Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Who is Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman?
To ask this question is forbidden. As I was told by one of my Ricochet colleagues the other day, “you do not publicly convict a decorated soldier for espionage either. Especially to save your own rear end. Stop telling me how much you love the troops, Donald. You are full of it.”
I’ve seen a lot of that sentiment. No one respects the uniform more than me but I also know that the uniform is not a cloak of holiness. Like the rest of the society it draws from, the US armed forces has its share of people whose actions do not represent the uniform in a good light. The Disciplinary Barracks at Ft. Leavenworth is full of them.
So who is Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman? Let’s ask someone who knows. This was posted on Twitter by Lt. Col. James Hickman, US Army (ret.):
I know LTC Alex Vindman from a Combined US-Russian exercise called Atlas Vision 13 in Grafenwoher, Germany. He worked with the Russian Embassy and I was assigned to the JMTC (Joint Multinational Training Command), within USAREUR (US Army Europe). He worked coordination with the Russian 15th Peacekeeping Brigade, and I was in charge of all Simulations planning, as well as assisting the USAREUR Lead Planner as the Senior Military Planner.
The following account of LTC Vindman’s words and actions are completely accurate to the best of my recollection and have been corroborated by others. We interacted on several different occasions throughout the planning cycle, but it was during the actual execution of the exercise, that we had an issue relevant to his recent testimony. As stated earlier, Atlas Vision 13 was conducted at JMTC in the VBS2 (Virtual Battle Simulations 2) Classrooms for Simulation. Vindman, who was a Major at the time, was sitting in one of the classrooms talking to the US and Russian soldiers, as well as the young officers and GS employees about America, Russia, and (President) Obama. He was apologetic of American culture, laughed about Americans not being educated or worldly, and really talked up Obama and globalism to the point of uncomfortable.
He would speak with the Russian Soldiers and laugh as if at the expense of the US personnel. It was so uncomfortable and unprofessional, one of the GS employees came and told me everything above. I walked over and sat within earshot of Vindman, and sure enough, all was confirmed. One comment truly struck me as odd, and it was with respect to Americans’ falsely thinking they’re exceptional, when he said, ‘He [Obama] is working on that now.’ And he said it with a snide ‘I know a secret’ look on his face. I honestly don’t know what it meant, it just sounded like an odd thing to say. Regardless, after hearing him bash America a few times in front of subordinates, Russians, and GS employees, as well as, hearing an earful about globalization, Obama’s plan, etc…I’d had enough. I tapped him on the shoulder and asked him to step outside.
At that point I verbally reprimanded him for his actions and I’ll leave it at that, so as not to be unprofessional myself. The bottom-line is LTC Vindman was a partisan Democrat at least as far back as 2012. So much so, junior officers and soldiers felt uncomfortable around him. This is not your professional, field-grade officer, who has the character and integrity to do the right thing. Do not let the uniform fool you…he is a political activist in uniform. I pray our nation will drop this hate, vitriol and division, and unite as our founding fathers intended!
Note: The above was written over the course of 11 Tweets and has been edited for readability.
Published in Military
I never considered myself beyond criticism just because I’m a veteran. Benedict Arnold was a wounded veteran and a hero too.
We’re speaking two languages here, the Left/Dem/Media consider ‘swiftboating’ to be lying. We consider it telling the truth about an insufferable blowhard .
Just because you identify a pattern (in this case poor outcomes for those inheriting wealth) doesn’t mean it’s universal. One can inherit wealth and yet be smart and successful.
Sessions told everyone who had ears to listen that he didn’t think that the Attorney General should act like the President’s personal defense attorney.
The result of Sessions recusing himself from the investigation into Trump was essentially nothing. The Mueller report came out and was discussed for a few weeks and then crickets.
But Trump is such a moron that he can’t understand why having Mueller investigate and find no smoking gun was a positive thing for Trump.
I never said that Obama’s EOs were identical to Trump’s.
What I said was that Sessions made it clear when he criticized the Obama administration that he believed that people surrounding the president should occasionally stand up to the president and say, “No.”
If Trump wanted someone to be his “wingman” Sessions was the wrong guy.
So why do you object to Rudy Giuliani performing in that role?
Some people who inherit wealth are smart.
If you think Trump is smart, you are entitled to your opinion.
I’m just saying that if you are in Trump’s cabinet or his national security council and you think that Trump is dumb and is going to make a dumb decision, of course you are going to try to save Trump from himself.
Sure, one could resign. But you also realize that Trump hired you. So, you figure that you will try to talk him out of some of his decisions and sometimes you succeed. Nothing wrong with that.
Sure. And he lost that money and made millions more without it. I have long ceased to be bothered by or envious of birth circumstance.
If that’s the measurement of policy acumen then I’m dead. I suck at math.
If we accept this ‘testimony’ – which was via Twitter, and from someone whose political affiliations are so far unstated – then sure. Though it’s still not clear how it’s relevant.
