people. He later admitted that he lied! This goes far beyond presenting a legitimate concern to his chain of command. He wilfully, wantonly and deliberately gave aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States, foreign and domestic.

Response by 1SG Robert Hunt made Aug 6 at 2020 3:19 PM

1SG Robert Hunt — Thu, 06 Aug 2020 15:19:47 -0400

Something got to be wrong with our military members when you follow wrong over what’s right. That tells me you are no different from LT General Flynn. Your integrity is in question. Don’t let this so call president lead you right off a cliff.

Response by COL Thomas McGrath made Aug 6 at 2020 3:20 PM

COL Thomas McGrath — Thu, 06 Aug 2020 15:20:42 -0400

A coup orchestrated by Democratic operatives. Vindman should have kept his mouth shut. Or reported it to the chain of command for action.

Response by William Drummond made Aug 6 at 2020 9:28 PM

William Drummond — Thu, 06 Aug 2020 21:28:41 -0400

LTC V went around his chain of command. He chose to take a trip up the hill and share his concerns with a member of Congress. It would take several days before the whistleblower protocols started with him. LTC V admitted that he received guidance and advice from someone in Congress during one part of his hearing. When asked to whom he voiced his concern in his chain of command, he matter-of-factly answered, "Nobody."

I disagree with Trump's public shaming of people. Such acts are below the standards of any leader at any level. There are few times when you chastise in public. Praise in public, chastise in private.

Response by SPC Robert Bobo made Aug 6 at 2020 9:54 PM

SPC Robert Bobo — Thu, 06 Aug 2020 21:54:43 -0400

It appeared this guy was Pandering to the deep state for personal gain, his actions were agenda driven and I suspect he will resurface on the propaganda team or elsewhere

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 6 at 2020 11:26 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 06 Aug 2020 23:26:05 -0400

Man y’all are some glutens for punishment. These comments remind me of all those sugar cookie I endured at Knox

Response by Maj Charles Porter made Aug 7 at 2020 2:46 AM

Maj Charles Porter — Fri, 07 Aug 2020 02:46:06 -0400

He testified to 100% third party hear say. He felt he knew of a problem and reported it. That's where the problems start. I a sane world there would be an investigation. Real witnesses would be called. they would give testimony to facts they witnessed. None of that happened. He was called and tried to save a sinking ship. As a loyal officer? he went down with it.

Response by PO3 Joshua Hayes made Aug 7 at 2020 9:33 AM

PO3 Joshua Hayes — Fri, 07 Aug 2020 09:33:19 -0400

My opinion for what it's worth... you're NEVER allowed to use your personal opinions while under contract to undermine the chain of command. This is EXACTLY what this LTC did during the hearing... subpoenaed or not.

Response by LtCol Robert Quinter made Aug 7 at 2020 1:09 PM

LtCol Robert Quinter — Fri, 07 Aug 2020 13:09:36 -0400

Vindman was absolutely out of line. My first research was to see where his billet (essentially senior analyst for the Ukraine) put him in the pecking order. His billet was so far down the line as to not even be mentioned in the description of normal attendees of NSC meetings. Above him were such individuals as the Vice President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the National Security Advisor, Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and others whose opinion could be considered at least as informed as his in the area of appropriateness of remarks and other items in the monitored telephone call. I also recall remarks during his testimony that "the President had failed to comply with his recommendations". So we've got a LtCol (as proud as I am of achieving that grade, I still had to count on about 1700 officers senior to me being wiped out before I could step in as CMC, so I wouldn't consider myself as one of the President's right hand men) sitting as a country advisor whose feelings were hurt that the President didn't do what he recommended, who, instead of having any reservations he might have had handled by any of the other members of NSA, decided to air them before Congress. By that act, he removed himself from being even a distant advisor to the President and was trying to insert his judgement as more valid than the President and all other members named above. Should have had a butt chewing and been sent to the playground at the daycare center.

Response by CPL Brian Trail made Aug 8 at 2020 11:31 AM

CPL Brian Trail — Sat, 08 Aug 2020 11:31:32 -0400

I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) 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." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962)

Response by MAJ Damajah Arnold made Aug 8 at 2020 1:33 PM

MAJ Damajah Arnold — Sat, 08 Aug 2020 13:33:41 -0400

Our senior military leadership is in deep, deep trouble, because if/when Biden wins, he will be forced to purge the military of decent officers who may have tried to do the right thing, but are perceived as complicit or enablers. What the military senior leadership typically does, is a month before the election, they play a game of musical chairs bd backstabbing, to make sure they survive into the next administration. Don’t believe it? In October, look for an uptick in “provocations” by traditional enemies and press releases by military spokespersons about threats that don’t really exist, but show the military isn’t responsible for the politics they may have willfully participated in...they just want to keep us safe.

Response by MSgt George Fillgrove made Aug 9 at 2020 8:40 AM

MSgt George Fillgrove — Sun, 09 Aug 2020 08:40:07 -0400

It was wrong. It was a clear example of why you never mix politics with military service. You take a risk and someone always gets burned. Even though the military has it's own form of politics and ticket punching, we are warriors trained and skilled in the defense of this country and our Constitution, where political parties are supposed to be neutral distinctions.

Ever wonder what might have happened if this guy was enlisted and not a field grade officer?

While we are not "yes men," functioning in the confines of the UCMJ and appropriate orders, we are also not supposed to be career opportunists who are looking for the next book deal.

Ultimately, he took a risk motivated by his own agenda -- right or wrong -- when he should have elevated the issue within his military chain of command, and then shut up. Leave it to the upper echelons to resolve. Instead we have the after-effect of another former military officer, now operating in the political arena, using military members as pawns to further her own political agenda related to the first individual's bad career choices.

I'll bet you we have not seen the last of this field grade officer. He now pens op-ed pieces. Want to bet how soon he ends up on some congressional payroll or as a high-paid media consultant?

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 9 at 2020 9:42 AM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 09 Aug 2020 09:42:29 -0400

The military is supposed to be above politics. Someone's promotion was held up? Boo hoo!

Politicians of all parties do all kinds of bad things, but they have the right to expect those working directly for them aren't going to be spies for the hysterical news media. We all know that we cannot campaign for anyone while in uniform, and that includes campaigning against anyone. LTC Vindman should have put on his big boy panties, and retired, if he wanted to involve himself in politics. Or he could have reported his suspicions to the Inspector General, not joined the media circus of those who for 3 years have been unwilling to accept the results of the election of 2016.

I am not a Trump supporter. He's rude, crude, and a loudmouth. But the more he is attacked by those with a political agenda, the more sympathetic I am.

Response by SGT Bob Knox made Aug 9 at 2020 9:56 AM

SGT Bob Knox — Sun, 09 Aug 2020 09:56:32 -0400

First off that fuck face was a foreigner and should have never been allowed to be an officer, secondly his demeanor how he carried himself while he was on trial was appalling he acted very unprofessional ....

Response by SFC John Gilmore made Aug 9 at 2020 11:15 AM

SFC John Gilmore — Sun, 09 Aug 2020 11:15:40 -0400

"I....do solemnly swear that I will support and defend THE CONSTITUTION of the United States"...therein lies the litmus test. The question I think is whether or not he truly believed that the actions he took were in line with the oath...

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 9 at 2020 4:04 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 09 Aug 2020 16:04:08 -0400

To put it bluntly, Vindman had absolutely zero firsthand knowledge of the situation, and could only testify to hearsay. So since he had nothing of actual value to add to ANY type of legitimate legal proceeding, he should have brought his concerns to either his civilian chain of command, military chain of command, or directly to the president himself for clarification of the situation. What Vindman did do should be considered nothing less than politically motivated treason. As for the remaining apolitical while in uniform, it's simple. Stay off of social media while in uniform, use your brain about what you're posting, and teach the service members under your command to do the same. Furthermore, if you're in doubt about whether or not something is ok to post, don't frigging post the nonsense. It's not hard concept to understand. Or atleast it wouldn't be outside of this kinder, gentler, weaker, too-sensitive-to-do-your-job military. As leaders, you should be teaching your service members to toughen up and grow a spine instead of holding their hands and telling them that their feelings matter more than the cold hard facts of this world.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 9 at 2020 5:52 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 09 Aug 2020 17:52:00 -0400

He was right. Not only that be Vindman did not make anything political; he was politicized by those who support politicians so *blindly* they’d do anything to discredit anyone who dare stand for the Constitution.

Response by MAJ Matthew Arnold made Aug 9 at 2020 7:14 PM

MAJ Matthew Arnold — Sun, 09 Aug 2020 19:14:44 -0400

There is no way to address this question unbiasedly. We have all already decided which side we are on , which means we have all already decided if LTC Vindman was a good guy or a bad guy. The lesson here is to stay out of politics and don't accept assignments to the White House.

Response by CW3 Michael Hess made Aug 9 at 2020 8:25 PM

CW3 Michael Hess — Sun, 09 Aug 2020 20:25:41 -0400

Vindman blew the “whistle” to the wrong people. He certainly did not use the chain of command or the IG. He was political not a soldier. I am not taking anything away from him, just, I think, he used bad judgment.

Response by 1st Lt Mark Marshall made Aug 9 at 2020 10:03 PM

1st Lt Mark Marshall — Sun, 09 Aug 2020 22:03:12 -0400

LTC Vinman was right. If the action of a superior put in jeopardy the integrity of the position as well as the office he had an obligation as a leader to speak to the truth. This is not an issue of mishearing or being unaware of what is occurring, he is a subject matter expert with a history of the understanding of the region. Holding up the promotions though impeding the ability of others to advance and was not the best response, lent integrity to the process. On the flip side had it simply been that others were offered promotions the concern becomes the validity of all promotions and the concern that promotions are not based on merit but favor.
We all took an oath to the country and not an individual.

Response by AB Edward Mondini made Aug 10 at 2020 2:19 AM

AB Edward Mondini — Mon, 10 Aug 2020 02:19:36 -0400

Vindman was 100% right to retire, and he’s lucky he was allowed to retire. All of the problems he encountered he invited upon himself. And he violated the first rule of thumb: he knew what procedures to follow & he chose to ignore them.
On top of that, he violated another convention: he deliberately lied about the President’s phone call, and that is unforgivable.
As for the instigator & Obama loyalist Eric Ciaramella & his pal, Adam Schiff: let’s hope those two are permanently under a microscope. Vindman can blame them, not President Trump, for short-circuiting his career.

Response by CDR Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 10 at 2020 7:53 AM

CDR Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 10 Aug 2020 07:53:27 -0400

What is the question? Was he right to whistelblow or right to retire? At his level, his position has a large amount of politicization already. I would think that, as a Major, you're already experiencing that. I'm experiencing it for sure. One bad CO and, if you don't play along, he or she can ruin your career. I've seen RDMLs try it. If you think a LTC isn't an inherently political position, you're in for a rude awakening I fear.

From my perspective, it sure seemed like he tried to stay apolitical but you can't. Any time you speak out against a "leader" like President Trump, you're going to be punished. The SecDef should have stood up for service members. I'm concerned that you thought it was a Senator holding up 1000 promotions and ignoring that the President was holding up a single promotion out of spite. I would have hoped that other LTCs would have stood up and said, "No...he was selected just like I was. I'll stand up with him. Where is the brotherhood in saying you should sacrifice one person's career who was trying to fulfill his oath to the Constitution and was targeted for retribution by the Commander in Chief?

Response by SSG Dave Johnston made Aug 10 at 2020 12:58 PM

SSG Dave Johnston — Mon, 10 Aug 2020 12:58:36 -0400

So, in reading through a number of responses to the question poised; how many of you typed "Corruption in the Ukraine" into the search bar and hit enter then read all the entries??? Don't use "Google" it's biased but, "Duck Duck Go", "Bing", "AOL", even Microsoft Edge gave some surprising results.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/11/19/alexander-vindman-admits-making-up-parts-of-trump-call-summary/
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/analysis-democrats-have-a-col-vindman-problem
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/10/corrupt_senators_took_ukraine_cash.html
https://eurasianet.org/a-brief-history-of-corruption-in-ukraine-the-poroshenko-era
https://www.dw.com/en/ukraines-anti-corruption-campaign-targets-klitschko-and-poroshenko/a-49816916
So my question is; Who or what was LTC Vindman covering up??

Alexander Vindman Admits Making up Parts of Trump Call Summary

Alexander Vindman admitted that he made up parts of a summary about President Donald Trump's call with Ukranian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Response by MSG Don Burt made Aug 10 at 2020 2:06 PM

MSG Don Burt — Mon, 10 Aug 2020 14:06:34 -0400

Let's say this: what was LTC Vindman’s job description?
Vindman's job at the National Security Council is to write policy memos, schedule meetings and keep minutes of conversations with foreign diplomats. That's why he was on the July 25 call.
Also, when you keep minutes, it’s supposed to be simply notes taken as “accurate as possible” during a meeting to remind you of what was discussed and agreed upon, and you shouldn’t “add to” or “take away” any of the basic data to embellish it for yourself.
If anything, you would make a recording of the conversation and do a direct transcription from the recording, that is, if allowed. Obviously, his interpretations and embellishments were added.
Whatever he thought he heard or felt, he should have reported directly to his immediate supervisor (TM) and not gone to anyone until he had passed it on to Timothy Morrison, period.
And when you get right down to it by reading the transcript, nowhere does the President say or imply that he will provide Military Aid or Support to Ukraine.

Response by SPC Albert Blosser made Aug 10 at 2020 3:50 PM

SPC Albert Blosser — Mon, 10 Aug 2020 15:50:32 -0400

duty, honor, country, no where does the constitution say that the president is above the law or the ucmj.

Response by SGT Mark Halmrast made Aug 10 at 2020 8:54 PM

SGT Mark Halmrast — Mon, 10 Aug 2020 20:54:44 -0400

LTC serving in NSC goes around chain of command with hearsay.

Hard to see how that can be considered right, politics aside.

Judgment, temperament, or both were lacking for an LTC in that type of role.

Response by MAJ John Douglas made Aug 14 at 2020 5:11 PM

MAJ John Douglas — Fri, 14 Aug 2020 17:11:48 -0400

I can't imagine a LTC challenging the President of the United States. He used his uniform as a prop which made it even worse since he normally wore a civilian suit to his office every day. Good riddance. But, but, but, I fully expect that if Biden wins, Vindman will be back and get his promotion to O-6. He will be rewarded for being the Democrat's martyr.

Response by SGT Justin Anderson made Aug 14 at 2020 5:48 PM

SGT Justin Anderson — Fri, 14 Aug 2020 17:48:33 -0400

He did his duty by saying something when he saw something. A trait that sometimes seems non-existent most days. He felt an injustice and did something despite of who or what it was about it. Like said the failure was on the behalf of the DoD not acting on his behalf and allowed him to get run over by the politicians.

