Col. A. Vindman

I served in a support roll that was less than distinguished. And, I worked for the VA for about 30-years. In one of my roles there I came in contact with a number of phonies in the "stolen glory," mode. Some were brought to my attention in my role in the Office of Public Affairs. I always state my service number, when questioned, it begins with US-567-******. I substituted the asterisks for privacy reasons. But, I learned it on May 8, 1968. I remember it to this day. If someone cannot remember thier Service Number (pre 1969) I question their claims. Unless someone makes an unusual claim, like being homeless after losing a leg in combat and winning the Medal of Honor, I take them at their word. If FlatJim says he served, I take him at his word. But, his demonstrated cognitive dissonance, if it was present during his service, would have resulted in a discharge under Article 635-200, an illegal induction due to disability. The military does not have a place for people who are this loosely wound. And, they would not burden the VA with a patient who is unable to dicern the difference between real facts and insane conspiracies like the Birther one.

My reference to a pre-1969 Service Number was a recognition that the SSN was used from mid-1968 forward. You passed my quiet test by knowing that. If you really believe as true, the information concerning the former president's birth certificate, you are probably delusional and I would recommend you seek help. If you just put this info out there to be provocative, it is losing its usefulness. Nobody cares about that crap anymore. I have not heard Lt. Col. Vindman say anything that would support your delusions about him, either. Remember, his testimony is not secret and prosecutors could bring charges if he was breaking the law. Unless the entire military is in on the conspiracy against Trump, that is.

If you want to be taken seriously, then you would not continue using alarmist rhetoric in an otherwise constitutional procedure. Saying otherwise makes you look like a crying child.

Thank you for your honesty. I'll cease impeding your personal howls of irrational anger toward invented insidious organizations at your leisure. But I will not entertain your fantasies as fact.

No. Calling you crying children is an observation, avoidable by not using alarmist rhetoric. Stating conspiracy theories as fact is alarmist rhetoric. And believing in a shadow government who can’t successfully rig the Electoral College is a fallacy in the logic of a shadow government.

Let me explain to you what alarmist rhetoric is since you may not know what it is.

Alarmist, noun, someone who is considered to be exaggerating a danger and so causing needless worry or panic.

Rhetoric, noun, the art of effective or persuasive speaking or writing, especially the use of figures of speech and other compositional techniques.

Examples of this in political commentary are using such terms as "Deep State", "Your President", "Demonrats" , "tRump" , "Republican'ts" , "Libtards", "Conservatards","RINOs", and "Coups" All these words are meant, in some way to either offend, excite, or revel in bias and exacerbate partisan views. I admit, that it is fun to revel and partake, but if your intention is to realistically persuade, especially those who may not share your opinion, it's best to not willfully antagonize them.

Did I antagonize you by calling you a "crying child"? Of course! Ad hominems, however, does not prevent one from making an argument against those who use them against one. But, if you take irrational positions that cannot be argued, then what is the point in arguing with those who are set in their ways when facts and evidence mean nothing when they can use conspiracy theories and psalms to shut down the argument?

I don't want you to sound like a crying child. I genuinely believe that Trump Supporters, not conservatives and Republicans, Trump Supporters, would not exist if they truly upheld their resignation to facts as they so erroneously claim to do so. Trump Supporters do not care about anything except protecting Trump and one-upping "Libtards" As a conservative, I find this more threatening than any conspiracy theory about a shadow government that can't successfully rig an election. I find Trump's incompetence and exacerbation of our political divide more divisive than any presidential impeachment. Partisan though it may be.