His lying to congress was probably PTSD before it became the popular diagnosis…
1 Like
How many American military officers testify under oath to congress and don’t wear a military uniform?
None.
It is absolutely correct protocol, you don’t like what he said.
Defend the president all you want.
But don’t attack the messenger.
Allan
Her looks have nothing to do with anything related to this hearing.
Are you sure you meant collaborate?
You may not like Vindman or Williams or Kent or Taylor.
But they have the relevant bona fides.
The folks on the Breitbart article do not so I was simply asking why you think they are more relevant?
Maybe you know something about them I do not?
.^
.
.
Today’s thread is up for Sondland, Cooper, and Hale appearing in public testimony.
.
.
.
.WW
Was Lt Col. Vindman wounded in battle? Do those battle heroes criticising have first hand knowledge of Lt Col Vindman or is it just hearsay?
1 Like
You think you do. You see what you want to see and ignore everything else.
“Break character”. That’s rich, coming from you.
Oh look! You made a friend!
Why?
…
good one.
Another Scott Stedman recruit!
If he’s not I will.
6 points. “Self-important” was redundant. Minus 1. Total score - 5.
Did he say this?
You are straying away from the point. Vindeman did not wear his uniform to work daily so it called attention to the matter when he wore it to testify.
The rest is a smattering of opinions like yours, mine, and all.
1 Like
There is no opinion needed at all to determine whether wearing the uniform to testify was appropriate…
AR 670-1
His daily duty uniform is irrelevant…
We see a vast array of opinion on the matter.
I never said he couldn’t wear it.
It just appeared “showy.”
It’s not opinion… It’s the Army regulation…
So naturally, he “reeks as a spy”.
One of the opinions you found “relevant”.
