The Impeachment Trial of President Donald J. Trump

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, Capco said:

 

The US and the Soviets kept over 7,000 SS personnel from Auschwitz "hidden"?  

 

The US kept thousands of Nazis hidden. Yes. The Soviets did not hide them, they executed them. We used them for our own intelligence purposes and scientific purposes (and denied doing so until the late 1990s). It's called Project Paperclip.

 

If you want to understand what's actually happening in this country today, and the ongoing war, you have to understand Paperclip. 

[Capco]

Just now, Deranged Rhino said:

 

The US kept thousands of Nazis hidden. Yes. The Soviets did not hide them, they executed them. We used them for our own intelligence purposes and scientific purposes (and denied doing so until the late 1990s). It's called Project Paperclip.

 

I'm sorry my dude, I know about Paperclip but there's absolutely no intelligence or scientific reason to keep 7,000+ SS personnel who contributed to the mass murder of millions from meeting legal justice.  And that's just one small example.  There were tens of thousands of personnel directly complicit in the Final Solution and who knows how many more were indirectly complicit.  The fact that you think every single perpetrator ("all" in your words) either met some form of legal justice or were absolved of it is absurd and false.  Patently false.  

 

The whole point of me asking that was to see how far down this road some of you want to go.  You want to take the purging of the Deep State in our government above and beyond the level of justice that was exacted upon Nazi Germany after WWII by your own admission.  

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, Capco said:

 

I'm sorry my dude, I know about Paperclip but there's absolutely no intelligence or scientific reason to keep 7,000+ SS personnel who contributed to the mass murder of millions from meeting legal justice. 

 

I agree there's no valid reason for it, but they did it anyway. This isn't opinion, it's a fact. 

 

The question you should ask is what happened to all those Nazis who were injected into our intelligence community, our defense community, our contracting community... 

 

1 minute ago, Capco said:

 

There were tens of thousands of personnel directly complicit in the Final Solution and who knows how many more were indirectly complicit.  The fact that you think every single perpetrator ("all" in your words) either met some form of legal justice or were absolved of it is absurd and false.  Patently false.  

 

I didn't say that. 

 

I added the parenthetical for a reason. 

 

2 minutes ago, Capco said:

The whole point of me asking that was to see how far down this road some of you want to go.  You want to take the purging of the Deep State in our government above and beyond the level of justice that was exacted upon Nazi Germany after WWII by your own admission.  

 

My words aren't controversial, or shouldn't be. If people are shown to have broken the law, with evidence and after they are afforded due process, they should be held accountable. 

 

The real question to ask, is why you find that proposition so extreme? Do you believe that if you work in the government you're not subject to the constitution or the law itself?

[Capco]

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

I didn't say that. 

 

I added the parenthetical for a reason. 

For the second time, your parenthetical doesn't account for every single person involved in war crimes in Nazi Germany.  There were criminals not part of Paperclip, not killed by the Russians, not hunted down by the Israelis after the war, and not part of any trial or military tribunal, who died peacefully in their own beds... because at some point, a line was drawn by the Western Allies when it came to measuring out justice.  

 

The reason you should take pause about what you are saying is because you are suggesting that we cross that line and take the purge of the Deep State to the level of the Reign of Terror in France or the Great Purge in the USSR.  

 

Remember what I asked about treason and treasonous government organizations?  Remember how you said that the run-of-the-mill people working for organizations infected by the Deep State, who were just doing their jobs, ought to meet that same level of justice as the leadership of the Deep State? 

 

Tell me Rhino, what is the ultimate punishment for treason?

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, Capco said:

For the second time, your parenthetical doesn't account for every single person involved in war crimes in Nazi Germany.

 

You began this conversation asking where the line should be drawn in terms of purging the government of bad actors. I offered, and explained, Nuremberg as an example of how it went beyond leadership to the government drones. That is the point. 

 

3 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

The reason you should take pause about what you are saying is because you are suggesting that we cross that line and take the purge of the Deep State to the level of the Reign of Terror in France or the Great Purge in the USSR.  