Response by SGM Thomas Terebesi Sr made Aug 15 at 2020 11:12 AM

SGM Thomas Terebesi Sr — Sat, 15 Aug 2020 11:12:29 -0400

In the military we all know our pecking order. As we progress in rank that power increases. All of us have had occassions when we disagreed with our superiors. The question is how far do you go to fix it. If you want in the name of patriotism fix all of the bad decisions made by superiors don't expect to have a long military career. Take this as a lession.

Response by MSgt J D McKee made Aug 17 at 2020 11:57 AM

MSgt J D McKee — Mon, 17 Aug 2020 11:57:48 -0400

Treason. That is really all I have to say.

Response by SGT Philip Klein made Aug 21 at 2020 9:14 PM

SGT Philip Klein — Fri, 21 Aug 2020 21:14:53 -0400

When was the last time the LTC took a PT test?

Response by SPC Bryan Guzman-Piedra made Aug 27 at 2020 7:47 AM

SPC Bryan Guzman-Piedra — Thu, 27 Aug 2020 07:47:36 -0400

Vindman contacted the Ukrainian government and told them not to listen to the guy that makes foreign policy.

We used to call that sedition.

Response by PO2 Nick Burke made Sep 6 at 2020 8:43 PM

PO2 Nick Burke — Sun, 06 Sep 2020 20:43:39 -0400

He reported the hearsay. He admitted that when questioned. Not facts hearsay.

Response by Stephen Bracken made Sep 7 at 2020 4:50 PM

Stephen Bracken — Mon, 07 Sep 2020 16:50:04 -0400

https://ricochet.com/696869/archives/on-ltc-vindman-and-the-interagency-but-mostly-on-vindman/

On LTC Vindman and the "Interagency," but Mostly on Vindman - Ricochet

You can read Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman’s opening statement for his 29 October Congressional testimony here. First on Vindman, then the Interagency, then more on Vindman. Full disclosure: I hate the fact that Vindman is in my cohort. He has to be junior to me, but he’s a Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) in the United States […]

Response by Stephen Bracken made Sep 7 at 2020 4:52 PM

Stephen Bracken — Mon, 07 Sep 2020 16:52:00 -0400

https://thefederalist.com/2019/11/19/vindman-just-admitted-to-leaking-to-the-anti-trump-whistleblower/

Vindman Just Admitted To Leaking To The Anti-Trump Whistleblower

Vindman said he spoke with two individuals not in the White House, then Adam Schiff cut him off, instructing him not to name the whistleblower.

Response by 1SG Alan Boggs made Sep 7 at 2020 8:36 PM

1SG Alan Boggs — Mon, 07 Sep 2020 20:36:20 -0400

The disgraced LTC chose politics over country. I hope he fades away into retirement but, i suspect he will become a well paid, "former intelligence official" who will spend the rest of his life as a prop of the left whenever they need to validate some left leaning opinion.

Response by CPT Jeff Reichardt made Sep 8 at 2020 7:51 AM

CPT Jeff Reichardt — Tue, 08 Sep 2020 07:51:08 -0400

If I were the convening authority, LTC Vindman should be charged in a General Court Martial

He’s guilty of Articles 81, 88, 89, 92, 107, 131 and 133.

Article 81 conspiracy. Sentence commensurate with most serious charge. In other words, another life in prison.

Article 88 contemptuous words. 1 year in jail. Dishonorable discharge. Loss of all pay and allowances.

Article 89 insubordination to a superior officer. One year confinement. Dishonorable discharge. Loss of all pay and allowances.

Article 92 Failure to obey a lawful order.

Article 94 Sedition. Life in prison.

Article 106a Espionage. Life in prison.

Article 107 false official statements. Dishonorable discharge. Confinement at hard labor for five years. Loss of all pay and allowances.

Article 131 Perjury. Loss of all pay. Five years confinement. Dishonorable discharge.

Article 132 Fraud against the government. 5 years confinement. Loss of pay and allowances. Dishonorable discharge.

Article 133 conduct unbecoming. 5 years confinement. Loss of pay and allowances. Dishonorable discharge.

And all of the following: Article 134-12. Disloyal statements.

Article 134-19. False swearing.

Article 134-5. Obstruction of justice.

Article 134-40 falsifying public record.

Article 134-38 solicitation of an offense.

Response by SFC Terry Bryant made Sep 8 at 2020 11:10 AM

SFC Terry Bryant — Tue, 08 Sep 2020 11:10:50 -0400

When I was preparing to campaign for a political opponent while still active, I had to go though a very strict course by the JAG on what I could and could not do. Especially while in uniform. This officer used his rank and position to spread false innuendo about the commander-n-chief. There is in no way any room for such blatant disregard for political infiltration of our Military personal in the police campaign for our against a President. Now if he had FIRST HAND knowledge of the President doing something illegal then he reports that using what we all use, the damn chain of command. He hated the President and he allowed himself to be used like a wet rag to further one parties agenda against a setting president. And that should have landed him a court martial at the least.

Response by PFC Donnie Harold Harris made Sep 8 at 2020 5:53 PM

PFC Donnie Harold Harris — Tue, 08 Sep 2020 17:53:09 -0400

Just because you are in the military does not mean your family or future is. You have a right to point out what others may not be able to see. Like what really happened on 9/11.

Response by PFC Donnie Harold Harris made Sep 8 at 2020 5:53 PM

PFC Donnie Harold Harris — Tue, 08 Sep 2020 17:53:38 -0400

Just because you are in the military does not mean your family or future is. You have a right to point out what others may not be able to see. Like what really happened on 9/11.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 8 at 2020 9:30 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Sep 2020 21:30:34 -0400

He decided! End of story!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 8 at 2020 9:42 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Sep 2020 21:42:29 -0400

He is a blue falcon!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 8 at 2020 10:50 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Sep 2020 22:50:30 -0400

You people are worried about him! The military is changing our ways! We are no longer a fighting force!

Response by CW3 Charles Morris made Sep 9 at 2020 2:31 PM

CW3 Charles Morris — Wed, 09 Sep 2020 14:31:05 -0400

Our oath is to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution. Our responsibility is to do that which is right, which at time times cause us to take a sabot round through the chest. LTC Vindman chose the 'hard right' over the 'easy wrong.' He could have said nothing when he observed an incident that was grossly wrong, bur rather he showed the qualities that we should expect from a leader. He did what I hope the rest of us would do, he put country before self.

Response by PO2 Tom Kalbacher made Sep 9 at 2020 6:59 PM

PO2 Tom Kalbacher — Wed, 09 Sep 2020 18:59:38 -0400

When he put his faith in Adam Schiff helping him he showed very poor judgment and is lucky he got out of it all well as he did.

Response by SGT Walter Drumm made Sep 9 at 2020 9:13 PM

SGT Walter Drumm — Wed, 09 Sep 2020 21:13:30 -0400

A question for the commissioned types on here, O-5 and below. Could you, in your best judgment see yourself being subjected to the same, had you done what LTC Vindmann did? Or do you think the consequences would've been more severe?

Response by SrA Eric Belko made Sep 10 at 2020 3:31 AM

SrA Eric Belko — Thu, 10 Sep 2020 03:31:27 -0400

I watched the testimony and was astounded by the lack of honesty. It was disturbing to see the uniform disgraced at the level of LTC. This goes to show the level of political brainwashing that is going on, at all levels. His duty and obligations were to his Country, not the Democrat Party.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 12 at 2020 7:49 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 12 Sep 2020 19:49:22 -0400

Can’t say but I’ll say this; I doubt he passed tape.

Response by LCpl Rich Vail made Sep 13 at 2020 2:08 PM

LCpl Rich Vail — Sun, 13 Sep 2020 14:08:05 -0400

He went outside the chain of command. He should have been court-martialed for that. Current serving officers and enlisted men/women have a narrow path to tread. Here's a question for you. What if your Battalion commander tells you that you and your company must "secure" the White House and evict a lawefully elected president because "orange man bad."...what would you do?

Response by SGT Bruce Savage made Sep 13 at 2020 5:08 PM

SGT Bruce Savage — Sun, 13 Sep 2020 17:08:59 -0400

It doesn't take much searching on the net to find opinions of his character from people who served with him. Vindman has a very low opinion of Americans and joked openly with Russian officers about us. So says LTC Hickman. Vindman had an advisory position and got his panties in a wad when Cinci didn't take his advice. He stated such in his testimony. The very same testimony where he said Trump didn't do anything impeachable. Vindman is a disgrace to the uniform and to all who wore it. Good riddance

Response by SGM Gerald Fife made Sep 13 at 2020 9:59 PM

SGM Gerald Fife — Sun, 13 Sep 2020 21:59:32 -0400

If what he heard why did he wait to tell it. And then to a politician. Thinking he could get an eagle?

Response by CPL Cadrew Strickland made Sep 13 at 2020 10:54 PM

CPL Cadrew Strickland — Sun, 13 Sep 2020 22:54:21 -0400

I really don’t know all the facts of what really happen or what was said in that phone call. So I will not make a decision either way. The LTC Vindman should be thank for his 21 years of service to his country and I hope he enjoys his retirement.

Response by SP5 Alain Delon made Sep 14 at 2020 4:00 AM

SP5 Alain Delon — Mon, 14 Sep 2020 04:00:28 -0400

Didn’t Gen Mcchrystal get relieved for not agreeing with Obama?

Response by SP5 Alain Delon made Sep 14 at 2020 4:07 AM

SP5 Alain Delon — Mon, 14 Sep 2020 04:07:28 -0400

Ummm just realized he was born in the Ukraine, Soviet Union, USSR. Sleeper agent maybe?

Response by Capt Frederick Holderman made Sep 14 at 2020 10:44 AM

Capt Frederick Holderman — Mon, 14 Sep 2020 10:44:28 -0400

You have the right to remain silent. And sometimes that's just damn good advice.

I appreciate LtCol Vinnmman's desire to fall on his sword, what useful did he accomplish? Really, what?

Response by SPC Brandon Israel made Sep 15 at 2020 12:04 AM

SPC Brandon Israel — Tue, 15 Sep 2020 00:04:57 -0400

traitor, democrat stooge, liar, and unbecoming of a senior officer. just too further his career. wat a tool, he deserves a a dishonorable. then to p**** out and blame trump, wat a pathetic POS.

Response by SPC Brandon Israel made Sep 15 at 2020 12:06 AM

SPC Brandon Israel — Tue, 15 Sep 2020 00:06:40 -0400

traitor, democrat stooge, liar, and unbecoming of a senior officer. just too further his career. wat a tool, he deserves a dishonorable, too bad its not the old days cause then it would be a firing squad. then to p**** out and blame trump, wat a pathetic POS. if u cant handle the heat, then stay out of the oven.

Response by SFC Mark Klaers made Sep 16 at 2020 4:19 PM

SFC Mark Klaers — Wed, 16 Sep 2020 16:19:41 -0400

I find it extremely disturbing how many people here find it okay that an officer in the United States Army participated in a coup attempt.

Response by LTC Thomas Tennant made Sep 16 at 2020 6:09 PM

LTC Thomas Tennant — Wed, 16 Sep 2020 18:09:29 -0400

Frankly I saw Vindman as a complete joke and a puppet of the media and "deep state" players. As I see it, he is lucky he was allowed to retire. As I watched him during the hearings I was appalled by his actions and testimony. If I were to write his OER, I would have nailed him for lack of judgement and the fact he embarrassed the office he served.

Response by COL Bill Stoltzfus made Oct 7 at 2020 3:32 PM

COL Bill Stoltzfus — Wed, 07 Oct 2020 15:32:42 -0400

Not that I believe anything Vindman claimed to have heard, Who authorized Vindman to eavesdrop of Head of State communications?

Response by MSgt Ross Baxter made Oct 7 at 2020 3:34 PM

MSgt Ross Baxter — Wed, 07 Oct 2020 15:34:25 -0400

Any “concerns” he might have had should have been addressed up his Chain Of Command, the nanosecond he made it public he violated the UCMJ and subject to the consequences. NO sympathy for him, as a senior commissioned officer he knew better.
HIS lack of judgment earned him his fate.

Response by PO1 Mark Rhodes made Oct 7 at 2020 5:41 PM

PO1 Mark Rhodes — Wed, 07 Oct 2020 17:41:00 -0400

Did he follow the chain of command? Did he notify his supervisors? If in fact he had, then why weren’t more high ranking military brought into questioning over this? In my opinion, I believe that he allowed his political opinion to influence his duty. I have served under both Democrats and Republicans. I may not have liked them, but they were my CinC and for that I supported and respected the position. This was definitely a witch hunt that backfired not only against the President, but also Our Country and Our Military.

Response by MSG Danny Mathers made Oct 8 at 2020 12:53 PM

MSG Danny Mathers — Thu, 08 Oct 2020 12:53:48 -0400

He forgot where his loyalty was obligated.

Response by SGT Jack Stevens made Oct 8 at 2020 4:40 PM

SGT Jack Stevens — Thu, 08 Oct 2020 16:40:00 -0400

Some can argue that LTC Vindeman was right in his actions, but under the UCMJ for the Officer Ranks when it comes to Politics. He violated those rules, as well as spotlighted his actions. Politically. Which is something No Officer in the military should ever do. Remember it was a Flag Officer during the Clinton Administration who made derogatory comments towards tge President William J. Clinton. Who was removed from his Command and forced Retired. All military should observe and learn what LTC Vindeman did was wrong. I for one think LTC Vindeman got off light. I still believe today he should have been Courts Martialed for his actions.

Response by Patricia Burke made Oct 11 at 2020 8:58 AM

Patricia Burke — Sun, 11 Oct 2020 08:58:04 -0400

Undermine; to subvert or weaken insidiously or secretly trying to undermine his political rivals. He has no business deciding if his Commander and Chief is wrong. He didn't follow chain of command. He should be in Leavenworth.

Response by CW3 Ed Neely made Oct 12 at 2020 7:42 AM

CW3 Ed Neely — Mon, 12 Oct 2020 07:42:56 -0400

He was 100% wrong. He was there to advise the president on military matters, yet because the president chose to execute his own foreign policy as opposed to what the State Department recommended, he leaked classified information to those outside the NSC. Here is a little hint for you Mr Vindman, the president is the only one that determines US foreign policy. Not the State Department and certainly not you. You failed to uphold your oath.

Response by MAJ Damajah Arnold made Oct 13 at 2020 2:30 PM

MAJ Damajah Arnold — Tue, 13 Oct 2020 14:30:06 -0400

He will be vindicated in the new administration, and the scales of decency will be balanced once again. All of the cowards, careerists, backstabbers and enablers will be looking for new jobs on 21 January.

