Another dirty Democrat scheme: Take Trump down using the Yovanovich Bewitch ploy

[Moot]

If she had been fighting corruption in Ukraine she would not have testified that she prohibited Lutsenko from talking with the FBI. Ukrainian officials claimed she was obstructing investigations into American corruption in Ukraine and she said she was not. By preventing the Ukrainian prosecutor from talking with the FBI she proves she was lying about fighting corruption and Lutsenko was telling the truth.

She didn't say that...the corrupt prosecutor, Lutsenko did...and he later recanted and said she didn't do anything wrong. You seem to be having trouble with information that the general public knew five months ago.

The US credit rating was lowered under Obama for the first time in history because the Obama administration did not have a plan for paying back all the money it was borrowing to temporarily buy the US out of fiscal depression.

This thread isn't about Obama or the economy. So stop trying to hijack the thread with your knownothingaboutisms.

 

[HumblePi]

Let me try again. Are you saying Yovanovitch did not serve in the Obama administration for 8 years? Did Obama ever fire any former ambassadors under Bush? If so, why did he not fire Yovanovitch unless she served him well?

She served under SEVEN presidents! Of course, but "firing" and replacing are two different thing, especially when there is absolutely NO reason whatsoever to replace Marie Yovanovitch. She wasn't the ambassador to some "****-hole" that matters little in the scheme of our election, she was ambassador to one of the most pivotal countries struggling for democracy, one that is engaged in a war with Russia. That's an extremely important ambassadorship.

And by the way, everything you claimed that was said in Wikipedia was 100% false, and I proved it to be so.

 

[rickc]

Oh but there was a reason to fire her.

Giuliani didn't want her in the way of his plans.

Trump sent Sondland to take his deal to Zelensky. No way Yovanovitch would have done that.

 

[HumblePi]

Political party does not matter in analyzing the facts. Joe Biden bragged about forcing the Ukraine president to fire Viktor Shokin for supposedly not being aggressive in investigating corruption in Ukraine. That was a huge lie and Joe Biden was criminally wrong for doing that for many reasons. First, it was none of his business how Ukraine was conducting investigations into internal corruption. Second, it was wrong for him to threaten to withhold massive amounts of promised US aid if the president did not fire Shokin. Third, it was the corruption of Burisma and its owner Mykola Zlochevsky which were the subject of concern among other nations and which Biden accused Shokin of not pursuing aggressively enough, and yet Burisma was the corrupt company his son worked for. Furthermore, Shokin had seized Zlochvesky's assets in early February 2016, initiating a firestorm of activity between Burisma officials (including Hunter Biden and Devon Archer) and US government officials in the State Department and in the Obama administration. Within days Joe Biden was calling the Ukrainian president demanding he fire Shokin, and Shokin was fired that same month.

Do you really believe that Joe Biden would insist that Shokin be fired and use a few hundred million as the carrot for Ukraine to get rid of his corruption? NO. Joe Biden was working on behalf of the EU and the IMF which was holding back FORTY BILLION DOLLARS of aid to Ukraine because of their corruption. Joe Biden was the point man for Christine leGarde and others EU members to get them to clean up their act before billions of dollars in foreign aide would be sifted through the pockets of corrupt prosecutors.

Millions of US dollars is peanuts compared to what the IMF was handing over to Ukraine.

IMF warns Ukraine it will halt $40bn bailout unless corruption stops | World news | The Guardian

 

[Obscurity]

Isn't that natural though? Thre more extreme right the Republicans go the more vocal and numerous the far left has to be.

Yes, it's self defense. The right wing has literally resorted to calling folks like you and I enemies of the country.

 

[Obscurity]

What question? Could Yovanovitch have been effective serving Trump in spite of political ideology? Yes.

Thank you.

Now. Explain to me how YOU GET OFF calling her a partisan hack?

Why didn't he just fire her, as he had the authority to do? Why the illegal surveillance? Why the smear campaign?

 

[Ikari]

Everything you said is a lie.

