Opinion| Lawrence David| It’s been clear to me from the outset that someone who had actually been on the phone call President Trump conducted with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy served as the source for the whistleblower’s complaint.
While we still cannot confirm that person is Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the transcript from National Security Council aide Tim Morrison’s closed-door deposition raises our suspicions that it was indeed him.
From page 82:
Add that to the fact that Lt. Col. Vindman admitted providing readouts of the phone call to members of the NSC, that the whistleblower is reportedly a member of, during his testimony.
Now consider that Lt. Col. Vindman wore his full dress uniform when he gave his deposition. He does not wear his uniform in the normal course of performing his duties at the National Security Council.
Lt. Col. Vindman was making a statement, a statement with significant implications. Vindman, by providing testimony against his commander-in-chief while in uniform, violated military protocol, I believe.
During the course of his testimony, Lt. Col. Vindman admitted that his ‘concerns’ with President Trump’s words to President Zelenskyy were based on his personal interpretation and his difference of opinion with the president’s policy.
My interpretation was that Vindman was forced to admit there was nothing illegal in what the president said. Only that he thought President Trump was wrong politically.
NSC member Vindman was upset with the president because he doesn’t share President Trump’s policy objectives. If he restricted his actions to just holding that opinion there would be no problem.
Unfortunately, it’s beginning to appear that Vindman made himself a human resource in a wider plot to remove President Trump.
By appearing in uniform and testifying that he had intentionally usurped the chain of command when he advised his Ukrainian counterpart to ignore the president’s request Vindman, drew his superiors’ silence/inaction about his insubordination into question.
Within the Doctrine for the Armed Forces of the United States the chain of command is clearly delineated:
It is widely understood within the military that you follow the orders given to you by those higher up in the command structure yet Vindman admitted to giving countermanding instructions to his Ukraine counterpart two weeks after understanding opposite policy objectives from his commander-in-chief.
Understanding Vindman’s insubordination, and if Vindman was the whistleblower’s source, and his command superiors within the military are not relieving him of his duties at the White House, then the conclusion is that military leadership is complicit in what appears to be a widening coup that includes the CIA and now the U.S. military.
There is little doubt that the Joint Chiefs recognize the severity of Vindman’s actions. They are trained to identify and remove this type of compromise. By abdicating that responsibility they have become participants in the coup.
The United States Military is collaborating with the CIA to remove a U.S. President from office.
We’ve always had our suspicions about the reason Adam Schiff was shielding the whistleblower from testifying.
Having admitted that the information he relied on was not his own, the first question he was likely to have been asked was, ‘then from whom did you get that information?’
Frankly, Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman should be facing a court martial for failing to follow a direct order from his commander-in-chief.
That he has instead been returned to the White House shows how deeply corrupted the military’s chain of command became under Manchurian President Barack Hussein Obama.