Response by SrA Colton Read made Nov 3 at 2020 7:37 AM

SrA Colton Read — Tue, 03 Nov 2020 07:37:16 -0500

He was right to report any concerns he had. But he was wrong to allow the media and congress to use him as a puppet. At the end of the day he needed to remember the only knowledge he had was hearsay. After the first report was made and the IG said everything was all good, he should have stopped. Continuing to push, made him look like he had a political motive.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 3 at 2020 12:58 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 Nov 2020 12:58:53 -0500

The lesson to be learned is don't be a political hack and stooge while your wearing the uniform. He should have got an article 88 referral to a court martial and booted out sans retirement. What a stain.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 3 at 2020 1:05 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 Nov 2020 13:05:56 -0500

There is no place in uniform to be a political hack or stooge. He should have been charged with an article 88 violation and court martialed sans retirement. That wouldn't have happened though because every two star general and above in DC got their stars under the most corrupt administration in US History. The Obama/Biden Criminal regime. When I served under them and the Clinton Crime family I kept my mouth shut and they committed actual crimes.

Response by CMSgt David Bridge made Nov 5 at 2020 10:49 PM

CMSgt David Bridge — Thu, 05 Nov 2020 22:49:44 -0500

He should have stayed out of it. Military members have no business getting into civilian leadership arguments. It’s not about integrity it’s about knowing your role.

Response by SPC Steven Nihipali made Nov 8 at 2020 10:33 PM

SPC Steven Nihipali — Sun, 08 Nov 2020 22:33:48 -0500

That asswipe deserves time in federal prison for treason. How the fuck are you gonna step all over your command and go right to congress? Fucking hell man... i don't even have a security clearance and know my chain follows a set of individuals. As far as the office goes, he's a former soldier held to yr same accountability as anyone else. As far as Intel goes, well the joke says it, an oxymoron. He helped in the screwing over of the president and helped in the creation of Russiagate with the impeachment. Hope he loves living under Biden n Harris big toe

Response by PO2 Allen Pegg made Nov 9 at 2020 7:59 AM

PO2 Allen Pegg — Mon, 09 Nov 2020 07:59:39 -0500

Vindman never had a true case. He was only out to get the President. There was NOTHING wrong with the phone call but IDIOT Vindman wanted it to appear so.

Response by TSgt Neil Rosen made Nov 14 at 2020 6:33 PM

TSgt Neil Rosen — Sat, 14 Nov 2020 18:33:23 -0500

LTC Vindman needs to re-read the UCMJ in regard to political involvement while in service. In basic training, we were told NEVER to participate in political stunts while in uniform, such as protests and campaign events. He wasn't just speaking out, he was in violation of the UCMJ and involving himself in a coup attempt. He's lucky he got off with retiring.

Response by SGT Cy Sturgis made Dec 5 at 2020 7:41 PM

SGT Cy Sturgis — Sat, 05 Dec 2020 19:41:22 -0500

The strength of the American armed forces is their apolitical stance. In America, civilians controlled the use of force and that is the way it should be. However the culture of service, honor and brotherhood is (I hope) the culture of the military. LTC Vindman broke faith with all of that when he went to the press because He didn’t like the policy of the current occupant of the White House. That’s a betrayal of military honor and one more step toward changing the US military into a third world political mob.

Response by PO1 John Wypyszinski made Dec 6 at 2020 10:06 AM

PO1 John Wypyszinski — Sun, 06 Dec 2020 10:06:53 -0500

He went outside his chain of command to either advance a personal agenda or at the urging of a third party who may have enticed him with promises that couldn't be kept once the house of cards they were built on came crashing down. Once he had outlived his usefulness to the denizens of the swamp they put on a show of trying to protect him and salvage what was left of his career. I've been told that Ranger School will reveal your character flaws, it apparently showed LTC Vindman's in spades - being tagged as lazy and a chow thief by your peers is a pretty serious character flaw for a leader. That alone tells me all I need to know about him, when the pressure is on he only cares about himself and advancing his needs/wants/desires. They should have been allowed to peer him out in Ranger School and maybe we could have been spared this circus.

Response by Cpl Mark A. Morris made Dec 9 at 2020 1:04 AM

Cpl Mark A. Morris — Wed, 09 Dec 2020 01:04:10 -0500

I enjoyed reading all the well written posts on Vindman. My suspicion he was a shit bird appears correct.

Response by PFC Carmine Angelo made Dec 20 at 2020 11:44 AM

PFC Carmine Angelo — Sun, 20 Dec 2020 11:44:31 -0500

Roman Empire collapsed due to using captured enemies in their legions. This man seemed to me to hold allegiance to a foreign country. Did he not brag about being offered a position with a foreign entity

Response by SGT Walter Drumm made Dec 23 at 2020 8:39 AM

SGT Walter Drumm — Wed, 23 Dec 2020 08:39:20 -0500

Even if you have all the right reasons for doing something if you're violating regs/SOP or disregarding the chain of command you should expect to have to answer for it.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 23 at 2020 9:02 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Dec 2020 09:02:13 -0500

I like to say that if something doesn't seem right, then bring it up to the proper channels. Let the people decide. Sure it may not have been his place to intrude politically, but he believed in what he did. I give him props for making the move. I know I would not have done the same, but perhaps the Army needs less yes men, and more who are willing to step out of their specified duties to make a change for what they believe is for the better. Politics and Military aside, time is the only true judge of us all.

Response by SPC Karen Bowerman made Dec 30 at 2020 11:57 PM

SPC Karen Bowerman — Wed, 30 Dec 2020 23:57:50 -0500

I think that his motivation really should be questioned. Watching his testimony was excruciatingly painful for many reasons. I found it hard to believe he was unbiased, and that is never a good look for the military, especially when his position was in the political realm. As was suggested in one comment, he should have been brought back to his post for his and the military’s protection! I disagree, in that, his actions were his, and when you make a stand, you must be held responsible for the fallout. Perhaps, his chain of command should have had a meaningful conversation with him prior to making a choice to testify to begin with. I also believe he was walking a very thin line of slandering the Commander in Chief, never a good idea, never a reason to earn a promotion, and Vindman did a huge disservice to those soldiers that were actually busting ass and waiting for much deserved promotions.

Response by Col Tri Trinh made Jan 1 at 2021 5:59 PM

Col Tri Trinh — Fri, 01 Jan 2021 17:59:39 -0500

Doesn’t matter whether you are in or out of uniform. When you are called before Congress to testify. You tell the truth.
The military is just a phase in your life.
You live with your words and actions on the right side of history for the rest of your life.

Response by SSG Russell Busicchia made Jan 4 at 2021 2:18 PM

SSG Russell Busicchia — Mon, 04 Jan 2021 14:18:25 -0500

LTC Vindman did not follow the chain-of-command., for this he was wrong. I served for 20 years and never made comments in public. Service members must remember the chain at all times. I don't believe it is proper to publicly question the CINC. When I had a problem with the CINC I voted for the other guy. Publicly, I always supported him.

Response by SSG Patrick O'Flaherty made Jan 22 at 2021 12:48 PM

SSG Patrick O'Flaherty — Fri, 22 Jan 2021 12:48:54 -0500

Vinman should have kept his mouth shut and do his job at the time. I hope he's happy now that our Guard troops are being treated like garbage.

Response by COL Dave Sims made Feb 12 at 2021 8:40 PM

COL Dave Sims — Fri, 12 Feb 2021 20:40:52 -0500

So retired and sitting here in Ft. Living Room I will offer my opinion on LTC(R) Vindman . He was a mediocre officer who had language skills and turned "political". Near as I can tell he never held company or battalion command....which for me is an acid test of an officers' ability to lead. During his entire career he was the typical staff officer making recommendations and having no accountability for their consequences. I have met many like him (Someone should ferret out his assignment officer and find out how he got the job at NSC.) He retired I think because he knew he would not be trusted by either his contemporaries or his superiors. He will not be missed...at least by me.

Response by 1SG Alexis Ruiz made Feb 17 at 2021 8:54 AM

1SG Alexis Ruiz — Wed, 17 Feb 2021 08:54:20 -0500

As always there are two different moralities. The one that calls what our duty to our nation and what people think we owe an individual. Our oath is always to defend and protect the constitution, to do the hard right not the easy wrong. LTC Vindman did the right thing and what was required for him. The fact the DA and DOD the Senate and Congress did not take care of th his s ol soldier should be what is in question. I seen this in what happened to the navy Captain when he was taking care of his sailors and marines. We want to have a conversation. then let's talk about how DUTY, HONOR, COUNTRY has been replaced by loyalty to a political party and not to the people we serve.
I'm tired of everything one give BS opinions and making we that served just another buzz word. And for the LTC that called LTC Vidman a she and her at least have the decency to actually read and look at HIM in HIS uniform.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 21 at 2021 4:05 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 21 Feb 2021 04:05:51 -0500

Wrong, he completely avoided his chain of command to score political points and he never heard or saw any of the shit he was testifying on. He should have been reprimanded and kicked from his post to go and complete the rest of his contract as a 1st LT in antarctica.

Response by SFC Melvin Brandenburg made Feb 22 at 2021 1:19 PM

SFC Melvin Brandenburg — Mon, 22 Feb 2021 13:19:22 -0500

I don't think it was justified to do what he did.

Response by SFC Erin Barnett made Mar 18 at 2021 10:06 AM

SFC Erin Barnett — Thu, 18 Mar 2021 10:06:54 -0400

He should have reported his concerns up his chain of command and stayed out of the political arena. Retirees can still face UCMJ action. He wont since Biden won, but he could have and very possibly should.

Response by LTJG Sandra Smith made Mar 22 at 2021 11:22 AM

LTJG Sandra Smith — Mon, 22 Mar 2021 11:22:55 -0400

Since his information was unconfirmed 2nd or 3rd hand, he should've waited 'til there was something more concrete than innuendo. As an officer, he should've known better, and exercised better discretion.

Response by SSG J S made Apr 17 at 2021 10:08 PM

SSG J S — Sat, 17 Apr 2021 22:08:25 -0400

Vindman was a tool that was relieved for cause just prior to the 2SCR 2007 Iraq deployment. He's a political hack that lied and then cried when he got called out for being a political pawn.

He never should have been in any position that required a security clearance, let alone turning his opinion into another witch hunt.

Enough said.

Response by LCpl Steve Zupan made May 11 at 2021 3:21 AM

LCpl Steve Zupan — Tue, 11 May 2021 03:21:58 -0400

Too fat.... He was an officer for sure and should've got kicked out...Unsat yo

Response by LCpl Steve Zupan made May 11 at 2021 3:28 AM

LCpl Steve Zupan — Tue, 11 May 2021 03:28:38 -0400

He was a fat ass... Typical officer for the Army... Sad AF

Response by CMSgt Donald ONeill made May 22 at 2021 8:23 PM

CMSgt Donald ONeill — Sat, 22 May 2021 20:23:20 -0400

First let's not forget Vindman went around his chain of command . Second LtCol Vindman had a hard time taking orders . And third he put politics over his position as a military member .

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Jun 11 at 2021 10:02 PM

SSG Edward Tilton — Fri, 11 Jun 2021 22:02:56 -0400

A true PATRIOT who stood up to the forces trying destroy America

Response by SGT J M Porters made Jun 25 at 2021 10:46 PM

SGT J M Porters — Fri, 25 Jun 2021 22:46:04 -0400

It cost him his Full Bird and rightly so. One of the worst things you can have in your chain of command is Senior or subordinate officers second guesting the Commander Chief. Sometimes learning that the hard way can cause you to lose lives. All of us know officers or NCOs sidestepping the chain of command bread disrespect and causes chaos. When you serve at the leisure of your commander and if you disagree. What do you do? Put in for a transfer. You do not Sabotage his command. https://youtu.be/Cq693K6GEaw

Riker will snap you back SO hard...

Response by CAPT Edward Schmitt made Jun 27 at 2021 12:09 PM

CAPT Edward Schmitt — Sun, 27 Jun 2021 12:09:47 -0400

I think the LTC was right to voice his concerns but was completely wrong to willingly join in a political vendetta and be used by politicians. We in the military are supposed to stay apolitical regardless of our political positions. The LTC was used for a drama circus and was wrong to allow it.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 28 at 2021 2:32 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 28 Jun 2021 14:32:16 -0400

He didn’t use his chain of command and was trying to punch well above his pay grade. He was foolish to wear his political beliefs on his sleeve and be used as a pawn.

Response by SPC Michael Brown made Jul 1 at 2021 2:30 PM

SPC Michael Brown — Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:30:47 -0400

Vindman had a moral obligation to say something.

Response by PO2 Mike Vignapiano made Jul 5 at 2021 11:42 AM

PO2 Mike Vignapiano — Mon, 05 Jul 2021 11:42:01 -0400

I believe the LTC was wrong. He said he reported it because he "thought" the investigation into Joe Biden and his son was "quid pro quo". He said he did it out of a sense of duty. If Trump wasn't so hated, or if it were Biden on the call, the LTC's concern would have been squashed immediately. There's too many things that if it weren't Trump, it'd be fine. Or the opposite, if Trump or Trump Jr had done the things the Biden's have done, there'd be blood in the streets. Also, no one (to my knowledge) brought up the concern that LTC Vindman is a naturalized citizen of Ukrainian birth and perhaps that played into it.

Response by SFC Cheryl McElroy US ARMY (RET) made Jul 22 at 2021 2:31 PM

SFC Cheryl McElroy US ARMY (RET) — Thu, 22 Jul 2021 14:31:38 -0400

He belongs in Leavenworth.
Background on Vindman:
He’s tied to Ukrainian arms dealers, Ukrainian oil, and the Atlantic Council.
He’s connected to Obama’s Russian ambassador and Fusion GPS’s Glenn Simpson.
He tried to tamper with the transcript of the phone call between President Trump and the Ukrainian President.
He’s in violation of the leaking statute that is 18 USC 798.
He claims Trump’s phone call was “biased”, but not Biden’s actual bribery or his own convoluted logic.
The following is a first-person account of Vindman’s penchant for being a dishonorable leftwing tool.
https://amgreatness.com/2019/11/04/retired-army-officer-remembers-lt-col-vindman-as-partisan-democrat-who-ridiculed-america/
Lt. Col. Jim Hickman stated that he had to reprimand Vindman for denigrating the USA in front of Russian officials.
Vindman was part of an attempted coup d'etat against a duly elected President.
He should have been prosecuted.

Retired Army Officer Remembers Lt. Col. Vindman as Partisan Democrat Who Ridiculed America ›...