 

I'm not suggesting that. You're trying to spin what I said into that because you are uncomfortable (for some reason) with what I actually said. What I actually said is that if there is evidence to support it, and the accused are given due process, then those who break the law should face the same legal consequences as the rest of us. 

 

Why are you resisting that so much? It's not controversial. It's not extreme -- yet you're trying to twist it into the extreme. Why? 

Do you not think that those who break the law should face punishment, regardless of their positions within the government? Or are you advocating what we've had for the past 70+ years -- a system where the political elite can rape, pillage, and plunder without consequence? 

 

5 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

Remember what I asked about treason and treasonous government organizations?  Remember how you said that the run-of-the-mill people working for organizations infected by the Deep State, who were just doing their jobs, ought to meet that same level of justice as the leadership of the Deep State? 

 

Tell me Rhino, what is the ultimate punishment for treason?

 

"Just doing their jobs" when they know "doing their jobs" is violating the constitution is not an excuse. They should face the same punishment as the rest. 

 

This isn't complex. 

 

I'm aware of what the punishment for treason is. It's the same as it was when half the media (and yourself) were accusing Trump of treason without evidence to support it. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, Capco said:

 

I'm really not trying to play that kind of "put words in your mouth" game with the question.  Honestly. 

 

As wide as you like, with punishments that you see fit.  It's your dough to play with. 

 

I wasn't really referring to "well-intentioned" people in any event and intention is subjective by nature so I have no idea what you actually meant.  If I had to guess I would assume you referred to people who followed their conscience or moral/inner compass.  

I wasn't sure if by "purge", you meant the Josef Stalin, Chairman Mao or Marie Antoinnette 'off with their heads' version or the other kind.  Now that I know you meant the friendly, 'It's not you, it's me' with the Dunkin Donuts gift card on the way out, I follow.?

 

In a nutshell, I would support the removal of any individual acting against the administration in a hostile capacity, using their position of power abusively, to undermine the President. I would also support the removal/dismissal of those in positions of power that work at the will of the President who may act appropriately and without malice, yet against the interests of the President consistent with the rules of the game. In Vindmann's case, he's gone, he was expendable and it makes perfect sense that Trump canned him.  Same with Sonderland.  

 

[Capco]

16 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

You began this conversation asking where the line should be drawn in terms of purging the government of bad actors. I offered, and explained, Nuremberg as an example of how it went beyond leadership to the government drones. That is the point. 

 

I'll take this as your admission of being wrong about the facts of how justice was measured against Nazi Germany after WWII.  You can't know everything DR.  After all, the only thing we both know is that you know nothing at all, amirite?  

 

16 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

I'm not suggesting that. You're trying to spin what I said into that because you are uncomfortable (for some reason) with what I actually said. What I actually said is that if there is evidence to support it, and the accused are given due process, then those who break the law should face the same legal consequences as the rest of us. 

 

Oh by all means, the floor is yours on this one.  Since you have admitted that you want justice measured out against the Deep State above and beyond that which was exacted against Nazi Germany in WWII, but refuse to acknowledge the similarity in scope to something like the Reign of Terror or the Great Purge, then please by all means provide an intermediate example that doesn't go too far.  I don't want to put words in your mouth.  

 

16 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Why are you resisting that so much? It's not controversial. It's not extreme -- yet you're trying to twist it into the extreme. Why? 

 

Do you not think that those who break the law should face punishment, regardless of their positions within the government? Or are you advocating what we've had for the past 70+ years -- a system where the political elite can rape, pillage, and plunder without consequence? 

 

I think this is where your confusion lies.  On the surface, what you are advocating certainly looks like justice.  And who doesn't like justice, right?  But don't you think Maximilian Robespierre and his supporters thought they were dispensing justice when they were going down their list of criminals against the state?  And I'm sure Stalin felt like he was completely justified when he was exacting his punishments on the undesirables of his governments' institutions.  

 

You are talking about retribution with no bounds (unless you'd like to provide an intermediate example with bounds, like I requested above) on charges that carry the penalty of death.  Be careful about the road you want to go down.  

