Can you spot the WaPo fallacy in this tweet by Brit Hume?
This from the article: “he was deeply troubled by what he interpreted as an attempt by the president to subvert U.S. foreign policy…” There is a huge fallacy in this. Anyone know what it is? https://t.co/L1Jfgck6G2
— Brit Hume (@brithume) November 2, 2019
THE FALLACY EXPLAINS A LOT
Vindman was “deeply troubled by what he interpreted as an attempt by the president to subvert U.S. foreign policy,” is the key passage Brit Hume responded to in the tweet above.
In full, it reads, He told lawmakers that he was deeply troubled by what he interpreted as an attempt by the president to subvert U.S. foreign policy and an improper attempt to coerce a foreign government into investigating a U.S. citizen. Vindman said he relayed these concerns to Eisenberg [White House counsel] within hours of the phone call, according to the people familiar with Vindman’s testimony who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss closed-door testimony.
The President sets foreign policy, not a clerk named Alex Vindman. He should have followed orders. The subversion is the policy a bureaucratic shadow government laid out illicitly.
The diplomats work for him, it’s not the other way around.
Vindman Should Be Shown the Door
The leaker Vindman did not follow the chain of command, leaked to others, and wrote a memo to himself about gossip that he says was told to him by another alleged diplomat who found Trump’s call “crazy,” “frightening” and lacking national security substance.
Vindman was told to be silent — not leak — but he disobeyed orders. The Washington Post conjectured it was proof of a cover up and they verified it with quotes from anonymous sources who may or may not exist or may or may not have said it.
The rest of the article is conjecture and rehashing backed up by new anonymous quotes. They did their best to nullify leaks from Morrison’s testimony which obliterates Vindman’s. Now the House Democrats are considering bringing in Vindman’s identical tweet to basically redo his brother’s testimony — identically, no doubt.
We have seen the transcript, and there is no quid or pro or quo.
WE’VE SEEN THE TRANSCRIPT AND THERE IS NO CRIME
Not only is the transcript available for all to read, it doesn’t support the leftist arguments. The President had an obligation to follow up on possible corruption in the 2016 election and to determine if a man who would be president is involved in corruption. He has the authority as the person in charge of foreign affairs and under the 1999 U.S.-Ukraine Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty.
Angelo Codevilla wrote at American Greatness, the real ground of the unending attacks on Trump is the ruling class’s decision to resist the 2016 election’s outcome. It is a revolution from which the Republic is unlikely ever to recover.
Intelligence has the ability to feign secrecy due to national security. It’s a perfect partnership.
Intelligence agencies have a significant role in the resistance seeking to destroy the current administration, Codevilla says. He notes that the vestiges of these agencies’ mystique, plus their legal claims to secrecy, have enabled the Democrats and the media to pretend the American people should regard partisan bureaucrats as wise and expert stewards of national security. They are no such thing.
He continued, The bureaucrats who have launched their attacks on Trump from behind the intelligence agencies’ shield of secrecy, and through the Democrat-controlled House Intelligence Committee’s hearings are part and parcel of the Democrat-led ruling class. We are asked to believe that the nation is being saved. In fact, some very dirty dogs are biting American voters.
How the Scam Works
Democratic politicians or the media find a manufactured crime Trump committed but they never explain what the crime is. Bureaucrats affirm the allegations and shout classified as needed.
The modus operandi is as follows: Democratic politicians assert that Trump committed crimes. They do so by re-assertion, without explaining what the criminality might be.
They feed these assertions to their media collaborators through bureaucrats as if these assertions resulted from authoritative, professional judgments.
They protect their bureaucratic allies from cross-examination by asserting the privileges of national security. Then they use the very media accounts they generate as the basis for more frankly political accusations.
President Trump, hampered by inexperience and unending attacks, never cleaned house of the prior administration’s dirty doers. They’ve answered Brennan’s call to rise up and unseat the President for no crime whatsoever. Their main goal is to win in the court of public opinion.
The deep state rules:
Former CIA director John McLaughlin on an intelligence official sparking Democrats’ attempt to impeach President Trump: “Thank God for the deep state” pic.twitter.com/UbU5b33I6Q
— Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) October 31, 2019