A retired Army officer who worked with Democrat “star witness” Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman in Grafenwoher, Germany, claims Vindman "really talked up" President Barack Obama and ridiculed America and…

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 31 at 2021 10:30 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 31 Jul 2021 10:30:14 -0400

How can we be apolitical? How about delete this post? That’s a good start… stop teaching CRT. I’m an immigrant who got here in the US at 20yo. Im still serving as well my only two children. We consider ourselves Americans! Stop whining.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 1 at 2021 5:39 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 01 Aug 2021 05:39:08 -0400

I find it deeply concerning that a Field Grade Amedd like yourself would mislead superior and subordinate peers, either intentionally or unintentionally, by cherry picking the UCMJ and misquoting tbe Manual for Courts-Martial.
We are all obligated to issue and/or follow "legal" orders and NOT to issue OR follow "unlawful" orders.
E-1/O-1 to Commander in Chief. We are ALL included, no exceptions, to Oaths of Service and Office.
A President that issues illegal order is acting as a domestic enemy to the Constitution, does not matter what Party they represent.
It surprises me that both you, and many others, do not appear to recognize your constitutional responsibilities to US National Security.

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Aug 1 at 2021 10:15 AM

SSG Edward Tilton — Sun, 01 Aug 2021 10:15:41 -0400

He was a hero, without him the Fascisti may have taken power

Response by SSG Brian Carpenter made Aug 1 at 2021 2:04 PM

SSG Brian Carpenter — Sun, 01 Aug 2021 14:04:25 -0400

Wrong...he was politically motivated and in my own humble opinion deserved UCMJ for slandering his CIC. Many of you may say nay but I feel he went against his own oath to the CIC that he swore to when signing his contract. He repeatedly said it was hearsay and that HE did not directly hear it. In that case he was dead wrong and an embarrassment to the Army. Sure I know the good ol boy system took care of him. But had he been a senior enlisted would the outcome been the same? No he would have been reduced and then retired. As far as I see it he lied under oath and did so on a televised event while wearing his uniform. A disgrace plain and simple. Yes I am a Republican but I also have not lost sleep over President Trump losing other than that my party lost. His actions at the end were embarrassing to the great office of the Republic he held. But he was the sitting President and the LTC betrayed him.

Response by MAJ Hugh Blanchard made Aug 1 at 2021 9:25 PM

MAJ Hugh Blanchard — Sun, 01 Aug 2021 21:25:52 -0400

LTC Vindman was assigned to a post in support of the National Security Council. Very dicey business, given that national security policy is a very politically controversial battlefield.

Response by Lt Col Leslie Bryant made Aug 2 at 2021 1:29 AM

Lt Col Leslie Bryant — Mon, 02 Aug 2021 01:29:53 -0400

Frankly as a four time former US Defense, Acting Defense and Air Attache and Security Assistance Officer and Adviser to 5 US Ambassadors in Nicaragua, Zambia, Nigeria and Sierra Leone specializing in Post Conflict Countries, I’m not convinced nor did I hear anything in the testimony that convinced me President Trump did anything wrong. I did see an immature Army LTC out of his element serving in a position I question he even had the qualifications or experience for. I’m not sure he had received any orientation or training for his job from the State Department or Intelligence Agencies which could have affected his decision making and choice of actions. I also felt he did not understand who he worked for or how to interact with those folks, especially the State Department. I also heard his State Department Boss say he was not respected, had jumped their chains of command, gone around his State Department Boss and again he appeared very immature. Should any Senator hold up military promotions? No, but they do and this was no exception! The US Military needs and should continue to remain apolitical! It does not help that our now retired Generals rather than quietly retiring and remaining apolitical previously have now chosen to become political! I blame retiring Generals dating to Obama for this increased politicization. That said, the US Military needs to find a way to stay apolitical!

Response by SFC Thomas Cook made Aug 3 at 2021 7:25 AM

SFC Thomas Cook — Tue, 03 Aug 2021 07:25:14 -0400

I believe he lost sight of his overall role, got his feelings hurt and decided to draw an ounce of revenge. I believe he forgot that the President IS foreign relations. In the end, none of my business.

Response by CPO Gary Andrews made Aug 4 at 2021 10:02 AM

CPO Gary Andrews — Wed, 04 Aug 2021 10:02:00 -0400

He made an ass of himself

Response by SPC Mark Maestas made Aug 4 at 2021 10:02 AM

SPC Mark Maestas — Wed, 04 Aug 2021 10:02:47 -0400

100% right

Response by LTJG Sandra Smith made Aug 4 at 2021 6:51 PM

LTJG Sandra Smith — Wed, 04 Aug 2021 18:51:32 -0400

Just as an addendum to this conversation: Vindman has admitted he lied to Congress.
https://libertyonenews.com/dems-hero-whistleblower-admits-he-lied-

Dem’s Hero Whistleblower Admits He Lied To Congress Under Oath

NSC leaker Lt. Col. Alexander Vindmantestified on day 3 of the Adam Schiff Show Trial. On that day, House Intelligence Committee Devin Nunes (R-CA) asked Vindman if he had discussed Trump's phone call with anyone

Response by SSG Carlos Garcia made Aug 6 at 2021 6:35 PM

SSG Carlos Garcia — Fri, 06 Aug 2021 18:35:07 -0400

This LTC got what he deserved. Even before all of this FUBAR, servicemembers especially those in the Senior ranking bracket (whether Commissioned or Nooncommisioned) have turned into a political/ PC environment that is indeed very detrimental to the Armed Forces than anything else. Even during my tenure as an SSG I always asked those seniors asking me questions whether they want it my shot from the hip answer or the Politically Correct version. Needless to say, I always called it as I saw it, nothing more and nothing less.

Response by COL John Hudson made Aug 7 at 2021 8:16 AM

COL John Hudson — Sat, 07 Aug 2021 08:16:48 -0400

From my personal point of view: Commissioned Officers in our U.S. Military serve at the pleasure of a President...the "Commander in Chief." LTC Vindman was welcome to run his concerns up his immediate chain of command. Regardless of HOW he was pulled into controversy of a Presidential Impeachment...strolling into Congress in full uniform while on Active Duty to testify against a sitting President did NOT sit well with a great number of service members who saw his act as visibly against the principles we work for. He opened himself up to the spotlight of public opinion which was not favorable, ultimately paying a price for that act (removal from promotion - reassignment - and retirement). Legal pundits will argue the 'rightness' of his actions until the end of time, but the lesson here (for any astute observer) is to stay in your lane and out of politics!

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 7 at 2021 7:56 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 07 Aug 2021 19:56:00 -0400

Guilty of perjury according to his own book. Probably violated Official Secrets Act. He should have been tried, not allowed to retire.

Response by LtCol Robert Quinter made Aug 16 at 2021 4:32 PM

LtCol Robert Quinter — Mon, 16 Aug 2021 16:32:13 -0400

An update. Vindman gave an interview to Heritage Foundation saying that he did what he did because Trump didn't respect the "career" people and he wanted to help Biden get elected by besmirching Trump. Said if they hadn't impeached him, he would have found another way.

Response by Cpl Paul Shanaman made Nov 16 at 2021 5:17 PM

Cpl Paul Shanaman — Tue, 16 Nov 2021 17:17:05 -0500

Link is broken. However.

Vindman was wrong in every way. If he had a real concern it would have been done so, in the proper manner, through the chain of command. A very simple principle drilled into every member of the armed services, whether commissioned or enlisted.

I do not believe he did this.

From all available information we can reasonably deduce that he:
1. Wanted to sway an election.
2. Wanted to profit.

This is indisputable.

To answer the question how do current service members remain apolitical?
It starts with refusing. Refusing to get political, choosing to not get promoted if it requires you to act against your oath and your morals and values. Blow the whistle on those that present you with an ultimatum for promotion.
Officers are supposed to be the example for the enlisted, our leaders. Recently, the officer ranks have become a clown show. The weak ones willing to play ball get promoted and the ones who speak out and do what's right are punished, true leaders like Lieutenant Colonel Stuart Scheller.

It starts with policing your own. If enlisted acted in such a manner the officers would rain down hellfire. Practice what you preach, set the example, tell politicians to shove off this includes the senior officers that have already sold their rank.

Oh, also don't dismiss the veteran community so easily. We are the ones that have the greatest ability to drive change. We are no longer bound by the contract and can speak freely.

Response by CPO Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 17 at 2021 6:49 PM

CPO Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 17 Nov 2021 18:49:51 -0500

He upheld the code of ethics.

Response by MSG Tony Reilly made Nov 18 at 2021 6:35 AM

MSG Tony Reilly — Thu, 18 Nov 2021 06:35:52 -0500

Should have been court martial education! Stripped of all rank and entitlement.

Response by CW2 Samuel Hunt made Nov 18 at 2021 8:25 AM

CW2 Samuel Hunt — Thu, 18 Nov 2021 08:25:53 -0500

I believe LTC Vindman was right. I believe his actions were justified and correct. The whole cover up business that others keep condoning is an example and aberration of cover up culture. You are either morally bankrupt or honest with no in between or grey area, those living in grey areas are in denial. The Constitution is the will of the People and should never be compromised for anyone. Including a 4F POTUS using influence granted to him, to coerce a foreign govt official to investigate a political rival. If you think LTC Vindman was wrong, you probably think the attack on the Capital was Orchestrated by everyone except ex- POTUS Donald Trump.

Response by SGT Jeff Everhart made Nov 18 at 2021 11:22 PM

SGT Jeff Everhart — Thu, 18 Nov 2021 23:22:33 -0500

As members of the military we take an oath to uphold lawful and dutiful orders. Vindman had no right to listen on to President Trump's phone calls. Donald Trump was duly elected by the American people, we didn't elect LTC Vindman. Vindman is creature of the deep institution that is the Pentagon and the State Department. However, what he did is nothing new.

Response by Col Larry Chodzko made Nov 19 at 2021 12:41 PM

Col Larry Chodzko — Fri, 19 Nov 2021 12:41:49 -0500

who are the 28% morons who thought he was right?????

Response by SPC Perry Gresham made Nov 19 at 2021 2:13 PM

SPC Perry Gresham — Fri, 19 Nov 2021 14:13:42 -0500

He took something he overheard and passed it on, not only to his chain of command but to his brother and ultimately the world. What he overheard turns out to be false. He was not fit to be in the service at all. He was gossiping like a little bitch. Period, why are we we still talking about this fool when so much else is going on with our government?

Response by 1SG Raymond Benning made Nov 21 at 2021 12:33 PM

1SG Raymond Benning — Sun, 21 Nov 2021 12:33:30 -0500

Man i feel bad for the dude losing his retirement. I get it I truly do but there are rules and regulations that you have to conform to. He didn’t. Do I think he should have lost his retirement? No. He should have been able to finish out his 20 with a letter of reprimand riding some desk some where.

Response by SSG Russell Busicchia made Nov 26 at 2021 11:42 AM

SSG Russell Busicchia — Fri, 26 Nov 2021 11:42:18 -0500

If LTC Vindman thought that the President was wrong he should have addressed hi chain-of-command, which he did not. He jumped the chain-of-command for his own political gain. Had he used the proper method to express his concerns the whole situation would have been different. Leave politics out of the equation. If you have a problem addressed it through your chain-of-command and let the "system" do it's job.

Response by SGM Leon Peck made Feb 3 at 2022 10:18 PM

SGM Leon Peck — Thu, 03 Feb 2022 22:18:07 -0500

As soldiers, we all are entitled to our own opinions. But, as soldiers, we also fall under the oath that we take to obey the orders of the Officers appointed over us. And as soldiers, we all fall under the UCMJ - NOT the Civilian Justice system. The President, any President of the USis the Elected Leader of the Nation, and the ex-officio Commender in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States.

LTC Vindman had the absolute right to his opinion . BUT his responsibility was to address those opinions to his Chain of Command - NOT the media, not one political party or the other. When he went outside of his supervisors in the Chain of Command, he violated his oath of office and Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. He should have been subject to trial by Courts Martial.

Response by GySgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 4 at 2022 10:38 AM

GySgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 04 Feb 2022 10:38:43 -0500

The constitution nor rules of war mention LTC but if they are something wrong should they not do/say something? If they see someone torturing a prisoner Should they say the rules of war and the Geneva convention don’t say LTC? If they see a soldier doing something wrong should they say army regulations don’t say LTC?

Response by SGT Joseph Smith made Feb 4 at 2022 9:05 PM

SGT Joseph Smith — Fri, 04 Feb 2022 21:05:07 -0500

How do I know if he was right or wrong, I don’t even know who vindman is or what he done

Response by MAJ Steve Daugherty made Feb 5 at 2022 11:17 AM

MAJ Steve Daugherty — Sat, 05 Feb 2022 11:17:05 -0500

The Roman Republic fell when there was so much partisan politics that nothing could be done positive for the Empire, the populace lost faith in the government and the only stability was the professional standing Army, which took over and established a military dictatorship, which by the way the empire flourished for over 300 years with a higher standard of living than mankind has enjoyed till modern times. It didn’t make much difference who the emperor was for the citizens as the military enforced a relatively high level of justice. At least compared to that offered by a government that openly bought and sold Senate seats. Does any of this have a sound of familiarity?

Response by SSG R R made Feb 7 at 2022 4:44 PM

SSG R R — Mon, 07 Feb 2022 16:44:19 -0500

I found his pointing to his OER to be amusing. He sat there and with a straight face said "look how good I am. This is what my OER (although he called it something else....) says and she signed it."

Look let's just be honest. We all know that OER and NCOER are inflated. It's a known issue and has been going on since time immortal.

I would make a fair wager that he actually wrote his own OER and handed ot to his civilian supervisor for signature.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 7 at 2022 5:02 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 07 Feb 2022 17:02:32 -0500

1000% right

Response by SFC Carlos Cruz made Feb 8 at 2022 9:21 AM

SFC Carlos Cruz — Tue, 08 Feb 2022 09:21:39 -0500

I will not agree with some comments the he should had reported it when in reality he work for the President. We took a oath and was to report it to the chain of command not congress or any others agency. He was unprofessional regardless how you see it. If we aren’t countable with our job we request to be move or resign. Too easy

Response by CW4 Tim McCartney made Feb 11 at 2022 12:58 AM

CW4 Tim McCartney — Fri, 11 Feb 2022 00:58:06 -0500

Pillsbury fatbody is a disgrace to every 05 I ever knew. He should be throat chopped the first of every month he receives his govmint check.

