Replies

Long read but interesting........

I want to offer some OPEN ADVICE to the Commander and Chief; Donald J. Trump, the President of the United States.

Mr. President; I must honestly say, that as a Veteran of Lebanon 1982, Grenada 1983, Beirut 1983 and Operation Iraqi Freedom 2005… I am seriously brought to a point of RAGE over the conduct of Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman; who testified on a “Phone Call” (privileged communication) that was a conducted between the Commander in Chief of the United States of America and the siting President of a Sovereign Nation. This testimony was given because a Lieutenant Colonel of the Armed Forces of the United States did not agree with a “POLICY” question between TWO (2) World Leaders that the Lieutenant Colonel took an Oath to Uphold and Defend.

The Lieutenant Colonel is a Policy Enforcer, not a Policy Maker. If he wants to change an existing Policy, then Traitor Vindman should have resigned his Commission in the U.S. Army and go into Politics. Instead, he took his ability to have knowledge of a “Privileged” Conversation from his Commanding Officer and convey the FULL conversation to members that are not within the Military Community.

This member (Disgrace) while in FULL-DRESS Uniform, TARNISHED the VERY UNIFORM that so many have died to keep free of Dishonor, all because he did not like a Policy that was not his to decide if he liked or disliked, rather a policy that he took an OATH to uphold.

Mr. President; as a 100% Service-Connected DISABLED veteran of the United States Armed Forces (Staff Sergeant / E-6) find that this Dishonorable Lieutenant Colonel committed the TEXT-BOOK example of ESPIONAGE! The Vernacular for this act is defined as the practice of spying to obtain POLITICAL and military information. This is EXACTLY the type of conduct Disgraced Vindman engaged in. I feel that Vindman used his position within the United States military for the SOLE PURPOSE of Spying, through the use of cloak-and-dagger activities with the SOLE INTENT to conduct Surveillance on the HIGHEST FREELY AND DULLY ELECTED OFFICAL of a Nation recognized within the WORLD COMMUNITY of Nations.

As a LIVING member of the Legion of Veterans of the United States Armed Forces; I personally feel that the Oath that Vindman took; Dishonor’s and Disgraces all those that served with HONOR and DIGNITY throughout the very existence of the United States Army. This is the very Oath that I feel Vindman not only disrespected, but he actually took and threw it on the ground and CRAPPED all over it.

[ I , Alexander Vindman do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear TRUE FAITH and ALLEGIANCE to the same; that I take this obligation freely, WITHOUT ANY MENTAL RESERVATION or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So, help me God. (Title 5 U.S. Code 3331, an individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services)].

I personally feel that his CONDUCT was NOT in the Finest Tradition of the United States Army, unless he was trying to MIRROR the conduct of General Benedict Arnold. And we all know how HISTORY has judged Benedict Arnold’s conduct and actions against the United States of America! In short, Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman’ s conduct was NOT in the FINEST TRADITION of ALL the COMMISSIONED OFFICERS AND NON-COMMISSIONED OFFICERS of the United States Armed Forces, Past and Present.

Mr. President; there is both Precedence and Procedures to rectify Vindman’ s conduct and actions! The measures I’m speaking about is called the UNIFORMED CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE (UCMJ). I would like to offer some recent examples of how this procedure is used to correct so POOR ERRORS IN JUDGEMENT.

The Manual for Courts-Martial provides only limited guidance in defining what constitutes “contemptuous words”. However, Colonel Winthrop, in his Work, Military Law and Precedents, offered some examples, which include, “abusive epithets, denunciatory or contumelious expressions, and intemperate or malevolent comments…” The legislative history is sparse on explanations, as well, but it is clear that “contemptuous words” includes “disrespectful” speech. In addition, the Military Judges’ Bench-book suggests that contemptuous means “insulting, rude, disdainful or otherwise disrespectfully attributing to another qualities of meanness disreputableness, or worthlessness.”