 

8 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I wasn't sure if by "purge", you meant the Josef Stalin, Chairman Mao or Marie Antoinnette 'off with their heads' version or the other kind.  Now that I know you meant the friendly, 'It's not you, it's me' with the Dunkin Donuts gift card on the way out, I follow.?

 

In a nutshell, I would support the removal of any individual acting against the administration in a hostile capacity, using their position of power abusively, to undermine the President. I would also support the removal/dismissal of those in positions of power that work at the will of the President who may act appropriately and without malice, yet against the interests of the President consistent with the rules of the game. In Vindmann's case, he's gone, he was expendable and it makes perfect sense that Trump canned him.  Same with Sonderland.  

 

Thank you.  This is so much more measured and fair than what I'm afraid Rhino is trying to say.  I hope he proves me wrong though.  

Edited February 8, 2020 by Capco

[Deranged Rhino]

2 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

I'll take this as your admission of being wrong about the facts of how justice was measured against Nazi Germany after WWII.  You can't know everything DR.  After all, the only thing we both know is that you know nothing at all, amirite?  

 

It's not wrong. But carry on. 

 

2 minutes ago, Capco said:

Oh by all means, the floor is yours on this one.  Since you have admitted that you want justice measured out against the Deep State above and beyond that which was exacted against Nazi Germany in WWII, but refuse to acknowledge the similarity in scope to something like the Reign of Terror or the Great Purge, then please by all means provide an intermediate example that doesn't go too far.  I don't want to put words in your mouth.  

 

And yet, you are putting words in my mouth, and omitting key qualifiers. 

 

(Because you're dishonest and can't argue what I actually said)

 

3 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

I think this is where your confusion lies. 

 

So, rather than take what I said as my opinion, you wish to intuit what you think I really mean? 

And you consider this an honest way to have a conversation? 

 

Please note, while you're doing all this work to stretch my words to the extreme you have refused to answer the very simple question put to you: namely, are people who serve in government above the law or not? 

 

If you don't think they are, then we're on the same page. 

 

5 minutes ago, Capco said:

On the surface, what you are advocating certainly looks like justice.  And who doesn't like justice, right?  But don't you think Maximilian Robespierre and his supporters thought they were dispensing justice when they were going down their list of criminals against the state?  And I'm sure Stalin felt like he was completely justified when he was exacting his punishments on the undesirables of his governments' institutions.  

 

My position is that we are a nation of laws, not men. Full stop. I've called for due process for the accused, that's not what Stalin nor Robespierre wanted or pushed for. 

 

You're inventing my position, because you can't argue the facts. Because you're being dishonest. 

 

6 minutes ago, Capco said:

You are talking about retribution with no bounds (unless you'd like to provide an intermediate example with bounds, like I requested above) on charges that carry the penalty of death.  Be careful about the road you want to go down.  

 

I'm talking about justice, not retribution. 

 

No one, but you, has said everyone would be tried for treason. There are numerous other offenses and crimes which they can/should be tried for that are not capital offenses. 

 

Your dishonesty is showing again. 

 

 

[Capco]

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

It's not wrong. But carry on. 

 

Not being able to admit you were wrong isn't very admirable.  

 

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

And yet, you are putting words in my mouth, and omitting key qualifiers. 

 

(Because you're dishonest and can't argue what I actually said)

 

Still waiting for that intermediate example that is above and beyond the level of justice exacted on Nazi Germany after WWII.  

 

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

So, rather than take what I said as my opinion, you wish to intuit what you think I really mean? 

 

No.  Absolutely not DR.  I didn't think you have a "real" meaning or that you have an ulterior motive of some kind (your last comment in this post confirms that, thankfully).  I just think you're oblivious to the extent that what you are suggesting can be abused, where good reasons meet bad actions.  

 

7 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Please note, while you're doing all this work to stretch my words to the extreme you have refused to answer the very simple question put to you: namely, are people who serve in government above the law or not? 

 

If you don't think they are, then we're on the same page. 

