Amid increased calls from House Republicans to force the testimony of the CIA “whistleblower”, today the Washington Post, the primary outlet for CIA misinformation and public relations, began shaping the “whistle-blower” as a hero.
Because the overall effort involves multiple parts of the deep state apparatus, to see through the construction it is important to note which media outlet holds equity for agency talking points within the coup. The Washington Post is primary PR for the CIA and IC writ large. The New York Times is primary PR for the FBI; and CNN is primary PR for the State Dept. This pattern has been consistent throughout.
Over time it has become clear the first confidential human source for the CIA Ukraine dossier, written by CIA analyst Eric Ciaramella and also known as the “Whistleblower report”, is Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman a Ukraine expert inside the National Security Council on assignment from the Dept of Defense intelligence unit.
Within his deposition the ideology of Lt. Col Vindman is clear. Vindman’s mission focus was/is to shape U.S. policy toward Ukraine (and by extension NATO) regardless of the actual policy view of President Trump. Within his deposition Vindman admitted to giving countermanding instructions to his Ukraine counterpart two weeks after understanding opposite policy objectives from his commander-in-chief.
During his deposition Lt Col Vindman also admitted -with considerable angst and attempts to deflect from his legal advisors provided by the Dept. of Defense- that he was intentionally usurping the chain of command in an effort to follow his own ideological agenda; and perhaps that of his DoD leadership.
By itself that level of admitted and direct insubordination should be alarming for many reasons; not the least of which is his lineage within the U.S. Military. Indeed Vindman’s intent and purpose explains why he appeared for his deposition in full military uniform.
When we consider that Lt. Col. Vindman was carrying out what he believed to be his role; and when you overlay his military purpose; and when we accept Lindman was assisting CIA agent Eric Ciaramella in constructing his dossier to remove President Trump; and when we stand back and look at the aggregate interests involved; and when we consider there was ZERO push-back from the ranks of military leadership, specifically the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and when you accept Lindman was simply allowed to return to his post inside the White House – where he remains today; well, the alarming aspect increases in direct proportion to the definition of the word: “coup”.
I would encourage all readers to think long and hard those factual data-points.
CIA Agent Eric Ciaramella never delivered his dossier briefing to the upward chain-of-command within the CIA. Instead Ciaramella subverted the formal process and transmitted his hearsay complaint, derived from material provided by Vindman, directly to principal officials who could assist in the removal of the President. Again, often we get caught in the weeds, but think long-and-hard about this impeachment process as it is being discovered.
Yesterday President Trump released the call transcript from an April 21st conversation with Ukraine President Zelensky. Reporters noted there was a disconnect between the call transcript and a separate summary of the call sent to reporters in April.
[…] In response to questions from reporters, the White House said in a Friday statement that “the NSC’s Ukraine expert” prepared the April summary.“The president continues to push for transparency in light of these baseless accusations and has taken the unprecedented steps to release the transcripts of both phone calls with President Zelensky so that every American can see he did nothing wrong. It is standard operating procedure for the National Security Council to provide readouts of the president’s phone calls with foreign leaders,” deputy White House press secretary Hogan Gidley said. “This one was prepared by the NSC’s Ukraine expert,” he added. (link)
That “NSC Ukraine expert” was Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman.
For emphasis let me repeat a current fact that is being entirely overlooked. Despite his admitted usurpation of President Trump policy, Vindman was sent back to his post in the NSC with the full support of the United States Department of Defense.
The onus of action to remove Vindman from the NSC does not just lay simply at the feet of the White House and National Security advisor Robert O’Brien; and upon whose action the removal of Vindman could be positioned as political; the necessary, albeit difficult or perhaps challenging, obligation to remove Lt. Col Vindman also resides purposefully with the Dept. of Defense.
The Pentagon could easily withdraw Vindman from his position at the National Security Coucil; yet, it does not…. and it has not. WHY?
Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman was the majority (#1) source for the material CIA operative Eric Ciaramella used in a collaborative effort to remove President Trump from office. Let me make this implication crystal clear:
The United States Military is collaborating with the CIA to remove a U.S. President from office.
Do you see the issue now?
The Pentagon has done nothing, absolutely nothing, to countermand this implication/reality. The Joint Chiefs of Staff have done nothing, absolutely nothing, to diminish the appearance of, nor deconstruct the agenda toward, the removal of President Trump.