Response by PVT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2022 5:59 PM

PVT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 14 Feb 2022 17:59:48 -0500

He was not a whistleblower so 100% wrong. He was a political activist in uniform pushing ideological beliefs but was protected as he served the political collectivist cause. He broke multiple articles of UCMJ and was shielded from repercussions because of the cause he serves currently has the backing of an entrenched bureaucracy.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2022 9:23 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 15 Feb 2022 21:23:26 -0500

Vindman was a uninformed service member. It has everything to do with the oath. Loyalty to the constitution above all else…that’s why it is a certain order. Now him getting fired from his post makes sense because he couldn’t be trusted to perform those duties with transparency. Still the point being there should be no reason and no situation that causes you to have to choose between being loyal to the constitution or being loyal to a person…even if that person is the president. If that ever happens than it means the person (in this case the president) is in fact wrong themselves. Think about we all should be upholding the constitution…all of us, including the president. The only time you would have to choose is if one (the person or the constitution) is out of line and the constitution remains unchanged since it’s inception so that could only mean the person is out of line. Bottom line Vindman made a choice and even if it cost him his job and it torpedoed his career he was not wrong for that choice.

Response by 1SG Roberto Peralta-Vazquez made Feb 16 at 2022 9:45 AM

1SG Roberto Peralta-Vazquez — Wed, 16 Feb 2022 09:45:24 -0500

He was dead wrong and disloyal. Then proven to be a liar. He should have been court martial, He was the whistleblower in my opinion.

Response by LTC John Wilson made Mar 14 at 2022 10:17 AM

LTC John Wilson — Mon, 14 Mar 2022 10:17:48 -0400

Vindman violated Articles 88 and 94 of the UCMJ, at the very least. He was 100% wrong, and should be tried for his crimes.

Response by SPC David S. made Mar 14 at 2022 5:12 PM

SPC David S. — Mon, 14 Mar 2022 17:12:59 -0400

Vindman intentionaly lied to congress - 2019 Oct. 29 deposition, LTC Vindman was asked by "Adam B. Schiff" about military aide sent to Ukraine. Vindman testified - “Under the previous administration, there was a, I’m aware of the transfer of a fairly significant number of Javelins, yes,” - lie as that never happened. Obama never sent anything other than support aid - all was none lethal.

LTC Vindman was assigned to the Joint Chiefs in late 2017 when the Trump administration made the decision to send the first Javelins to Ukraine. The first delivery of lethal aide happened in the spring of 2018. LTC Vindman arrived at the White House that July. So the guy making claims about risks to national security had either no clue what aid was actually sent to Ukraine by either administration or he lied - yet he's was the Ukraine expert at the NSC?

As to claims about improper call due to political rival claims - is Hunter a political rival? If so seems Hunter's business dealing while his father was VP would and should have been considered a clear conflict of interest. Might need to look into what father and son where doing to make sure Ukraine can't blackmail US into getting into WWIII with Russia yet again he's the Ukraine expert in the NSC.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/nov/13/alexander-vindman-claims-obama-not-trump-gave-jave/

Alexander Vindman claims Obama, not Trump, gave Javelins to Ukraine

Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a main accuser in the Democrats’ impeachment drive, wrongly credited President Obama for sending advanced anti-tank weapons to Ukraine when President Trump was the first.

Response by CPL Kenneth Servello Jr made Mar 22 at 2022 6:06 AM

CPL Kenneth Servello Jr — Tue, 22 Mar 2022 06:06:32 -0400

He perjured himself by repeatedly saying he was a direct witness.

Response by CPL Kenneth Servello Jr made Mar 22 at 2022 6:50 AM

CPL Kenneth Servello Jr — Tue, 22 Mar 2022 06:50:28 -0400

He thought he could make it up and be protected by the Military..and he almost did until he admitted during his rambling speech that he wasn't actually there..he had zero first hand evidence and that he lied..

Response by CPL Kenneth Servello Jr made Mar 22 at 2022 6:51 AM

CPL Kenneth Servello Jr — Tue, 22 Mar 2022 06:51:38 -0400

If yiu really watched the trial,this would be 100% wrong.

Response by LTC Ray Buenteo made Mar 23 at 2022 10:43 AM

LTC Ray Buenteo — Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:43:39 -0400

His 15 minutes are over. Let it go.

Response by MAJ Geiter Dunn made Mar 24 at 2022 10:08 AM

MAJ Geiter Dunn — Thu, 24 Mar 2022 10:08:34 -0400

Quite a few comments about "Loyalty to the Constitution vs. Loyalty to any President".
I've looked at the Constitution, and I still can't find where in the Constitution where it says LTCs set foreign policy.

Response by PO1 Kevin Dougherty made Mar 24 at 2022 1:21 PM

PO1 Kevin Dougherty — Thu, 24 Mar 2022 13:21:54 -0400

He was a conveniently placed pawn who allowed himself to be used to further the political goals of people who would have been just as happy to throw him under the bus had it benefited them. His pride allowed him to be deceived into stepping beyond the bounds of both his expertise and authority.

I think most of us heard things or received orders with which we did not agree. But most of us were smart enough, and humble enough to realize we might not have the whole picture. I know that even as a senior enlisted, I from time to time gave orders that had the men under me saying huh? Usually because I had information and/or context that did not have access to and sometimes, lacked need to know.

Response by CPL Sheila Lewis made Mar 24 at 2022 2:38 PM

CPL Sheila Lewis — Thu, 24 Mar 2022 14:38:05 -0400

The oath is to uphold and protect the Constitution of the United States of America.

Response by CPL Kenneth Servello Jr made Mar 24 at 2022 3:05 PM

CPL Kenneth Servello Jr — Thu, 24 Mar 2022 15:05:16 -0400

Armored combat? So you sat on your ass in a TOC.. letting the real troops do the work..I've met a LOT of officers while in the service..you're the absolute worse. And the fact you're defending a pos like Vindman shows it..do us both a favor...stop posting. Its your only hope of posting something true or factual..

Response by PO3 Edward Jones made Mar 24 at 2022 5:00 PM

PO3 Edward Jones — Thu, 24 Mar 2022 17:00:52 -0400

First of all Vindman was a clear partisan political operative, he was squarely ups the ass of the State Dept. where his twisted idea of loyalty clearly lay. His warnings seem to mimic the lefts non-stop lies that have now been exposed. I see him as a kiss ass looking toward his hoped future at State and not any love for country.

I would like to add that this virus of politics is infecting the current leadership under Biden. We have two military CEO's more interested in political appearance over military readiness and telling a clearly addled leader in the White House that his choices are at least bad if not callous toward the safety of the men and women they lead.

Response by TSgt Jonathan (Chris) Watson made Mar 25 at 2022 3:51 PM

TSgt Jonathan (Chris) Watson — Fri, 25 Mar 2022 15:51:37 -0400

He was completely in the wrong. As an actively serving military member, he had zero justification to insert himself into politics. As a commissioned officer, he should have been honorable and resigned his commission. As to the ripples, I wonder how his actions have impacted the current conflict in Ukraine.

Response by LTC Karen McKay made Apr 14 at 2022 11:35 PM

LTC Karen McKay — Thu, 14 Apr 2022 23:35:38 -0400

Vindman should have been court-martialled. He still can be in retirement.

Response by SGT Scott Adie made Apr 15 at 2022 1:32 PM

SGT Scott Adie — Fri, 15 Apr 2022 13:32:36 -0400

On his retirement, he was right. With his feet unintentionally or intentionally planted in the political landscape, he can no longer effectively serve in his military capacity. On Biden & Bruisema I can understand his compulsion to defend what he saw as a necessary and fragile alliance with Ukraine. However, there may have been a more appropriate time to reveal his thoughts. It's a tough one.

Response by PO3 Darla Summers made Apr 15 at 2022 3:37 PM

PO3 Darla Summers — Fri, 15 Apr 2022 15:37:33 -0400

Anyone find it odd he’s connected to Ukraine? These people think they’re slick, and smart. Most of us are right through this BS! most Politicians and some Officers are so far disconnected from reality it’s disgusting. They don’t think we understand 4th and 5th generation warfare and that we (the U.S.) are using these strategies on our own people.

Response by MSG Jeremy Jiron made Apr 16 at 2022 11:10 AM

MSG Jeremy Jiron — Sat, 16 Apr 2022 11:10:50 -0400

He was a political soldier who utilized gaps in the armor to exploit things all commanders in chiefs do. If the current commander in chief was doing the same thing, would he come out and whistleblow? The LTC was a partisan operative and the military is better off without these types of biased officers.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 16 at 2022 2:42 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 16 Apr 2022 14:42:35 -0400

Regardless of rank, it was his DUTY to report an unlawful act, potus made an unlawful proposition. Those that cannot see that are blinded by partisan politics or hiding behind some ‘he needed to just follow orders’ mindset reminiscent of those that followed LT C. at the Mai Lai massacre in Vietnam or to a further degree, SS troops, just following Hitler’s orders. He did the right thing, and was punished for it.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2022 8:02 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 17 Apr 2022 08:02:20 -0400

You a retired 06 and are 100 percent off kilter.
1. Vindamen WAS A POLICY ANALYST FAO.
2. LTC Vindamen property used his chain of command to report what he believed to be UNLAWFUL practices regarding foreign policies.
Why do you think the current administration seems upside down?
Previous administration's flawed policies NEGATIVELY AFFECTS current administration's ability to overcome the chaos.
Your perview is limited. Your argument is not well critiqued, and reaks of 'someone whose personal views overshadow the truth.
Very disappointed in your simplex, irrelevant explanation regarding your own opinion.
Sad so many fall in line with you.
Glad you are retired and not leading troops with this partisan weird logic.
Got a problem with what I write?
Too bad

Response by A1C Medrick "Rick" DeVaney made Apr 17 at 2022 9:52 PM

A1C Medrick "Rick" DeVaney — Sun, 17 Apr 2022 21:52:49 -0400

MAJ RICHARD L...?
Regardless Of Those Figures, I Believe Vindman Deserved a Damned Metal & A Parade In Front Of Our White House The Full Length Of Pennsylvania Avenue...
Perhaps I'm Wrong, But I'll Be 78 In June,2022; And Recall It Being On The NBC Nightly News On a Regular Basis And I Supported His Every Move........"Being There" Was A Must.

Response by SN Walt Boyer made Apr 20 at 2022 10:05 AM

SN Walt Boyer — Wed, 20 Apr 2022 10:05:03 -0400

It is a shame that Partisans have successfully conflated corrolation with causation. Trump was well within his perview as CiC and as the director of Foriegn Policy to ask Ukraine to investigate admitted Quid Pro Quo from VP Biden regarding the firing of Ukrainian prosecutor. It was partisan of Vindman to label it as "election help" . That is the real issue because that is simply an opinion based on his biases. The MSM ran with that narrative, and Dems jumped on another chance to impeach and try to discredit a sitting POTUS because he knocked over the deep state apple cart and put out "mean tweets". I am more appaled that intelligent military veterans and active service members bought into the partisan Democrat fed BS. We all took that Oath and I feel it is more important to understand seperation of powers as well as actual powers within each branch. Democrats in Congress ignored those separations and behaved as schoolyard bullies against a POTUS that was not part of the ruling Cabal.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 20 at 2022 10:37 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 20 Apr 2022 10:37:46 -0400

As military men and women, we should be focused on the mission. LTC,(R) V. should have stayed out of the Gossip Game.
He gets paid for life and will get a job as a political ANAList. The JCOS and Congress has been trying to get Pandora out of the box, it worked.
Since civil servants are No Longer, politicians are the ruling class,

Response by SGT Frank Pritchett made Apr 23 at 2022 10:11 AM

SGT Frank Pritchett — Sat, 23 Apr 2022 10:11:41 -0400

There is a right way and a wrong way to get things done, going to to the News Media or a social Platform to air out your opinion requires you to go through JAG and request press release. In LTC Vindman case, he took sensitive information and went public out of personnel rage. We all know this is a common problem in the Military and changes come from the top down and there are some things you can't do anything about. I am speaking from personal experience after all I didn't stay an E-5 for 17n years while constantly being threatened for doing a similar thing.

Response by SPC Sean Kennedy made Apr 27 at 2022 4:07 PM

SPC Sean Kennedy — Wed, 27 Apr 2022 16:07:59 -0400

I think he was 100% wrong; to answer how to remain apolitical: don’t use your rank, position or military affiliation to give opinions on politics, aka stay in your lane and don’t make comments about politics; would I have done the same? No, not in uniform (I was only an E4) there was a culture of shut your mouth and stay in your lane, even before we met with any type of media during our deployment we were told to say things are going well and we miss family back home, other than that if you speak out of line you’ll be punished, we have a chain of command if you have legit gripes and complaints: don’t go outside the chain of command, just don’t

Yes he was dead wrong and he lied and tried to use his position to have credibility and clout when he didn’t have any, it was partisan

Gen Mattis: similarly, granted he was retired, but he spoke out against trump (and lied) but he was retired, as much as I hated to read what he said he was well within his right to say it because he was retired and not DoD affiliated

Response by CSM Darieus ZaGara made May 9 at 2022 12:50 PM

CSM Darieus ZaGara — Mon, 09 May 2022 12:50:49 -0400

I have no problem with him speaking out, just have a problem with the way in which he did so. We in the military have policies and regulations to go by, Presidents aren’t above the law, nor are those who do things in an inappropriate manner.

Response by CW5 Ray Noble made May 27 at 2022 12:49 AM

CW5 Ray Noble — Fri, 27 May 2022 00:49:25 -0400

LTC Vindman, was 100% correct reporting the actions of the president

Response by CW5 Ray Noble made May 27 at 2022 1:08 AM

CW5 Ray Noble — Fri, 27 May 2022 01:08:51 -0400

Lieutenant colonel vindman actions were 100% correct in reporting the unethical actions of the President of the United States. Some of us have no values and are highly dishonest and lack integrity. I believe LTC Vindman understood the the Army Values better than most. Good leaders always operates with intestinal fortitude.

Response by SPC Vonnie Jones made May 27 at 2022 8:48 AM

SPC Vonnie Jones — Fri, 27 May 2022 08:48:17 -0400

I compared the oath of enlistment and oath of office. Both say defend the constitution. The one for enlistment says to obey orders from the President, however the oath of office doesn't there Officers do not serve at the pleasure of the President. This man did the right thing. At the end of the day he upheld his oath. May question is with full disclosure running rampant is anything military or political secret or top secret anymore?

Response by SGT Amy Tribou made May 30 at 2022 11:52 AM

SGT Amy Tribou — Mon, 30 May 2022 11:52:24 -0400

I'm just curious. If it was wrong of him to testify, then why did the other side call him in to do so? Aren't they just as wrong for having him there to do so, while he's still active duty working under the President? Regardless of who is sitting at the desk in the Oval office, shouldn't it be an understanding that what you hear stays amongst those who are present at the time, and to do differently whether it be willingly or through force is against standards and National Security? I mean didn't training, SERES or otherwise teach him that? Or did he not get that training. POWs even know that.