 

Of course I don't think anyone is above the law.  And to hell with anyone who does!

 

9 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

You're inventing my position, because you can't argue the facts. Because you're being dishonest. 

 

I'm trying to gauge your position based on what you're saying.  You are free to correct me at any time or take back something you said earlier that wasn't properly worded or written.  

 

I gave you plenty of opportunities to clarify your position on treason and to what extent the punishment exacted upon the Deep State (who is committing treason) should apply.  You've already answered with comments like, My reference was to the fact that it wasn't just the big wigs and leaders who were tried. They were tried first, but then after them we had trials for the judges, the guards, lawyers and cops who were "just following orders". Some were found innocent, some found guilty, but all faced judgement (but for the ones the US and Soviets kept hidden -- but that's a different topic).

 

 

But please clarify what you meant at your leisure.  

 

17 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

No one, but you, has said everyone would be tried for treason.

 

Oh, did I say that?  When?  Was it when I asked you a second time to provide an example that exacts harsher justice than that which was measured out against Nazi Germany after WWII?  Because that was meant as an opportunity for you say the following (which should NOT have taken this long to get out of you):

 

21 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

There are numerous other offenses and crimes which they can/should be tried for that are not capital offenses. 

 

And again, where do you draw that line?  What people at what levels should get what charges and what punishments? 

 

Did you read @leh-nerd skin-erd's answer?  Is your version of justice something comparable to that?  More harsh?  Less harsh?  

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

...the actions of the forelorned Nancy were grossly misinterpreted......

Dems demand Twitter, Facebook take down edited video of Pelosi ripping up State of the Union speech posted by Trump

 

By Adam Shaw | Fox News

 

Democrats are calling on Twitter and Facebook to take down an edited video of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., ripping up the State of the Union address -- claiming it's designed to “mislead” people.

“The latest fake video of Speaker Pelosi is deliberately designed to mislead and lie to the American people, and every day that these platforms refuse to take it down is another reminder that they care more about their shareholders’ interests than the public’s interests,” Drew Hammill, Pelosi's deputy chief of staff, said Friday.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/democrats-demand-twitter-yank-edited-video-of-pelosi-ripping-state-of-the-union-speech-posted-by-trump

 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

10 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

Not being able to admit you were wrong isn't very admirable.  

 

I happily admit I'm wrong all the time when I am. This is not one of those cases. You twisting words, omitting other words, to make a point doesn't make mine wrong. It makes you dishonest. 

 

11 minutes ago, Capco said:

Still waiting for that intermediate example that is above and beyond the level of justice exacted on Nazi Germany after WWII.  

 

I've given it. 

 

If they violate the law and the constitution they should be held accountable as every other citizen would be. Again, this isn't complicated, yet you're trying to make it so for reasons which escape me. 

 

13 minutes ago, Capco said:

No.  Absolutely not DR.  I didn't think you have a "real" meaning or that you have an ulterior motive of some kind (your last comment in this post confirms that, thankfully).  I just think you're oblivious to the extent that what you are suggesting can be abused, where good reasons meet bad actions.  

 

So -- because it's possible to go to far, we shouldn't even try to clean up our system? That's the position you're staking out now?

 

14 minutes ago, Capco said:

Of course I don't think anyone is above the law.  And to hell with anyone who does!

 

Then we agree. Told you it was simple. 

 

15 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

I'm trying to gauge your position based on what you're saying.  You are free to correct me at any time or take back something you said earlier that wasn't properly worded or written.  

 

I have corrected you and clarified. You continue to stretch it to the extreme. 

 

15 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

I gave you plenty of opportunities to clarify your position on treason and to what extent the punishment exacted upon the Deep State (who is committing treason) should apply.  

 

And I answered them in full. 

 

That you don't like the answer doesn't make it any less true. 

 

16 minutes ago, Capco said:

You've already answered with comments like, My reference was to the fact that it wasn't just the big wigs and leaders who were tried. They were tried first, but then after them we had trials for the judges, the guards, lawyers and cops who were "just following orders". Some were found innocent, some found guilty, but all faced judgement (but for the ones the US and Soviets kept hidden -- but that's a different topic).

