Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman: an active duty serviceman honorably a obeys lawful subpoena, to testify to his witness to the illegal acts of his commander-in-chief. Republicans try to smear him.

(photo courtesy of pixabay.com)

Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman, who was born in Ukraine and brought out of the Soviet Union by his family at age 3, is being slandered as too concerned with the welfare of Ukraine, among other things.  He has been described as a “Never-[redacted]” by [redacted] himself.  What could be worse, as he is “human scum” by that association?

John Yoo, already notorious for drafting a memo justifying torture, described Vindman as “treasonous” for supposedly being more concerned about the welfare of Ukraine than that of the US.  Although how the behavior of the president* intersects with the welfare of Ukraine is not clear, other than that $400 million in military aid was being with-held.  Surely the welfare of Ukraine and of the US are linked when the US gives Ukraine $400M in weapons to defend against the Russians and save a Western-style democracy  Are they implying that Vindman was so unhinged by the prospect of losing the aid for his country of birth that he decided to slander the president* as revenge?  Apparently.

Vindman may not be a wonderful guy or even a great conversationalist, but he is a veteran with multiple foreign deployments and a Purple Heart for wounds received in an IED explosion in Iraq.  He is still on active duty and was deployed to the National Security Council in the White House.  His family is Jewish, which is apparently why they emigrated from the Soviet Union– a number of Jews were allowed to emigrate from the USSR to get rid of them, due to pervasive occult anti-Semitism and the perception of all Jews as dissidents.

He is said to be resolutely apolitical and has stressed his “sacred” duty to the United States on multiple occasions.  He was “concerned” by the meeting he had with Gordon Sondland and others in which he heard that there was a quid pro quo, and reported his concerns to a ranking lawyer in his chain of command.  He reported a second time after he listened in at the Situation Room on the notorious July 25 phone call.  His complaints seem to have gone nowhere, although those of the still-anonymous whistle blower(s) have finally reached Congress.

This is what the Republicans are claiming is the “fruit of the poison tree” in the House impeachment inquiry.  By claiming that the inquiry is fatally flawed from the beginning (as if he hadn’t been read his rights or had evidence seized without a warrant) they can avoid discussing the actual evidence, which has been voluntarily made public by the president* himself.  They can pretend that the pending all-House vote on the impeachment inquiry doesn’t make it legitimate by claiming that somehow the “rights” of the victim-in-chief have been violated so he should be allowed to walk free for homicides committed in plain sight of multiple witnesses.