During last week’s public impeachment (sham) hearings on Capitol Hill, the desperate Democrats trotted out Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman.
Vindman, of the National Security Council, appeared before the House Intelligence Committee and offered nothing in the way of “evidence,” in my view, to prove that President Donald Trump did anything wrong during his July 25 phone call — of which we all read the transcript — with Ukraine President Volodymr Zelensky.
Vindman was reportedly on the July 25 phone call and says he “felt” alarmed at what he heard.
So, he testified about his “feelings,” which nobody except those in the resistance care about, in my view.
Regardless, he was hailed an “American hero” simply because he doesn’t like Trump.
However, one thing Vindman hasn’t been called is a “whistleblower.”
As a matter of fact, during Vindman’s testimony, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) even brought up the “whistleblower” after Vindman claimed he talked to “someone” high up in the CIA about Trump’s Ukraine call.
While he was questioning Vindman, impeachment ringmaster Schiff interrupted him and accused him of “outing the whistleblower.”
Jordon fired back, saying, “I don’t see how this is outing the whistleblower. The witness has testified that he does not know who the whistleblower is. You have said, even though no one believes you, you have said you don’t know who the whistleblower is …”
You can watch that video below:
So, why is it that Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) just referred to Vindman as a “whistleblower” in a recent tweet?
All along, we’ve been led to believe that Vindman heard the call and then went to the “whistleblower” and told him about it.
Which felt very coordinated and strange, to begin with.
So, many people were surprised when Schumer took to Twitter and wrote this tweet: “LTC Alexander Vindman and whistleblowers like him are patriots. They are standing up for the Constitution they swore an oath to defend. They don’t deserve these disgraceful attacks, and they must be protected from reprisals.”
So, the question is: Why would Schumer call Vindman a “whistleblower”?
Unless of course, he is the whistleblower?
A version of this piece originally appeared in WayneDupree.com; this piece is used by permission.
Read more at WayneDupree.com:
Melania Wows White House Onlookers in a Stunning and Unique ‘Tuxedo Jumpsuit’ (Photos)
The View’ Impeachment Debate Gets So Heated Meghan McCain Begs Producer to Go to Commercial
This Explains a Lot: Obama and Hillary Donor-Supporter Is Head of Chick-fil-A’s Charitable Foundation
The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LifeZette.