Response by MSgt Mark Eral made Jun 1 at 2022 3:16 AM

MSgt Mark Eral — Wed, 01 Jun 2022 03:16:58 -0400

Vindman interpreted his commander-in-chiefs actions and intentions. Then reported those actions to political rivals versus the chain of command. He was wrong and should have been subjected to the UCMJ. He got away with a crime.

Response by LTC Eric Udouj made Jun 1 at 2022 11:08 AM

LTC Eric Udouj — Wed, 01 Jun 2022 11:08:56 -0400

History will tell how it wants to hold him or remember him. In the end - i hold him responsible as one of the causes of the invasion of the Ukraine... When you put politics above the nation - your in the wrong job... for it opens the door to that happening as a trend. The question is always as to will others take advantage of political leanings and use that trend to their advantage? We have seen it in our history before - never a name you want to remember - but closing the door is much harder than opening it.

Response by LTC Dennis Lang made Jun 2 at 2022 9:56 AM

LTC Dennis Lang — Thu, 02 Jun 2022 09:56:23 -0400

Vindman is an idiot. He -- for some reason -- thought the President did not set foreign policy.

Response by SPC Robert Bobo made Jun 5 at 2022 9:36 PM

SPC Robert Bobo — Sun, 05 Jun 2022 21:36:37 -0400

He allowed himself to be used by politicians in hopes of personal gain after military service, professionalism with integrity is out the window with this guy

Response by SSG Omar Ruiz-Canales made Jun 20 at 2022 6:06 PM

SSG Omar Ruiz-Canales — Mon, 20 Jun 2022 18:06:18 -0400

WE as military members serve our Country and the constitution 1st, many of you have forgotten that to justify whatever twisted reason you have.... the President is a far third for the reason that he holds office for only so long (regardless of trying to retain it by illegal means.)

Response by Sgt Paul Mazan made Jul 12 at 2022 6:23 PM

Sgt Paul Mazan — Tue, 12 Jul 2022 18:23:42 -0400

You should have been in during Vietnam been spit on in airports, refused service in restaurants, and treated like a serial killer on the loose. I seriously doubt you would have been apolitical then. Like most of us you might have kept your mouth shut and maintained a military bearing but apolitical wasn’t an option.

Response by 1SG David Spalding made Jul 26 at 2022 10:43 PM

1SG David Spalding — Tue, 26 Jul 2022 22:43:57 -0400

Vindman, as with any other current member of the military can have no political opinion while in uniform. To publicly speak out against any president while in uniform is a court martial offense, plain and simple. Whether I agree with his opinion or not, makes no difference. He was wrong to do so.

Response by MSgt Robert E. M. made Jul 27 at 2022 1:05 PM

MSgt Robert E. M. — Wed, 27 Jul 2022 13:05:10 -0400

No comment, because the Book of Proverbs with the wisdom I do know, Proverbs 6: 16 to 19.

Response by SGT Doug Blanchard made Jul 27 at 2022 9:34 PM

SGT Doug Blanchard — Wed, 27 Jul 2022 21:34:35 -0400

Vineland should have been removed from his position as soon as it came to light what he did. He also should have been court-martialed for violating his chain of command and for service unbecoming an officer. POTUS not some damn O-4 in the military is the one who sets precedent of how this country deals with other countries. He was of high enough rank that he should know that you do not circumvent his chain of command like he did.
Like I previously stated he should have faced a court martial and been stripped of his rank and kicked out of the Army, after spending a Stent in Levenworth first. He is a disgrace to the uniform. He even acted like he was better than the members of congress that questioned him. Namely like his shit does not stink.

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Aug 16 at 2022 5:39 PM

LTC Stephen F. — Tue, 16 Aug 2022 17:39:05 -0400

Thank you my friend LTC Private RallyPoint Member for posting a great question [long ago - which I just discovered.
I certainly would not have acted as he did in his role in the national security post.
It seems obvious to me that he relied on hearsay and claimed he heard the conversation directly under oath. There is no place for political bias in decision making for active-duty service members.

As far as second and third order effects, trust in military advisors at the national level; the impact of the 2020 national election; increased animosity and posturing of right and left-leaning folks; and the failed impeachment attempt [second] on POTUS Donald Trump.
The cost in political capital and wasted opportunities by Congress to work on legislative action for the benefit of the people of this nation is known only by God.

1. As a former enlisted soldier I took the enlist oath in 1974 and 1975
"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) 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." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962)"

2. As a commissioned Army officer Regular Army and later USAR I took the commissioned officer oat many times between May 1980 [graduation for USMA] through May 2008.
"I ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) 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; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God. (Title 5 U.S. Code 3331, an individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services)"

Article 92—Failure to obey order or regulation From [[mcm.mil/#art-92[]}
Text of statute. "Any person subject to this chapter who-violates or fails to obey any lawful general order or regulation; having knowledge of any other lawful order issued by a member of the armed forces, which it is his duty to obey, fails to obey the order; or is derelict in the performance of his duties; shall be punished as a court-martial may direct."
Elements.
Violation of or failure to obey a lawful general order or regulation. That there was in effect a certain lawful general order or regulation; That the accused had a duty to obey it; and That the accused violated or failed to obey the order or regulation.

Failure to obey other lawful order.
That a member of the armed forces issued a certain lawful order;
That the accused had knowledge of the order;
That the accused had a duty to obey the order; and
That the accused failed to obey the order.

Dereliction in the performance of duties.
That the accused had certain duties;
That the accused knew or reasonably should have known of the duties; and
That the accused was (willfully) (through neglect or culpable inefficiency) derelict in the performance of those duties.
[Note: In cases where the dereliction of duty resulted in death or grievous bodily harm, add the following as applicable]
That such dereliction of duty resulted in death or grievous bodily harm to a person other than the accused."

I concur with responses of my friends SPC Nancy Greene SGT Dan Gray CAPT Kevin B. SSgt G Wingate LTC Joe Anderson (Taz or Joe Retired Now in Contract Compliance) LTC Orlando Illi SSG Bill McCoy COL Thomas McGrath SFC Bernard Walko LTC Thomas Tennant SPC Robert Bobo Cpl Mark A. Morris MSG Danny Mathers PO1 Kevin Dougherty MSG Don Burt MAJ Hugh Blanchard LTC Eric Udouj MAJ Damajah Arnold

Response by SP5 John Fitzgerald made Aug 29 at 2022 5:36 PM

SP5 John Fitzgerald — Mon, 29 Aug 2022 17:36:21 -0400

Vindman over-stepped his bounds. He was obligated to COC not to shine light on himself.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 29 at 2022 6:26 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 29 Aug 2022 18:26:19 -0400

When General Milley is held accountable for being political then I will say any other Service Member is wrong for being political. Until then it means nothing anymore to claim to be apolitical.

Response by CPL Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 30 at 2022 7:19 AM

CPL Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 30 Aug 2022 07:19:27 -0400

First I would turn to the 7 Army Values. Then I would ask myself. Does this call fall under classified information? If answer is yes . Then we have our answer don’t we. Personally I feel he was wrong and I wounder what other classified information he shared and with whom. And if Jedi sit for political reasons then he’s just wrong for putting himself in that situation. Tough to answer not being him. But also if what I read is correct. And 1000 promotions where held so he could get that job. Then that may or may not fall under conspiracy and that may be treason.

Response by COL Jerry C. made Aug 30 at 2022 5:08 PM

COL Jerry C. — Tue, 30 Aug 2022 17:08:17 -0400

One only has to read their oath of office and parts of the Officers Handbook. Unless you are in a senior policy making position and your opion is sought-- you Salute smartly, and carry on. If you think YOUR ORDERS are illegal you have an obligation to execute-- to the best your ability

Response by SFC David Reid, M.S, PHR, SHRM-CP, DTM made Aug 30 at 2022 9:48 PM

SFC David Reid, M.S, PHR, SHRM-CP, DTM — Tue, 30 Aug 2022 21:48:35 -0400

He was a true patriot.

Response by LTC S S made Sep 1 at 2022 1:23 AM

LTC S S — Thu, 01 Sep 2022 01:23:21 -0400

He should have been at least removed from his position. When it was discovered he lied under oath, he should have been court marshaled and put in prison. As a military officer, you can't be biased. He was clearly biased and politically weaponized his position. After he used his position to lie about the Ukraine phone cal, he stated Gen. Miller should be removed after he usurped his power to limit the sitting President from utilizing the military to defend the US after Jan 6. Wow. Isn't that the pot calling the kettle. Our military is in desperate need of leadership that has a backbone to resist the temptations of Washington.

Response by SFC Benjamin Varlese made Sep 7 at 2022 12:41 PM

SFC Benjamin Varlese — Wed, 07 Sep 2022 12:41:27 -0400

Vindman was 100% wrong, and should count his blessings he was able to retire and is not currently spending the remainder of his adult life turning big ones into little ones at Leavenworth. This whole dust-up that resulted in an impeachment boils down to a junior (by NSC standards) analyst having a policy disagreement with the CinC, and violating about a dozen UCMJ articles in the process. Public ignorance and dishonest propagation of disingenuous arguments by political pundits and the media fueled this nonsense. Here is why:
Trump asked his Ukrainian counterpart for legal assistance in uncovering and building a case of corruption and criminal activities by someone who happened to be a political rival and his son. This request is covered under a mutual legal assistance treaty (MLAT) signed in 1999 by then-President Clinton. Trump did not exceed his presidential authority in any way, so Vindman had not reason to object on legal or ethical grounds.
Vindman, a politically biased ideologue, submitted his grievance, and after he was not satisfied with his supervisor's response, broke the law to get his way. He then contacted a former NSC member (Eric Ciaramella, a CIA analyst) and enlisted him to file a hearsay "whistleblower" complaint to members of the HPSCI. This act violated "need to know" security protocols (unauthorized disclosure), was insubordinate, conspiratorial, and several other related UCMJ articles.
Naturally, the "useful idiot", Adam Schiff, ran with this disingenuous and intellectually dishonest story, and, himself, engaged in all kinds of political, ethical, and legal malfeasance to initiate the first impeachment proceedings. Trump should have stepped on this from the beginning by citing the above mentioned MLAT then summarily crushed Vindman for his criminal and unbecoming actions.
Vindman violated his oath of appointment, several UCMJ articles, and federal laws. He should have been punished accordingly. Shielded by the ignorant and dishonest, he should have slipped quietly into the night. Instead, he is being lionized by those same uninformed and deceitful partisans resulting in more dystopian political persecutions like we are seeing currently with the MAL controversy. It is equally disturbing that too many military members, especially field grade officers, are applauding Vindman's actions. This political toxicity extends all the way to the top with that feckless hack Milley, and they all should be ashamed of the standards they have set in today's military.

Response by Pvt Robert L. Lamoreaux made Oct 5 at 2022 2:33 PM

Pvt Robert L. Lamoreaux — Wed, 05 Oct 2022 14:33:15 -0400

While not quite the same, do we allow soldiers or officers to use the defense of "only following orders"? Here is where character and reasonable judgment come into play. In my, admittedly long, civilian life I learned how to "gun deck" certain documents and, when it came to it, to refuse to obey clearly "illegal" (or at least unethical) orders. And I paid a cost for this. Ultimately, Lt. Col. Vindman's loyalty had to be to the Constitution rather than to the individual holding the Presidency.

Response by CDR Jack Tappe made Oct 15 at 2022 2:21 PM

CDR Jack Tappe — Sat, 15 Oct 2022 14:21:30 -0400

Stay in your swim lane.

Response by SFC Benjamin Harrison made Nov 9 at 2022 5:27 PM

SFC Benjamin Harrison — Wed, 09 Nov 2022 17:27:33 -0500

He was wrong, plain and simple. Had it been an NCO or any enlisted member, their careers would have been immediately terminated had they conducted themselves in the same manner.

Response by MSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 9 at 2022 8:08 PM

MSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 09 Nov 2022 20:08:12 -0500

He was subpoenaed. He must obey lawful orders. He must uphold the constitution. He was asked and he answered. I’m failing to see how he could be wrong unless he perjured himself. I have seen nothing that suggests he did so. And IF a President ordered him NOT to testify that would not be a lawful order and he would not be required to follow it. Quite the opposite.

It has no relevance who was the president or who wasn’t. It doesn’t matter which party was in office and which was not. That is all irrelevant bs meant to obfuscate the actual issue.

Did he hear a phone convo where an individual was engaged in an activity outside the preview of his elected office? Was the soldier ordered to testify? Did he tell the truth?

Anything outside of that is irrelevant to the argument and I’d wager the attitude towards this soldier would be far different if the parties involved were reversées. Those cilifying him would be defending his actions because it fits their confirmation bias and not the facts.

Response by LCpl Paul Miller made Nov 12 at 2022 6:52 PM

LCpl Paul Miller — Sat, 12 Nov 2022 18:52:34 -0500

I'm not nor was I an officer and I can not read the MSN (NWO, liberal biased) article because it's no longer available (link doesn't work) BUT ... I see/read/hear about officers and other service members who seem to either forget or misunderstand their oath. When I took my oath it was "to support and defend the CONSTITUTION against ALL enemies; foreign and domestic" and to obey LAWFUL orders from the C&C, my superior officers etc. I did not take an oath to any specific individual but to the US Constitution. Most military people, officer & enlisted seem to miss that very important point/objective. Do not dismiss what I say because my highest rank was only L/Cpl because my scores were such that I was offered the PLC program right out of recruit training and said no thank you. Again ... I don't even know exactly what the article or question is about but I am guessing it concerns orders and the President. The President is the CnC but he is not who I took my oath to support and defend. When he, or an officer, gives an unlawful order, such as mandating the covid vaccine, which was and is still killing people who stepped up like sheep and said "give me that poison" I would NOT have taken that crap. The President had absolutely no right to give the unconstitutional order. Yet top brass upheld that unlawful order and now after it has actually been deemed as an unlawful order WHO is going to pay for the MURDER of our military service members and civilians? I believe that the President, every politician and EVERY officer that forced the members under their command to either take the death jab or loose their rank and/or job to be punished appropriately for following, giving and enforcing an unlawful, unconstitutional order. An order that has ruined lives, livelyhoods and murdered innocent sheep. I look forward to seeing every single politician (including our fraudulent President and his admin), officer and NCO, who followed and enforced that unlawful order and mandate appropriately punished for the murder of the innocent who trusted them and/or followed unlawful orders.

Response by Cpl Barry Evans made Dec 10 at 2022 3:13 PM

Cpl Barry Evans — Sat, 10 Dec 2022 15:13:57 -0500

Dude did a political thing and should have been crumbed out …wore than Scheller

Response by Cpl Barry Evans made Dec 10 at 2022 3:15 PM

Cpl Barry Evans — Sat, 10 Dec 2022 15:15:18 -0500

Vindman should have been drummed out of the military …what he did was wires than Lt Col Scheller who summarily released.