I think you've pretty well summarized the great bulk of his arguments on this site.

 

[ludin]

Obama fired all the Bush ambassadors when he took office too bad Trump didn't do the same.

It was the biggest mistake that he made keeping past obama appointee's in place.
he should have fired every single one of them.

never keep past administration officials in place when they are working against you.

 

[ludin]

Trump was way too trusting as a novice.

as soon as all these leaks started happening he should have fired them all then.
comey and mccabe should be brought up on federal charges.

and right now wray should be fired for not doing his damn job and pulling a comey.
these people broke the law and they refuse to do anything about it.

comey was more of a scum bag than what we first thought.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Yes, it's self defense. The right wing has literally resorted to calling folks like you and I enemies of the country.

i've known these people for almost 60 years. i've known what they were really like for probably 40 years. they have confided their real feeling to me because i'm almost 60 and i'm white and look like many of them and live in the south. i've even played along when they actually open up just to see how far they'd go. it's really, really ugly. hillary was way too nice when describing them (and i said so at the time).

heck, just the white supremacists prove that. but that's only part of it. the hate controls them (and it's what Sean and Rush use to make themselves richer). a really genius strategy by those two.

 

[marke]

She served under SEVEN presidents! Of course, but "firing" and replacing are two different thing, especially when there is absolutely NO reason whatsoever to replace Marie Yovanovitch. She wasn't the ambassador to some "****-hole" that matters little in the scheme of our election, she was ambassador to one of the most pivotal countries struggling for democracy, one that is engaged in a war with Russia. That's an extremely important ambassadorship.

And by the way, everything you claimed that was said in Wikipedia was 100% false, and I proved it to be so.

She was ambassador to Armenia under Bush and, even though Obama had requested all ambassadors tender their resignations in Jan 2009, she was allowed to remain at Armenia until 2011, at which time she served under Obama in other capacities. Obama appointed her to Ukraine in May, 2016, shortly after Obama and Biden had pressured Ukraine to fire Shokin for not investigating Burisma, Hunter Biden's company, like they wanted. So Yovanovitch was well aware that the Bidens were involved in the investigations into the corrupt business owned by Mykola Zlochevsky and she should have been willing for Shokin's replacement to talk with the FBI about Burisma and Zlochevsky. The fact that she would not allow the Ukraine prosecutor to talk with the FBI has an inescapable appearance of obstruction on her part.
Why would she not want Lutsenko talking with the FBI about Burisma and Biden? She did not offer a reasonable explanation for her hindrence or obstruction, even though she did offer what amounted to a lame excuse that did nothing to make her testimony more believable than Lutsenko. Lutsenko testified about the corruption related to Burisma and Yovanovitch called him a liar for that. To the contrary, she is the liar and Trump was right to fire her.

 

[marke]

She didn't say that...the corrupt prosecutor, Lutsenko did...and he later recanted and said she didn't do anything wrong. You seem to be having trouble with information that the general public knew five months ago.

This thread isn't about Obama or the economy. So stop trying to hijack the thread with your knownothingaboutisms.

She testified that she refused to allow Lutsenko to talk with the FBI at the embassy. She could hardly say she did allow him to talk with the FBI because she knew the FBI would know he did not talk with the FBI.

Lutsenko said the same thing and neither of them recanted that testimony and how could they if both said the same thing?

 

[marke]

Do you really believe that Joe Biden would insist that Shokin be fired and use a few hundred million as the carrot for Ukraine to get rid of his corruption? NO. Joe Biden was working on behalf of the EU and the IMF which was holding back FORTY BILLION DOLLARS of aid to Ukraine because of their corruption. Joe Biden was the point man for Christine leGarde and others EU members to get them to clean up their act before billions of dollars in foreign aide would be sifted through the pockets of corrupt prosecutors.

Millions of US dollars is peanuts compared to what the IMF was handing over to Ukraine.

