- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
What happened here was......a member of the Armed Forces questioned his superior officer..
Posted on 11/19/19 at 12:50 pm
Posted on 11/19/19 at 12:50 pm
In this case, the Commander in Chief.
He then went outside his clear chain of command to LEAK IT and politicize it.
This is a clear case that REQUIRES a court martial.
He then went outside his clear chain of command to LEAK IT and politicize it.
This is a clear case that REQUIRES a court martial.
Posted on 11/19/19 at 12:52 pm to MMauler
Time to order the code red!!
Posted on 11/19/19 at 12:52 pm to MMauler
When combined with the fact the Vindman had poor judgement, I think you are right.
Posted on 11/19/19 at 12:54 pm to MMauler
Trump didn't use Vindman's prepared talking points. Vindman vows revenge.
Posted on 11/19/19 at 12:56 pm to MMauler
Well, we know that his anti-Trump and pro-Ukrainian opinionated opinion was passed to the so-called WB, who then ran to Schiff, who now starts PEACH MINT.
He is an intelligent, well educated, battle tested, and politically experienced man.
Does anyone think he was surprised by the above daisy chain and not supportive of it?
He is an intelligent, well educated, battle tested, and politically experienced man.
Does anyone think he was surprised by the above daisy chain and not supportive of it?
Posted on 11/19/19 at 12:56 pm to MMauler
The last attempt to Court Martial someone under Article 88 was during the Clinton Administration and it failed miserably.
You have to prove both "licentious comments" and "malicious intent".
You have to prove both "licentious comments" and "malicious intent".
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News