 

I was attempting to have a conversation with you, which clearly is not what you're interested in. My initial comment was quite simple: if there's evidence and due process applied, then yes, I'd support a cleaning out of the government bureaucracy. 

 

The Nuremberg example was brought up when you asked where the line should be drawn between leaders and foot soldiers. 

 

There wasn't a line drawn in Nuremberg, and there shouldn't be here. Again, it's not complicated unless you're trying to intentionally misconstrue what I'm saying -- which you are. Because you're dishonest. 

 

19 minutes ago, Capco said:

Oh, did I say that?  When?  Was it when I asked you a second time to provide an example that exacts harsher justice than that which was measured out against Nazi Germany after WWII?  Because that was meant as an opportunity for you say the following (which should NOT have taken this long to get out of you):

 

You're the only one who's said treason. 

 

And you didn't draw it out of me, I led with the premise that if crimes are committed backed by evidence and due process, then the guilty should be shown the same fate as any one of us would be. That's where I started. 

You're terrible at this. 

 

20 minutes ago, Capco said:

And again, where do you draw that line?  What people at what levels should get what charges and what punishments? 

 

If you broke the law, you face the consequences -- regardless of your position, or level.

 

It's simple. 

[Bob in Mich]

1 hour ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I think the challenge is that by the very nature of self-preservation, virtually every person who works in government has skin in the game and most of Trump's policies go counter to their instincts.  That includes well-intentioned people of all political leanings who when push comes to shove, are at best apathetic to targets on Trump's agenda.  

 

Of course Trump can hire and fire to refine his staff.  I feel the obvious retribution here though will discourage anyone that perhaps should speak against Trump for even valid reasons.

 

It should strike you as odd that many of the government employees who you are now implying are traitors, were perfectly fine Trump admin employees before they spoke out against Trump. Some of these long time govt employees have been able to toe the line for different administrations of both parties and have adapted to many policy changes over years.  They witnessed what they viewed as activity that ran counter to our national interests and being done for personal political purposes and, imo, rightfully spoke up.

 

The REAL crime to you is ratting on the boss here, right?  Is it preferable to you to have all government employees be people that will remain loyal and will lie to cover for Trump, regardless of what he might do?  Other descriptions for that type of employee are, unethical or mob-like.  The inner circle has proven that they will lie to cover for him already.  Trump actually has them compromised now.  "You lied and covered for me before and you will do it again."

 

Many here imply a huge conspiracy where admin employees laid in wait to spring this Ukraine trap on Trump.  I saw a post where Vindman was allegedly talking about impeaching him in 2017, but that suspicious conversation is far from proof of anything.  Whether Vindman was involved in trying to get Trump since 2017 should be investigated for actual wrongdoing but either way, Trump's behavior was improper.  One does not cancel out the other.

 

Undoubtedly in your eyes, all who accused Trump while under oath, were lying and/or motivated by blind hate while Trump and his team, who refuse to go under oath and are known to lie for many reasons, are just victims of another evil conspiracy?  C'mon Lenny! 

 

[Keukasmallies]

Anyone interested in supporting a Go [insert wording of your choosing here] Me initiative to help Ms Pelosi return to some semblance of her definition of normalcy?

[Capco]

10 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

I happily admit I'm wrong all the time when I am. This is not one of those cases.

 

21 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

The Nuremberg example was brought up when you asked where the line should be drawn between leaders and foot soldiers. 

 

Okay then... let's try a yes or no format.  

 

"There were Nazi war criminals, especially at the lower levels, who were not part of Paperclip or some kind of exemption, not killed by the Russians, not hunted down by the Israelis after the war, and not part of any trial or military tribunal, who died peacefully in their own beds and escaped any kind of justice or retribution.  In other words, there were war criminals that committed war crimes that were not accounted for in any way."

 

Yes or no?

 

 

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

So -- because it's possible to go to far, we shouldn't even try to clean up our system? That's the position you're staking out now?