IMF warns Ukraine it will halt $40bn bailout unless corruption stops | World news | The Guardian

Democrat spin is pure lying junk, but even the democrat spin reveals the Biden's corruption in all of this. Joe Biden claimed other nations were complaining about the fact that Ukraine was not aggressive enough in its investigation of Burisma, so just a few days after Shokin seized Burisma assets he had Shokin fired for supposedly not doing enough to pressure Burisma, Hunter Biden's employer. What did Biden demand of Ukraine at the threat of losing a billion dollars in aid? That Ukraine fire the prosecutor who had Hunter Biden in his sights. What did Joe Biden not demand? That Ukraine replace Shokin with a prosecutor who would be more aggressive investigating Burisma. That proves Biden was not trying to get more pressure put on Burisma, but less pressure. By Biden's own testimony. You can't make this stuff up.

 

[marke]

Thank you.

Now. Explain to me how YOU GET OFF calling her a partisan hack?

Why didn't he just fire her, as he had the authority to do? Why the illegal surveillance? Why the smear campaign?

I call her a partisan hack because she and Vindmann testified they conducted foreign diplomacy in accordance with previously accepted partisan guidelines in opposition to Trump's policies. Those government employees were not hired to do their own will, but the will of their President.

 

[Somerville]

I call her a partisan hack because she and Vindmann testified they conducted foreign diplomacy in accordance with previously accepted partisan guidelines in opposition to Trump's policies. Those government employees were not hired to do their own will, but the will of their President.

They were not "previously accepted partisan guidelines", rather they were the accepted diplomatic standards as exercised by all of the administrations that Ambassador Yovanovitch had worked for.

Sorry - well, not really - American diplomats are meant to support the interests of the United States and not the whims and dreams of the president, a man who has zero knowledge of the world and history, yet believes he's the 'smartest guy in the room'. As former Sec of State Tillerson said, following a meeting with Pentagon and security officials - the man is a "****ing moron"

 

[Moot]

She testified that she refused to allow Lutsenko to talk with the FBI at the embassy. She could hardly say she did allow him to talk with the FBI because she knew the FBI would know he did not talk with the FBI.

Lutsenko said the same thing and neither of them recanted that testimony and how could they if both said the same thing?

You're confused. Yovanovitch didn't stop Lutsenko from talking to the FBI....she simply told him that if he wanted to talk to the FBI that he should contact the FBI legal attache' in Kyiv, instead of the embassy. Apparently, Lutsenko didn't like that idea and so he started spreading rumors about her....

"...Per Yovanovitch, Lutsenko asked the US embassy to set up meetings with top US law enforcement officials from the FBI or Justice Department. But Yovanovitch says she objected to that because that’s not the typical way these things are handled. Instead, she encouraged him to meet with the FBI’s legal attaché in Kyiv. “I don’t think he really appreciated it,” she told investigators.

In connection with this effort, Lutsenko also began spreading what Yovanovitch says was a completely fabricated story about her — that she gave him a list of people she didn’t want him to prosecute. (Lutsenko has since recanted that story.) Rumors also spread that she was a Trump critic. The goal of these rumors seems to have been to push her out of the ambassadorship.

Only gradually, though, did Yovanovitch realize the extent of the smear campaign against her. In February 2019, she said, a senior Ukrainian official “told me I really needed to watch my back.”..."

Marie Yovanovitch’s testimony, explained: Impeachment transcript released - Vox​

 

[marke]

They were not "previously accepted partisan guidelines", rather they were the accepted diplomatic standards as exercised by all of the administrations that Ambassador Yovanovitch had worked for.

Yovanovitch was too stupid to be ambassador if she thought she was to give greater allegiance to "Accepted Obama standards" than to Trump's standards.

 

[Moot]

She was defending democrat corruption all while claiming she was fighting corruption. She lied for the democrat party. Trump had good reasons for firing her.

There are good reasons to fire Trump, too.

So why doesn't Pompeo agree with Trump about the Ambassador? Since he was her boss...shouldn't he be supporting Trump's reasons for firing her? Or maybe he's lying for the democrat party, too...is that it?