Records of prior courts-martial reveal that the element of contemptuousness is fairly easily satisfied. For instance, during the Civil War, convictions resulted for referring to President Lincoln as “a loafer,” a “thief”, a “damned tyrant”, and a “damned black republican abolitionist.” A conviction was even obtained for the statement, “Jeff Davis was as good a man as Abraham Lincoln.” Convictions in subsequent periods continued to run the gambit and convictions were obtained for disrespectful statements accusing Presidents Wilson and Roosevelt during the World Wars of being “socialist” and there are even convictions for disrespectful statements made against President Clinton (use your imagination here) and President Obama.

One recent high-profile case involved Marine Corps Sergeant Gary Stein, who was court martialed under Article 134 of the UCMJ (see below). SGT Stein created a Facebook page called the “Armed Forces Tea Party”. On his page, SGT Stein called President Obama a “coward” and a “religious and economic enemy of the American people”. On another Facebook page, SGT Stein vowed that he would not salute Obama, and he was also selling “NoBama” 2012 bumper stickers. As a result of his conduct, an Administrative Separation Board at Camp Pendleton voted 3-0 to recommend that Stein should be dismissed and given an “Other-Than-Honorable” Discharge for making comments “PREJUDICIAL TO GOOD ORDER AND DISCIPLINE.” Various appeals of the decision were unsuccessful.

In addition to the above, the official or legislature against whom the words are used must be occupying one of the offices or be one of the legislatures named in ARTICLE 88 at the time of the offense. Neither “Congress” nor “legislature” includes its members individually. “Governor” does not include “lieutenant governor.” Significantly, it is IMMATERIAL whether the words are used against the official in an OFFICIAL or PRIVATE CAPACITY.

While expressions of opinion made in a purely private conversation, or adverse criticism of one of the officials or legislatures named in the article in the course of a political discussion that are not personally contemptuous, are typically not charged as a n offense, giving broad circulation to a WRITTEN PUBLICATION CONTAINING CONTEMPTUOUS WORDS of the kind made punishable by this article, or the UTTERANCE OF CONTEMPTUOUS WORDS of this kind in the presence of military subordinates, will result in an Offense With Aggravating Circumstances, and the truth or falsity of any contemptuous statement is always immaterial.

As noted above, dismissal, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for up to one (1) year are the possible penalties for a violation of Article. In general, any individual subject to the U.C.M.J, who, at an alleged place and time, makes a statement on or about a particular subject or person, so as to encourage disaffection, disloyalty or both, or to interfere with or impair the loyalty and morale among the members of the armed forces, the civilian population or both, would be violating the Article 134 and shall be punished as deemed fit through a court martial. The statement made by the accused service member is considered an offense, if it is in anyway disloyal to the United States.

The Elements of Crime Are as Follows:

(1) The accused person actually made the alleged statement;

(2) The statement was made in public;

(3) The statement was disloyal to the United States;

(4) The statement promotes or encourages troops or the civilian populace to be disloyal, hostile or both towards the United States;

(5) The statement impairs and/or interferes with the morale, the discipline or loyalty towards the United States, of a member or multiple members of the U.S. military; and

(6) The nature of the statement was such that it brings upon discredit to the U.S. military, or disrupts the discipline and good order of the armed forces.

A service member is said to have “made” a statement only if it was spoken, written, published or printed, uttered, issued or put forth for circulation by him or her. The statement is made “public” only when it is made openly in the presence of others, who have the knowledge that the alleged statement was actually made by the accused.

Reasons for A Dishonorable Discharge?

When a member of one of the branches of the U.S. armed forces commits an action that is considered a major violation of the code of proper conduct, they may be brought before a general court-martial. If found guilty of the offense, the military personnel may receive a dishonorable discharge. This expulsion from military service can have serious and far-reaching consequences.

Possible Crimes that May Lead to Dishonorable Discharge

Military personnel who receive a dishonorable discharge frequently commit the most serious crimes according to military protocol. A service-person who is Absent Without Leave, or AWOL, may be dishonorably discharged. To be considered AWOL, the individual must leave their post intentionally or fail to return to their post. Sedition is another crime that may be punishable with dishonorable discharge. In a case involving sedition, the guilty personnel may have tried to get others to disregard orders or may have even been involved in a plot to overthrow the government. This aspect was stated beyond a reasonable doubt with his opening deposition where he clearly said that he was coming forward because he disagreed with a conversation between two Leaders of Sovereign Nations.

