Alexander Vindman is the latest “bombshell” witness who ended up telling us essentially nothing new regarding the Trump-Ukraine phone call at the heart of the current impeachment push.

Shockingly, when you already have the transcript, some guy’s opinions about it turn out to be fairly irrelevant. No matter how “concerned” he was or how many people he ran his mouth to (which was likely illegal), the content of the call is what it is. Even his claim of some revisions he wanted in the rough transcript being rejected ended up being a dud, as other witnesses testified there was nothing material missing and Democrats punted on making the matter a focus.

The value of Vindman’s testimony wasn’t that he revealed anything noteworthy about Donald Trump. It was that he revealed the very disturbing way in which the foreign policy establishment in Washington views our democratic process.

Take this note from Brit Hume about something Vindman says in his opening statement.

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

Crazy me. Here I thought we elected a President to set foreign policy and carry out the will of the voters. It turns out that unelected bureaucrats are actually the ones constitutionally appointed to carry out the international interests of the United States.

This is not only insane, it’s dangerous. And don’t be fooled, this is a common sentiment within the “deep state,” whether it be the CIA, FBI, State Department, or even the NSC. These people see themselves as above the people, executing their will regardless of what the result of an election may be.

And yet this nicely sums up the present divide: Do the American people get to elect a president? Or is the unelected bureaucracy our leader? https://t.co/5dPNKuxF80

— Mollie (@MZHemingway) November 2, 2019

I tried to give Vindman the benefit of the doubt, including writing a piece saying Republicans should lay off him. But the more we learn about him, the more I think he hasn’t earned that kind of treatment. The arrogance of some non-name NSC member, with no accountability to voters, proclaiming a duly elected President is “subverting” foreign policy is just mind-blowing. It’s a good case for every single President cleaning house the moment they take office. These people need to be cut down to size and reminded that we live in a Republic, and not the banana kind.

The more we learn about this Ukraine matter, the more it’s clear that this is just a bunch of whiney bureaucrats who are mad they weren’t getting their way. It was not Vindman’s job to look out for Ukraine’s well being. I don’t care if the Russians were dropping nukes on them, it’s the President’s role to set our posture toward another nation.

Further, Vindman’s action of going around the President and working his own foreign policy with Ukraine was wholly improper. The military should seriously consider discipline for his actions. There’s also the fact that he was likely a source to the whistle-blower, which means Vindman illegally leaked classified information.

The DOJ needs to be taking notes because when this impeachment fiasco is over in a few months (and it will be over with Trump still President), legal retribution needs to be brought against every single person who broke the law to push this garbage.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.