 

[JustHanging]

Who is Yovanovich? The Obama and Hillary darling state department official who was fired for improper behavior in May 2019. That did not sit well with democrat seditionists who claimed the ambassador as one of their own. Trump was again demonstrating his right to dismiss government employees who hold their position at his pleasure and that just fired up democrats even more to unseat Trump by hook or crook.

Why did Trump fire Yovanovich? Because she proved untrustworthy. Trump officials were investigating Ukrainian corruption in the 2016 election and Yovanovich was obstructing that investigation. One evidence of her obstruction was revealed in Congressional impeachment hearing of 2019 in which she admitted she blocked Ukrainian prosecutor from meeting with US Justice Department officials at the US embassy. It was likely that obstruction of an investigation which was the biggest factor in Trump's dismissal of Yovanovich.

https://www.intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/20191104_yovanovitch_transcript_excerpts_final.pdf


Excerpts from Joint Deposition, Marie "Masha" Yovanovitch, October 11, 2019

So you're saying the Democrats are discrediting Trump by putting Yovanovitch into reruns of Bewitched.

That's some pretty Deep State **** right there.

 

[marke]

You're confused. Yovanovitch didn't stop Lutsenko from talking to the FBI....she simply told him that if he wanted to talk to the FBI that he should contact the FBI legal attache' in Kyiv, instead of the embassy. Apparently, Lutsenko didn't like that idea and so he started spreading rumors about her....

She did not want Lutsenko talking with the FBI at the US embassy in Ukraine. Why? Because, she said, she had a better location for them to conduct a meeting. Did she consult with Trump about that rogue decision? Obviously not, because, as we found out l, Trump wanted the Ukrainian officials to meet with American investigators in Ukraine. Trump was right to fire her for impeding an investigation even though she may have thought her path to investigation was better than the one Lutsenko asked for. She shpoulod have consulted with Bolton, Pompeo or Trump before making such a bad decision. It may be true that Lutsenko complained to Guilianni that Yovanovitch was impeding his investigation and when Guiliani told Triump that he fired her for that.

 

[Moot]

Yovanovitch was too stupid to be ambassador if she thought she was to give greater allegiance to "Accepted Obama standards" than to Trump's standards.

You mean she'd have to lower herself to meet Trump's standards like you have?

 

[Moot]

She did not want Lutsenko talking with the FBI at the US embassy in Ukraine. Why? Because, she said, she had a better location for them to conduct a meeting. Did she consult with Trump about that rogue decision? Obviously not, because, as we found out l, Trump wanted the Ukrainian officials to meet with American investigators in Ukraine. Trump was right to fire her for impeding an investigation even though she may have thought her path to investigation was better than the one Lutsenko asked for. She shpoulod have consulted with Bolton, Pompeo or Trump before making such a bad decision. It may be true that Lutsenko complained to Guilianni that Yovanovitch was impeding his investigation and when Guiliani told Triump that he fired her for that.

:liar

I gave you the benefit of doubt and now you're just making **** up...and lying for Trump.

Trump may have had a right to fire her...but he didn't have a good reason. Instead, he had to make one up and no one is buying it...not even Pompeo.

 

[marke]

There are good reasons to fire Trump, too.

So why doesn't Pompeo agree with Trump about the Ambassador? Since he was her boss...shouldn't he be supporting Trump's reasons for firing her? Or maybe he's lying for the democrat party, too...is that it?

Who cares whether Pompeo agrees with Trump or not. Unlike Yovanovitch, Lt. Col Vindmann, James Comey, and dozens of others, Pompeo had the good judgment to submit to and support Trump as his boss.

 

[marke]

So you're saying the Democrats are discrediting Trump by putting Yovanovitch into reruns of Bewitched.

That's some pretty Deep State **** right there.

Yovanowitch may be a bitch but that is likely because she never learned how to properly address, respect and support her superiors.

 

[marke]

You mean she'd have to lower herself to meet Trump's standards like you have?

If she was too high and mighty for Trump then she had no business trying to implement his policies in Ukraine.