Mr. Vindman’ s defense against a charge of SEDITION has been totally eliminated when he came forward, wearing his Military Uniform and provided a statement to Adam Schiff with the SOLE INTENTION to remove a sitting President of the United States. This act on is on face value proves that his intent was to OVER-THROW an existing government for the sole purpose of installing a GOVERNMENT that met “HIS” approval. Adam Schiff is NOT a member of the United States Military, and if Vindman was directed by Adam Schiff to make his statements to this tainted inquiry for the SOLE PURPOSE of over-throwing the existing Government of the United States of America is TREASON.

Mr. President; as a 100% Service-Connected DISABLED veteran of the United States Armed Forces (Staff Sergeant / E-6) find that this Dishonorable Lieutenant Colonel committed the TEXT-BOOK example of ESPIONAGE! The Vernacular for this act is defined as the practice of spying to obtain POLITICAL and military information. This is EXACTLY the type of conduct Disgraced Vindman engaged in. I feel that Vindman used his position within the United States military for the SOLE PURPOSE of Spying, through the use of cloak-and-dagger activities with the SOLE INTENT to conduct Surveillance on the HIGHEST FREELY AND DULLY ELECTED OFFICIAL of a Nation recognized within the WORLD COMMUNITY of Nations.

Consequences of a Dishonorable Discharge

When a major crime has been committed, the dishonorable discharge is rarely the end of the legal proceedings. Individuals who are dishonorably discharged may still be facing criminal charges in regular or military courts. They may be sentenced to jail time or to pay fines. However, a record that includes a dishonorable discharge can follow the individual through the rest of their life.

People who have been dishonorably discharged may be shunned by military personnel, and they typically lose their entitlement to any military benefits for which they would otherwise have been eligible. Moreover, they may find it difficult to obtain employment and they will be ineligible for unemployment benefits. Some will be barred from owning a gun, holding public office and voting. Successfully appealing the dishonorable discharge may restore some of these benefits and entitlements, but the process is difficult and frequently futile.

In the civilian world, a Dishonorable Discharge may be considered equal to a felony conviction, and carries the same loss of civil rights. As an example, dishonorable discharge bars the individual from owning or possessing a firearm, from voting in many states, and from holding certain governmental positions.

Once he has his DISHONORABLE DISCHARGE, then Mr. Vindman can work for Adam Schiff as a personal assistant… but he will never be able to work the GOVERNMENT in an OFFICIAL CAPACITY ever again because of his TREASONOUS Conduct.

In Closing Mr. President; if you fail to act upon this blatant Disrespect and Disregard for your Authority as Commander and Chief, I am fearful that you will leave the door of Dissention wide open for other members in the United States Military to plan a MILITARY COUP against the Existence of the Democratic Republic in which we live, thus giving rise to a SECOND CIVIL WAR in our Republic’s relatively short life as a Country.

Respectfully, Frank L Sample SSG/Disabled U.S. Army [Veteran of Multinational Peace Keeping Forces of the United States, Lebanon 1982. Also, a Veteran of Operation Urgent Fury, the Invasion of Grenada 1983. Veteran of the December 4th, Reprisal Attack on Shi’ite Positions that over looked the site of the United Marine Corps Barracks – Terrorist Attack that left 278 U.S. Military Personnel Dead in 1983. A Veteran of the War on Terrorism, Operation Iraqi Freedom – III; Iraq War, 2005]

**Note to the Leftist Journalism Corps… Patriot and Traitor are NOT the same thing. Benedict Arnold was a TRAITOR, and so is Vindman. Patriot’s are those soldiers that Laid down their LIVES for the sole purpose of Sustaining and Maintaining the Constitutional Republic of the United States of America**

In Closing Mr. President; if you fail to act upon this blatant Disrespect and Disregard for your Authority as Commander and Chief, I am fearful that you will leave the door of Dissension wide open for other members in the United States Military to plan a MILITARY COUP against the Existence of the Democratic Republic in which we live, thus giving rise to a SECOND CIVIL WAR in our Republic’s relatively short life as a Country.