Response by CW5 Mark Smith made Dec 11 at 2022 5:35 PM

CW5 Mark Smith — Sun, 11 Dec 2022 17:35:24 -0500

He should have been retired as a Private.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 12 at 2022 6:21 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 12 Dec 2022 06:21:07 -0500

Vindman is a lying, Treasonous pile of garbage who should be locked up forever. Breaking rocks.. NOT Minimum Security

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 11 at 2023 10:34 AM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 11 Jan 2023 10:34:13 -0500

Regardless of what one's political leanings are, Vindman's actions were 100% political and completely inappropriate and helped further the divide between the military and civilian populace to whom we swore an oath to protect. Nothing about his actions were "brave". Now that he is retired, he has a unique opportunity to redeem his name and show the world that he is not a coward. He could do some good fighting the Russians in his home country.

Response by 1SG Charles Butts made Jan 12 at 2023 1:38 AM

1SG Charles Butts — Thu, 12 Jan 2023 01:38:09 -0500

I had my share of political upheavals that affected the way I had to do my business as a leader while in the military.......as long as we have politicians who have no clue of what it is like to "walk in military moccasins we will always have these upheavals and fork in our judgement road of how to do business. We have to decide whether to put up with it or know when it is time to leave and when and when not to voice our opinion.

Response by LTC Pete Moore made Jan 12 at 2023 8:31 PM

LTC Pete Moore — Thu, 12 Jan 2023 20:31:53 -0500

Vindman broke his oath as an officer, he lied about what he observed, and he did it for personal gain. He should have lost his clearance and been prosecuted. None of his politically and profit motivated actions were honorable!

Response by PO2 John Drillock made Jan 14 at 2023 5:07 PM

PO2 John Drillock — Sat, 14 Jan 2023 17:07:44 -0500

Vindman is the type of person I wouldn’t want as a neighbor. He only thinks of himself and leaked info on that infamous phone call. How’s that for serving your Commander in Chief? He’s a perfect example of the Peter Principle. I don’t care who the president is/was, Vindman did not serve the country well and in fact harmed it. And, I’m getting sick and tired of weak people leaving office and writing “tell all” books padded mostly with nonsense. JMO

Response by SFC Lynn Santosuosso made Jan 14 at 2023 6:33 PM

SFC Lynn Santosuosso — Sat, 14 Jan 2023 18:33:54 -0500

He was at 100% right based on the fact that he was wearing uniform and was a member of the United States military. When you are subpoenaed by the Congress, you have no choice you have to go and you have to answer their questions truthfully. In his position in Ukraine as an advisor, he was in the thick of it and knew that things were wrong and against the rule of law of the constitution. It was in phone calls, emails, And other correspondence, with security personnel in Washington, as well as embassy personnel, which is monitored and recorded, that Vindman got involved as well as everyone else in the mix. He was bound by his military oath to follow his legal obligations. He is 100% right!

I have read all 127 pages of this transcript and there were so many laws broken by the executive branch as well as those in the state department that there should be more people behind bars right now then there are! It is disgraceful that politicians and others skate free of breaking the laws of the constitution!
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CDOC-116sdoc12/pdf/CDOC-116sdoc12-pt2.pdf

CDOC-116sdoc12-pt2.pdf

Response by SGT Joe Lombardi made Jan 15 at 2023 9:54 AM

SGT Joe Lombardi — Sun, 15 Jan 2023 09:54:29 -0500

Consumate delta bravo.

Response by SGT Mark Friedman made Jan 16 at 2023 9:46 PM

SGT Mark Friedman — Mon, 16 Jan 2023 21:46:39 -0500

Vindman should have been taken to an Article 32 hearing and court martialed for disobeying a lawful order

Response by CW4 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 19 at 2023 8:30 PM

CW4 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Jan 2023 20:30:18 -0500

He is a typical democrat loser!! Chow thief in Ranger School!

Response by LtCol Bruce Janis made Jan 30 at 2023 6:13 PM

LtCol Bruce Janis — Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:13:30 -0500

It appears that if you are a Trump hater Vindman is a hero, If not, he is an AH. I am in the latter camp and think he shot off his mouth thinking he was going to be gloriously received for it. That didn’t happen and he ended up retiring quietly. As someone else said, he is hoping for a job with CNN or MSNBS. You would think he would be in the Ukraine helping his countrymen against Russia, but that would take the balls he is lacking.

Response by MSgt Kevin Carr made Feb 13 at 2023 4:18 AM

MSgt Kevin Carr — Mon, 13 Feb 2023 04:18:39 -0500

He had a duty to perform, if he could not carry his duty out then he bring his concerns to his superior or if he had any integrity, resign. It was not his job to decide what is or isn’t good policy, not carry it to the press.

Response by LCDR Tom Wootton made Feb 13 at 2023 2:34 PM

LCDR Tom Wootton — Mon, 13 Feb 2023 14:34:17 -0500

No active duty service member, civil service member, or political appointee is obliged to comply with an illegal order. If this were not true, then the judges at Nuremberg were wrong. "I was only following orders" becomes a valid defense.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 13 at 2023 6:04 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 13 Feb 2023 18:04:41 -0500

Our other is to the Constitution, not to a president. If I see an officer committing treason, even if he outrank me, I have a duty to report him for treason regardless of the rank.

Response by SFC Dave Brewer made Feb 13 at 2023 7:33 PM

SFC Dave Brewer — Mon, 13 Feb 2023 19:33:17 -0500

He was 100% wrong, he failed the military by making comments about the president while doing what was his job. Even the other president said he was wrong. What did our country say, they both are lying. Based off a O5 lie. He is weak, a failed leader.

Response by SGT Trevor Monroe made Feb 14 at 2023 10:44 AM

SGT Trevor Monroe — Tue, 14 Feb 2023 10:44:03 -0500

He's a damned traitor and I hope he stands before a firing squad with so many others.

Response by SrA James Cannon made Feb 14 at 2023 11:34 AM

SrA James Cannon — Tue, 14 Feb 2023 11:34:40 -0500

That dude is a schmuck.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2023 10:43 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 14 Feb 2023 22:43:08 -0500

He should be ashamed just as any officer who allows politics sway his choices. Unless given an illegal or immoral order we are to support our chain of command. That's what makes our military great. I served under 2 presidents that I detested but I followed my oath. He is reprehensible!

Response by SGT Stamatios Lahaniatis made Feb 16 at 2023 12:21 AM

SGT Stamatios Lahaniatis — Thu, 16 Feb 2023 00:21:54 -0500

Never like the politics. Didn't care if I hurt feelings. Did my job to the best of my abilities and expected the same from those around me. The part I hated the most was anything to deal with the Dirtbags from the UN. Main reason I ETSed.

Response by Lt Col Brett Meyer made Feb 16 at 2023 8:18 PM

Lt Col Brett Meyer — Thu, 16 Feb 2023 20:18:32 -0500

Asshole should have been shot

Response by SGT Jeff Bush made Feb 17 at 2023 4:47 PM

SGT Jeff Bush — Fri, 17 Feb 2023 16:47:03 -0500

How is this even a question? Eavesdrop on your leadership to conversations that didn’t concern you, were above your pay grade then leak it to the press. Anyone other than this clown would feel the full weight of UCMJ, busted down, dishonorably discharged and then spent a few years in Leavenworth

Response by SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL made Mar 27 at 2023 7:33 AM

SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL — Mon, 27 Mar 2023 07:33:09 -0400

He did the right thing, rest assured.

Response by SGT Timothy Posemato made Mar 28 at 2023 12:33 AM

SGT Timothy Posemato — Tue, 28 Mar 2023 00:33:47 -0400

I think he was 100% wrong, if that would have been a 2nd or 1st LT, let alone an E5 or 6, would they have been used to teach a lesson or made an example of? In my opinion, I think they would have. But of course that's just my opinion. Thanks.

Response by PFC John Roscoe made Mar 29 at 2023 5:44 AM

PFC John Roscoe — Wed, 29 Mar 2023 05:44:22 -0400

The President willlfully obstructed the will of the US Congress and tried to use the funds legally appropriated to aid Ukraine to strong-arm that country to benefit himself personally. What's not to report? This occurence, on the part of Trump was a just a pixel, of the overall history of Trump's life-long behavior and unsavory character. The US Military has it's own unsavory history, where 90% of personnel through-out history have kept their mouths shut and their head's down, with only a few coming forward to expose major atrocities (My Lai Massacre) and scandals (SGM of the Army running a system-wide organized corruption ring) Sounds like a lot of people voting against Vindman, don't get the fact that their loyalty is to the country and to defending it's Constitution, not to some cult-figure they happen to admire and agree with- they would find themselves comfotable in the systems that produced Hitler, Putin, Napolean, Julius Ceasar, but not so much, Washington, Roosevelt or Eisenhower. The guys with the guns (law enforcemeent and tthe military) too often prioritize protecting each other and their Chain-of-Command over their own country. Isn't that where the expreession "CYA" originates from?

Response by CPT Mark Lampton made Mar 29 at 2023 6:04 AM

CPT Mark Lampton — Wed, 29 Mar 2023 06:04:19 -0400

A fat Ukrainian colonel took it upon himself to permanently poison American foreign relations with the worlds largest nuclear power, while triggering the impeachment of the Commander-in-Chief, all while brazenly lying about his role in the drama, while under oath. Given the damage he has caused the United States, I dont think it would be out of bounds to demand his execution.

Response by SSG Patrick O'Flaherty made Mar 29 at 2023 4:27 PM

SSG Patrick O'Flaherty — Wed, 29 Mar 2023 16:27:42 -0400

Could you imagine if that had been a senior NCO? He would have been court martialed.

Response by SCPO Joseph Drake made Mar 29 at 2023 7:40 PM

SCPO Joseph Drake — Wed, 29 Mar 2023 19:40:42 -0400

The president at the time of Lc was so far out of touch with reality it is not funny. Military rules say to follow your last command first no matter how much you disagree with it.

Response by SFC Michael Hilton made Mar 31 at 2023 12:23 PM

SFC Michael Hilton — Fri, 31 Mar 2023 12:23:51 -0400

He was a liar

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 26 at 2023 8:37 PM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Apr 2023 20:37:17 -0400

Like him or not he was wrong

Response by Cpl Michael Saxton made Apr 27 at 2023 4:03 PM

Cpl Michael Saxton — Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:03:03 -0400

What's with this influence score crap? Information needs to be freely share, it's what we all fought for and swore an oath to protect. What is wrong with you guys?!

Response by SSG Shawn Mcfadden made Apr 29 at 2023 5:19 AM

SSG Shawn Mcfadden — Sat, 29 Apr 2023 05:19:10 -0400

He was in the right. The President and his acolytes had no right to persecute him the way they did.

Response by SSG Robert White made Apr 29 at 2023 6:37 PM

SSG Robert White — Sat, 29 Apr 2023 18:37:43 -0400

He just retired,? He was still on active duty parading around with the Jan 6 committee and as a consultant for the media?

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 30 at 2023 5:55 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 30 Apr 2023 05:55:46 -0400

My final comment is that USA is democratic Republic. Not just a democracy and not just a Republic. Half of my family came to USA in the colonies. Thr other half of my family immigrated from Norway. The colonial side has fought in every war since we have arrived. The Norwegian side fought the Nazis in the Norwegian Underground.
I cannot understand the shift in this country toward an authoritarian government like we observe in enemies of our Constitution, past and present. The times are changing and, as ever, corruption is evolving alongside it. Some contemporaries are not up to the challenge of international technology. Theres alot going on, and we need all hands on deck.
We need all of our families, neighbors and communities. Every good idea. For the love of God and Country.

Response by MSG Tracey Heard made Apr 30 at 2023 8:55 AM

MSG Tracey Heard — Sun, 30 Apr 2023 08:55:48 -0400

He did the right thing no one is above the law period! If it was any other president he would be getting praised. Show me in any regulation, policy etc where it says the president is above the law. You swear to defend the constitution

Response by COL Eric Rojo made Apr 30 at 2023 11:38 AM

COL Eric Rojo — Sun, 30 Apr 2023 11:38:15 -0400

100% wrong and should have resigned before opening his mouth and not soil the uniform, or shuld been court martialed

Response by CW4 Private RallyPoint Member made May 1 at 2023 6:47 PM

CW4 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 01 May 2023 18:47:17 -0400

This dirtbag betrayed his uniform and oath. He put the military front and center of a partisan political fight. An NCO would have immediately had their career and retirement ruined. Yet the Army will allow him to honorably retire after destroying public faith in our institution.

Response by Capt Jeff S. made May 3 at 2023 12:58 PM

Capt Jeff S. — Wed, 03 May 2023 12:58:01 -0400

Vindman was out of line. He allowed his personal political beliefs to cloud his professional judgment and SHOULD have been disciplined. Vindman's testimony was used as context by Democrats for Trump's sham impeachment. Note that Trump was accused of wrongdoing but never convicted of an impeachable criminal offense.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/read-full-transcript-trump-s-conversation-ukraine-s-president-n1058581

Having read the conversation, I don't think Trump said anything untoward to Zelensky about trying to get answers related to the Crowdstrike server which was in Ukraine's possession, nor was Trump out of line for requesting information related to Biden getting the lead prosecutor fired who was investigating his son Hunter for his involvement in Ukrainian government corruption. Ukraine was a hotbed of corruption... and many Western countries were taking advantage.

If there was any abuse of power, it was Biden using his power to threaten to withhold aid money to Ukraine and shut down a Ukrainian investigation into Hunter's involvement in Ukrainian government corruption.

I think Trump's interest in getting to the bottom of the corruption in Ukraine was legitimate. Biden claims his son did nothing wrong. Joe Biden abused his powers as VP and was laundering millions from the billions in aid money that our country had given to Ukraine. Emails taken from Hunter's laptop revealed that Joe Biden (the Big Man) was in on it and lied to investigators about his knowledge of his son's sketchy business dealings.

America rejected Hillary (because she has a well-established reputation for being corrupt) and elected Trump because he promised he would fight corruption in government and hold government agencies accountable for their fraud, waste, and abuse. Trump said he would Drain the Swamp and was simply following through on that promise. The Democrats went after Trump because he was exposing their incompetence and corruption and they didn't like it.

Read the full text of Trump's conversation with the Ukrainian president

Trump is facing allegations that he tried to strong-arm a foreign leader into launching an investigation that might hurt Democratic contender Joe Biden.