 

No.  I'm saying be careful about going down the road, not that we shouldn't go down it.  

 

 

20 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

And I answered them in full. 

 

That you don't like the answer doesn't make it any less true. 

 

You answered them truthfully, but not adequately or with very much specificity.  

 

 

21 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

There wasn't a line drawn in Nuremberg, and there shouldn't be here. Again, it's not complicated unless you're trying to intentionally misconstrue what I'm saying -- which you are. Because you're dishonest. 

 

There was a line drawn because not every individual that committed a crime met some form of non-spiritual justice.  Justice was not all encompassing.  There were privates who were convicted of war crimes.  Not every private that committed a war crime faced justice or punishment for a host of reasons, including the fact that such an undertaking would literally be impossible.  And if you don't draw the line there, then what about the civilian construction workers who built the death camps, or manufactured the Zyklon B, or the whole host of other secondary and tertiary participants in the Nazi's war crimes?  There's always a line to be drawn somewhere, and it's dishonest of you to say otherwise.  

 

There's nothing dishonest on my end about that.  There's only your lack of admission of ignorance.  I laid out verifiable numbers in detail, and if you think that only 209 people took part in the Nazi's war crimes at all levels, I have a bridge to sell you.  

 

31 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

You're the only one who's said treason. 

 

Haha, finally some backtracking from when you said this:

  

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

No one, but you, has said everyone would be tried for treason.

 

So first I'm the one who said everyone would be tried for treason (even though I never did), but now it's just that I said the word treason.  Isn't that cute.  

 

8 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

this isn't complicated

 

8 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Told you it was simple. 

 

11 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

quite simple

 

14 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

it's not complicated

 

15 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

It's simple. 

 

No Rhino.  Dispensing this kind of justice IS complicated.  This ISN'T as simple as you want it to be or think it is.  Applying "simple" to the draining of the swamp is how you create the awful kind of purge that (I believe) we both want to avoid.  This must be handled delicately with the kinds of checks and balances and oversight that this country is worthy of.  Not "simply". 

 

That's disturbing how quickly you reduce it as such.  

[3rdnlng]

17 minutes ago, Keukasmallies said:

Anyone interested in supporting a Go Fill My Liquor Cabinet For Me initiative to help Ms Pelosi return to some semblance of her definition of normalcy?

The 10 songs about ol' Jack Daniels #7:

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2011/07/27/10-Country-Songs-About-Jack-Daniels.html

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, Capco said:

 

There was a line drawn because not every individual that committed a crime met some form of non-spiritual justice.  Justice was not all encompassing. 

 

I never said it was. I said people should face legal consequences if the evidence and due process merits it. No one has ever argued that the justice system is 100% effective. You're shifting arguments from the extreme to the absurd now... because why? 

 

We agree that if people break the law they should face consequences regardless of their positions within the government. That's all we're talking about. 

 

4 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

No Rhino.  Dispensing this kind of justice IS complicated. 

 

You've now switched from what we think should happen to a discussion of how it would work. That's dishonest. 

 

The principle that is not complicated is what was stated above: if people break the law, they should face consequences regardless of their position or status. 

 

And we agree. 

 

The rest of this post is noise, dishonesty, and your attempt at trolling. It's shoddy work.  

[Capco]

Oh and I'm still curious what you think about lehnard's response to me @Deranged Rhino.  Just some quick commentary is all I'm looking for.  I liked his response a lot and maybe we can find some common ground in that.  Unless you disagree with his assessment of course.  

 

Anyway that's enough back and forth for me for a bit.  It's always a pleasure.  I am admittedly holding your feet to the fire a bit today, but it's nothing personal.  Cheers!

Just now, Deranged Rhino said:

The rest of this post is noise, dishonesty, and your attempt at trolling. It's shoddy work.  

 

I don't put that much thought or effort into trolling.  Have a good one.  

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

2 hours ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

Of course Trump can hire and fire to refine his staff.  I feel the obvious retribution here though will discourage anyone that perhaps should speak against Trump for even valid reasons.