Mr. President, do I have your attention?
On Tuesday, Nov. 19th, Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman is scheduled to appear in an intentionally shortened morning congressional session along with his ally Jennifer Williams, an aide to Vice President Mike Pence.
In the afternoon, Kurt D. Volker, the former United States special envoy to Ukraine, and Timothy Morrison, a Europe and Russia expert for the National Security Council will appear.
The timing, construct and purposeful design of Vindman’s appearance next week is being intentionally buried within the totality of the narrative that surrounds the impeachment effort. Perhaps, just perhaps, someone reading this will start to put the purposefully obfuscated pieces of the coup puzzle together and act quickly….
Perhaps a full search of the NSA database prior to dragging him out by the scruff?
How long has this been going on?
@kitt:
“According to the Washington Times, during the Oct. 29 hearing, Vindman was asked by Adam Schiff whether or not there was a transfer of weapons to Ukraine under Obama.
“Under the previous administration, there was a, I’m aware of the transfer of a fairly significant number of Javelins, yes,” he said.”
Ooops………………………….
@retire05: Hes the expert go to guy only he should set policy ya know, and those shell games with american tax dollars should never choose the center then lift the two outside shells.
@retire05: https://www.theepochtimes.com/official-linked-to-spygate-hatched-plan-for-biden-to-force-firing-of-top-ukrainian-prosecutor_3147123.html
The more you look the more corrupt the previous admin appears.
@retire05:
I believe that is what you call “perjury”.
Tim Morrison is not helpful to the coup. Also, he casts doubts on Vindman’s trustworthiness.
@kitt: Everything the Democrats try to do winds up exposing massive Democrat corruption. Spying, collusion, obstruction, extortion… all winds up being Democrat mainstays. Of course, the corrupt media is making it all possible.
Mr. Morrison repeatedly testified that he purposefully kept Lt. Col. Vindman out of the loop on this matter because he had concerns about Vindman’s judgment, which were also raised to him by Fiona Hill and others.
There were issues of judgment, that he operated outside his lane. He didn’t adhere to the chain of command. Was not included, specifically excluded — I guess, to your use your language, was not included on certain trips. And there was an area of Ukraine that you kept him restricted from being a part of, and you said you couldn’t get into that.
@kitt: @Deplorable Me:
Vindman testified his Ukrainian counterparts questioned him about the freeze in aid. Morrison testified that Vindman never informed him of those “light queries”. When asked if that was a violation of the chain of command and he responded it was a “habit” Vindman picked up from his former boss (who would have been in the Obama White House).
Here is the bottom line: Vindman was not trustworthy and Morrison knew it. That is why he was taken out of the loop.
Reading the transcripts as they are made public.
Vindman’s new boss, Tim Morrison said Vindman was constantly going out of the chain of command and telling “others” things he learned by snooping while at work.
Vindman is/was one of the “whistleblowers,” Schiff pretends not to know the identity of.
Both men are liars.
Vindman’s narrative is a lie and Schiff’s interpretation of it when he opened his hearing was a huge set of lies.
his conduct is treason and a court-martial is in order. Do you want to make a bet that he has an accident in the near future?
I cannot believe this is how ANYBODY talks to a superior, much less to the US President:
The Times report focuses on Trump and Sondland’s discussion as to whether or not the Ukrainian government would agree to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, but they also discussed Mayers’ situation. According to Holmes’ testimony, Sondland reportedly said that the rapper “should have pled guilty” to the charges of assault, and that the President should “let him get sentenced, play the racism card, give him a ticker-tape [parade] when he comes home.”
Trump, who has responded to Kim Kardashian’s efforts regarding prison reform in the past, spoke with her about Mayers’ imprisonment and was vocal about his legal woes on Twitter. Holmes’ testimony claims that Sondland reportedly referred to this relationship, noting that Trump could “tell the Kardashians you tried.”https://www.upcoming100.com/news-detail/19265/impeachment-investigation-uncovers-trump-and-ambassadors-phone-call-regarding-aap-rockys-sweden-arrest-report/
Nope.
This never happened.
So, how much of whatever else Holmes “testified” to is also fiction?