Response by SSG Douglas Shaffer made May 24 at 2023 7:25 PM

SSG Douglas Shaffer — Wed, 24 May 2023 19:25:09 -0400

Yes, I am sitting here in Ft. Livingroom as you would put it, however you have obligations to do what is morally right. LTC Vindman carried out is duties. Can you resend an order? Yes, you can if it is an unlawful order that is under morally standards. So, by that alone you should report any discretions look at general order #3 I will report violations of my special orders, emergencies and anything not covered in my instructions to the commander of the relief. General Orders don't only imply to Guard Duty. These are "General" orders that soldiers are to fall back on when no other orders are given.
It is no different than the Code of Conduct. When there is no leadership.
There is also your described responsibility of your duty position and what is also known as inherited responsibilities which is the moral one of right and wrong.
None of which I had explain had nothing to do with politics these are Military Standards as to how you are to carry yourself in a Military Manner.
In addition, had he not reported his knowledge of it, it would have looked like the Military was involved in a political cover-up and therefor would have made all Officers not to be trusted by the civilians that have given us their trust and responsibility to defend and protect this country.
These are things one should be telling a junior enlisted, and one shouldn't have to be explaining all of it to a Field Grade officer.
Anyone can disagree and is entitled too. However, the bottom line is we also have moral obligations to report discrepancies that we hear and see. If you can't see that then maybe you need to go back to the books and refresh yourself in your responsibility to your duties and to the civilians that have given us their trust for us to do the right thing without politics involved. We are all in the Military and NOT in politics.

Response by SFC Jim Thurman made May 30 at 2023 10:20 AM

SFC Jim Thurman — Tue, 30 May 2023 10:20:11 -0400

Let’s get down to brass tacks about Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, in my opinion he was wrong, and here’s why. The oath that he took stated, I will support and defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic and bear True faith and allegiance to the same. It also says he will obey the orders of the officers placed over him. I believe the President of the United States, is an officer, i.e., the commander in chief. The electorates choice. The LTC showed Disloyalty, end of story, we all learned during your time in service, use your chain of command, both NCO’s and Officers understand there are consequences for going outside of it, not getting promoted to one of those. Lieutenant Colonel Venman decided he knew better than the commander-in-chief and as George W Bush said he’s the deciding authority, it’s his job to take the lieutenant colonel‘s recommendations, along with all other advisers, and makes the decision. Whereby LTC Vindman , saying that he did not take his advice and use it, as presumptuous as that is, it’s also the same as usurping command for a position he was not elected to. I remember having conversations about an officer and a senior NCO’s need to be apolitical in the face of the rank-and-file This was to keep dissension out of the ranks. It’s the same as bitching up and never down.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2023 8:39 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 03 Jun 2023 08:39:09 -0400

Wrong

Response by Lt Col Eric Davis made Jun 26 at 2023 5:00 PM

Lt Col Eric Davis — Mon, 26 Jun 2023 17:00:59 -0400

All I can say is the last few years of presidents, including Senile Joe, Bad Orange Man, Barry O, and "W" have made me glad I am retired and moderately ashamed that I ever served so long...

Response by SGT Jodi WittBailey made Jun 29 at 2023 2:32 PM

SGT Jodi WittBailey — Thu, 29 Jun 2023 14:32:28 -0400

The URL is no longer posted at that address. The example you gave of callous words effecting a great menu people are true, especially in thr case of senior leaders.

Response by SGM John Barnett made Jun 29 at 2023 10:53 PM

SGM John Barnett — Thu, 29 Jun 2023 22:53:16 -0400

After reading all these comments, I agree them and was a bitch

Response by LCpl Michael Cappello made Jul 25 at 2023 8:20 PM

LCpl Michael Cappello — Tue, 25 Jul 2023 20:20:11 -0400

Vindman LIED. He even admitted that he LIED. He is a scumbag of the first order.

Response by TSgt A Marne made Jul 27 at 2023 3:30 PM

TSgt A Marne — Thu, 27 Jul 2023 15:30:15 -0400

The chart, and the responses to the question above, simply show party affiliation of the respondents.

Response by 1SG Michael Blount made Jul 28 at 2023 7:32 AM

1SG Michael Blount — Fri, 28 Jul 2023 07:32:46 -0400

that's a tough question, but I think at day's end, I would have to follow my conscience and do the right thing vs what's legally permissible but morally wrong.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 28 at 2023 7:39 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 28 Jul 2023 07:39:47 -0400

I have nothing but respect for what LTC Vindman did and the stance he took.

Response by MAJ David Hoyer made Jul 29 at 2023 10:55 AM

MAJ David Hoyer — Sat, 29 Jul 2023 10:55:43 -0400

Colonel Vindman is yet another of the thousands of good people whose careers has been damaged by the deranged and incompetent Donald Trump!

Response by 1SG James Kelly made Jul 30 at 2023 8:00 PM

1SG James Kelly — Sun, 30 Jul 2023 20:00:34 -0400

Wrong.

Response by LTC Paul Dulchinos made Aug 1 at 2023 2:50 AM

LTC Paul Dulchinos — Tue, 01 Aug 2023 02:50:53 -0400

He acted out of partisan politics and was not a whistle blower.

Response by LTC George Morgan made Aug 1 at 2023 12:40 PM

LTC George Morgan — Tue, 01 Aug 2023 12:40:48 -0400

When it is right for you, you will know!

Response by SPC Kent Laughlin made Aug 5 at 2023 1:44 PM

SPC Kent Laughlin — Sat, 05 Aug 2023 13:44:51 -0400

I used to come to this site and enjoy reading comments and searching for friends. After reading many of the comments about vinderman and his action and his CinC I am through with another page in my social media journey... this one article makes rally look exactly like twatter before Elon took over and the DJT haters bailed ... so long troopers ... it has been real, but not really real

Response by SGT Victor Negrete made Aug 25 at 2023 12:40 PM

SGT Victor Negrete — Fri, 25 Aug 2023 12:40:52 -0400

ITS TRUMP, WHAT YOUD EXPECT VINDMAN TO DO , THE INSURECTIONIST PREZ , DRAFT DODGER , LIAR IS IN HIS DNA ,LOOKS UP TO MOBSTERS AND FIENDS , PUTIN , AND OTHERS. NEW ERA.

Response by SSG Pedro Sotelo made Aug 27 at 2023 11:14 PM

SSG Pedro Sotelo — Sun, 27 Aug 2023 23:14:40 -0400

That LTC should be dishonorable discharged for betraying his oath and country.

Response by Col John "Coach" Allison made Aug 28 at 2023 2:53 PM

Col John "Coach" Allison — Mon, 28 Aug 2023 14:53:13 -0400

Wrong, wrong, wrong. One persons honored his oath, the other violated his.

Response by SFC R. Lee Linebarger made Aug 28 at 2023 3:21 PM

SFC R. Lee Linebarger — Mon, 28 Aug 2023 15:21:01 -0400

He is a POS that ought to have been put before as a courts martial.

Response by PFC Gerald Bailey made Aug 29 at 2023 7:57 AM

PFC Gerald Bailey — Tue, 29 Aug 2023 07:57:27 -0400

I don't care who is President, what Trump did was wrong.

Response by MAJ James Miller made Aug 29 at 2023 8:06 PM

MAJ James Miller — Tue, 29 Aug 2023 20:06:55 -0400

He should have been Court Martial.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 30 at 2023 11:02 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Aug 2023 11:02:13 -0400

Ok PA. You are retired like Vindman, right?
It's pretty obvious you don't like the guy.
The difference between Vindman and you is you aint him. You're like the barracks laywer projecting a bunch of, "NOT IN MY ARMY" rhetoric. 7 orher wutnesses affirmed what Vindman said without the marmelade daddy stuff. You are not in his shoes. YOUR politics stand out in your verse.
I met the man. I told him I support him 100 and that he kinda sounded cheeky metioning family and should get a couple tailored suits to present himself next time. He's actually hilarious- in a dry grunt sort of way.
See something - say something- That's all he HAD to do. Vindman is Ukrainian American so there's that. But all this mess YOU are spewing is incredibly off center. Can imagine my boss scanning what you wrote - then asking ' dammit are you TRYING TO INFLUENCE YOUR MEDICs???'
I truly hope you are FULLY rerired, otherwise tou know what's up.
Codified laws, policies, procedures-for better or for worse, Vindman folliwed them.

Response by SGT Lawrence Frank made Aug 30 at 2023 1:13 PM

SGT Lawrence Frank — Wed, 30 Aug 2023 13:13:32 -0400

Vindman is a politicaly driven shitbag. I'm curious to know what the left has on him.

Response by PO3 Edsel Hostilo made Aug 31 at 2023 10:46 PM

PO3 Edsel Hostilo — Thu, 31 Aug 2023 22:46:57 -0400

The LTC should have been court martialed and removed from his position because of his accusations of the President! He intended to follow the aims of one political party, and attempted to embarrass the President of the United States! This situation should have not been allowed under any circumstances! He should have reported his concerns to a higher authority who could have used the chain of command!

Response by LTC Esteban Jimenez made Sep 26 at 2023 9:41 AM

LTC Esteban Jimenez — Tue, 26 Sep 2023 09:41:01 -0400

They taught me this when I first joined up: If you work for a man, work FOR him. If you have a problem or criticism regarding him, either tell him or quit your job and then speak out against him all you want. Otherwise, you’re acting as a disloyal spy, a saboteur and a traitor.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 26 at 2023 7:55 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 26 Sep 2023 19:55:09 -0400

I think Vindman and his brother had their own agendas they were working.

Response by CPL Sean Browning made Sep 26 at 2023 8:06 PM

CPL Sean Browning — Tue, 26 Sep 2023 20:06:53 -0400

As a veteran and a historian what LtC Vindman did was similar to what George McClellan did during the civil war. McClellan personally did not like Lincoln and openly defied the president . McClellan was fired for lousy battlefield performance and actually lost to Lincoln in 1864 election . As a commissioned officer it's not your job to question the sitting president or try and vaunt yourself better than them . A soldier has to follow lawful orders regardless of rank or who gives them. I had officers who I didn't personally respected but I followed orders nonetheless

Response by SPC(P) Nick Bondgien made Sep 28 at 2023 3:33 PM

SPC(P) Nick Bondgien — Thu, 28 Sep 2023 15:33:23 -0400

Thank God I was never an officer, however in my honest enlisted opinion, he was wrong. I'd be inclined if I were his superior or had the power to do so, open up a CID investigation into his Financials and subsequent assignments post fraudulent testimony. I say fraudulent because his testimony was based solely on his impression of a he said she said conversation. I also think he's a disgrace to the uniform. I said what I said (probably why they keep us Scouts away from the general public)

Response by SP5 Larry Boggs made Sep 29 at 2023 4:39 PM

SP5 Larry Boggs — Fri, 29 Sep 2023 16:39:54 -0400

As the retiring Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff today make clear, the oath taken is to the constitution, to defend it against enemies domestic and foreign, not any any man that is President, certainly not one who invited a mob to storm the Capitol we are a nation of laws not men and I stand with General Miley

Response by Cpl Brian Ruby made Sep 29 at 2023 11:24 PM

Cpl Brian Ruby — Fri, 29 Sep 2023 23:24:57 -0400

What a scumbag! Forget all the politics and just consider the "woke" agenda he embraced to destroy our ability to be an effective fighting force. It's all on civilians and veterans now. Them bastards are overrunning our borders.

Response by COL John Hudson made Oct 2 at 2023 7:40 AM

COL John Hudson — Mon, 02 Oct 2023 07:40:42 -0400

LTC Vinman had a Chain of Command that he completely ignored in favor of putting himself in a public spotlight so far out of his lane it was embarrassing. Had he entered my Inspector General office to voice his concerns, my first question to him would have been, "Have you brought this to the attention of your Chain of Command?" A "Commander in Chief;" any person holding that position, has a legal right to remove or reassign ANY Commissioned Officer for cause. LTC Vinman gambled and lost. The Constitution of the United States provides for a "Civilian" Commander in Chief. That's the individual every Commissioned Officer ultimately reports to. Everyone is welcome to their personal opinion on any issue whatsoever. Acting on them while ignoring a Chain of Command is a very slippery slope, as LTC Vinman found out to his extreme displeasure (read history = President Truman fired General Douglas MacArthur). Vent and rail privately against any perceived wrong or injustice to your heart's content...after all, that's any soldier's right to do. But think first before ignoring your Chain of Command and publicly involving/exposing yourself in political issues. Bottom line? Stay in your lane and as far away from politics as possible. Voice your displeasure at the Voting Box.

Response by MSG Eryk Yoakam (Retired) made Oct 2 at 2023 1:35 PM

MSG Eryk Yoakam (Retired) — Mon, 02 Oct 2023 13:35:13 -0400

From LTC(R) Vindman's testimony, "I was concerned by the call, what I heard was improper, and I reported my concerns to Mr. Eisenberg. It is improper for the President of the United States to demand a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen and political opponent. It was also clear that if Ukraine pursued an investigation into the 2016 election, the Bidens, and Burisma, it would be interpreted as a partisan play." Note that he states, 'concerned', 'improper', 'interpret'. Did the LTC(R) honestly believe that our government NEVER asks a foreign government to look into things, ever? How did the LTC(R) come to the conclusion that an investigation into Burisma and the Bidens would be 'clear'ly interpreted as partisan? Is he a political reporter or pollster? Who is a LTC to decide what is 'improper' on a call between 2 leaders of different countries? In the end, his assessment of the call came down to personal feeling and assessments, not based on anything legal or illegal. If nothing he heard was against any standing U.S. or Military Law, then his job was to listen and shut the F up. He decided to dabble into the world of politics, hoping that if the current POTUS was removed, he would be substantially rewarded for his actions. He gambled and he lost, not nearly as much as he should have.

Response by MSgt Mark Young made Oct 2 at 2023 10:42 PM

MSgt Mark Young — Mon, 02 Oct 2023 22:42:45 -0400

Vman testified during the Trump kangaroo trial that HE was responsible for setting US policy towards Ukraine.

I immediately imagined Lt VMan as a Platoon leader setting Company policy and as Company Commander setting policy for his battalion.

He was lying POS

Response by LTC Wayne Dandridge made Oct 12 at 2023 6:48 PM

LTC Wayne Dandridge — Thu, 12 Oct 2023 18:48:42 -0400

All officers, warrant officers, noncoms, and enlisted men have a duty to be honest and to report all crimes and acts that violate our oath, honor, code of conduct, and the laws of our land. No matter who violates our laws!

Response by SPC Suzie Clary made Nov 14 at 2023 10:40 PM

SPC Suzie Clary — Tue, 14 Nov 2023 22:40:13 -0500

The Vindmans were raised to be assets against these United States.

Response by CPT Jeff Reichardt made Jun 17 at 2024 7:19 AM

CPT Jeff Reichardt — Mon, 17 Jun 2024 07:19:07 -0400

He was dead wrong. I posted earlier the specific articles of the UCMJ that he should have gone to court martial for. The most serious one makes room for the death penalty.