Vindman hates America, so of course he’s out to get Donald Trump? I understand the human need to build consensus, but what do we sacrifice to that end? Is it always worth it?
I don’t think Vindman hates America but it certainly sounds as if he misinterprets his job responsibilities as an analyst/advisor Ukraine/Russia specialist on the National Security Council staff. I trust I got that description of his job close to right. His quoted views indicate that he was concerned with the potential effects of the President’s phone conversation on Ukraine where I have taken his job to be concerned with the national security interests of the United States.
I am not convinced that Vindman is an America hater. It seems like this is just another case of “This guy disagrees with Trump. Traitor!! Traitor!!”
Every time anyone offers up some disagreement with Trump foreign policy or Trump’s communication style, the response is always the same: “Well, that’s what the establishment wants you to think. Did you get those talking points from the GOPe?”
My sense is that Vindman is neither a traitor nor a hero (except for whatever he did to earn his purple heart). Vindman is just one more person telling us something we already knew.
John Yoo had it right.
Laura Ingraham needs to lay off the Kool-Aid.
Relevance: A member of the US military, even if on a civilian duty posting, is not to subvert the civilian chain of command other than not obeying an unlawful order, nor is he to disparage his country or his fellow soldiers. And more importantly here, he is not to act on the behalf of a foreign power. LTC Vindman seems to have a history of all three. And that he sits in his position is very relevant.
I presume he will be invited to the Congressional hearings where he can be asked questions about it.
I take exception to referring to the president as an idiot. Indeed, he is capable of remarks best left unsaid, but then we knowingly didn’t send a professional politician to Washington D.C. who clothes his every statement in doublespeak. Furthermore, Trump is certainly not the first president to have staff try to manage him as we all know the history of the presidency abounds with tales of the generals versus the civilians in the White House.
Allegedly. Political?
My car circa 2005. Several nice donations to the Swift Boat Veterans, who helped sink Kerry.
The Boys from Brazil?
Yeah, kind of what I figured.
I hate the guys that exploit their service.
Douches.
I heard rumors that you take down guys who use their DOD ID to preboard at the airport.
If one is going to use one’s Common Access Card (CAC) to pre-board, or if one is going to accept an upgrade from a grateful airline, one must be in uniform, otherwise, it can too easily feed the perception one was accepting a gift.
An officer avoids misbehavior and the perception/appearance of misbehavior. The latter is always harder than the former.
Okay, tanker boy; as a general statement:
DAT.
Then I file a dissenting opinion as a matter of non-discrimination. Those Army boys are always in uniform whereas Marines have been forbidden to wear their field uniform anywhere off base since 2007. And you ain’t flying in your Dress Blues.
I notice you’ve been back since I asked this but didn’t respond. Doesn’t the President deserve to be represented in his effort to refute all that was charged falsely during the 2016 campaign? If the orchestration of that took place in Ukraine, what is the proper approach to get to the bottom of it?
Not that you asked me, but one that doesn’t link US aid to investigations of a political rival and imho preferably one that doesn’t involve washing America’s dirty laundry in public. (No matter who has, or had not, done this previously.)
Please explain how you made your first billion. I will now avoid reading any post of yours. Jesus !
Oh, no. The public is exactly where we should wash our dirty laundry. Hiding it, keeping secrets, allowing it to fester and spread is how we reached this point, not just in America but throughout the entire Western World. Too often we allow some of the worst transgressions slide under the name of National Security. In the UK, the Official Secrets Act might as well be called the Officials Protection Act.
@she, Exacto.
I’m pretty certain America’s official security classification system has been grossly abused by our own intelligence officials leading to an inability to investigate that same wrongdoing with dispatch.
Washing it overseas is a step too far. Jmho.
I don’t know how long Vindman has been in the military, but Lt Colonel is the lowest high rank in the military, and where it’s common for officers to retire at (if you retire as a major, you either screwed up, or you didn’t work hard enough; or you entered the officer ranks later in your career starting as enlisted).
I suspect that Vindman will retire at his present rank, and he’ll get a good job as a civilian with the liberal/progressive contacts he’s made.
If he was as political as Hickman says, then he left himself vulnerable when administrations changed. He saw the writing on the wall, so he did what he did.
I’m pretty cynical about a low level military staffer who is a part of the NSC. It probably means a concentration on politics more than fighting to get ahead.
There’s an argument to be made that full Colonel has that status if you’re promoted to it when close to mandatory retirement. There are plenty of Colonel slots that are not considered a part of the promotion track to General. Remember the Army has a pretty big bureaucracy and there are some slots for non-political officers who worked hard but aren’t considered General material.
They get to retire as a full Colonel.
Many officers don’t bother to go that extra step once the writing is on the wall. They can generally get a good civilian job with better pay, starting on their new civilian retirement plan that much earlier. Their military retirement isn’t quite as large but large enough, and they still get health care provided as a part of their retirement.