 

It should strike you as odd that many of the government employees who you are now implying are traitors, were perfectly fine Trump admin employees before they spoke out against Trump. Some of these long time govt employees have been able to toe the line for different administrations of both parties and have adapted to many policy changes over years.  They witnessed what they viewed as activity that ran counter to our national interests and being done for personal political purposes and, imo, rightfully spoke up.

 

The REAL crime to you is ratting on the boss here, right?  Is it preferable to you to have all government employees be people that will remain loyal and will lie to cover for Trump, regardless of what he might do?  Other descriptions for that type of employee are, unethical or mob-like.  The inner circle has proven that they will lie to cover for him already.  Trump actually has them compromised now.  "You lied and covered for me before and you will do it again."

 

Many here imply a huge conspiracy where admin employees laid in wait to spring this Ukraine trap on Trump.  I saw a post where Vindman was allegedly talking about impeaching him in 2017, but that suspicious conversation is far from proof of anything.  Whether Vindman was involved in trying to get Trump since 2017 should be investigated for actual wrongdoing but either way, Trump's behavior was improper.  One does not cancel out the other.

 

Undoubtedly in your eyes, all who accused Trump while under oath, were lying and/or motivated by blind hate while Trump and his team, who refuse to go under oath and are known to lie for many reasons, are just victims of another evil conspiracy?  C'mon Lenny! 

 

 

Slow down for just a minute, KimoBobby.  Let's step back for a minute and try and reconstruct what you think I said.

 

I was surprised many years ago to find that many government officials are hired and fired at the will of the official they serve.  The NY AG's office comes to mind...I never knew those folks could be let go when one administration is replaced by another.  When I heard that, my first thought was that it must lead to an awful brain drain, quickly followed by "Huh, oh well".  Since it happens on the federal level--and we hear it all the time on those good political dramas--"I serve at the pleasure of the President you son of a b+tch!!"--I don't worry so much about when it happens under any administration.  

 

You probably know I think James "He's a leaker" Comey is a dbag of the highest order.  He served at the pleasure of the President, so when he got sent to the street, it just meant it was the end for him.  The reality is that even if I respected him, the President has the right to do what he did, and that's how it works.  Really, who cares how anyone else feels if the President doesn't trust him?  And certainly, wasn't Trump correct in his assessment?  Comey's ultimate successors testified before a majority-lead committee that the FBI under Comey was one big crap-bag of anarchy(I'm paraphrasing).  

 

I think Vindmann is an operative, a weasel and a putz. He may have done heoric things in battle previsouly, he may have served admirably when things were the way he liked them, and he may really believe what he testified to. In the end, I think he operated in his own best interest, not in the interest of my country, and certainly not in the interest of the administration.  "Traitor" never came to mind though maybe you've seen something that I have not.  I'm given to understand he committed court martial level misdeeds w/re to his oath, but I am comfortable waiting to see if anything along those lines moves forward.  All that said, he serves at the pleasure of the President and the President wanted him out.  To borrow a line from Goodfellas:  He's gone, and ain't nothing nobody coulda done about it, 

 

Sondland-same.  His brother,Twindmann-same.  I say F%$#@ them because I don't like them, but in reality, they just need to go and if they broke laws, they should face the consequences.   If not and you feel Trump has damaged their collective psyche,  they should toughen up.  Either way, the President makes that call, and he did.  If you want to mourn their professional passing, have at it.  I  say "Smell ya later chumps". 

 

I have acknowledged your feelings about Trump and wrongdoing, I have acknowledged that I see much of what has gone on as treasonous, and much as political, and we just disagree.  The facts, of course, are on my side, right down to the acquittal of Trump etc etc etc.  You seem to perpetually want to re-draw the rules based on your feelings and the feelings of folks like Vindmann, Comey and others---but sometimes it just is what it is.  

 

As always, peace out.

[Foxx]

someone please tell the Donners that there is no there there. 

one might think that after having their hand slapped repeatedly they would learn but, noooooooo.

 

https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1226124413046870016

 

[B-Man]