Yovanovitch makes it clear: Trump put his personal interests above the U.S.

[Bullseye]

Yovanovitch makes it clear: Trump put his personal interests above the U.S.

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie L. Yovanovich.



Madame Ambassador Marie Yovanovich served the Unites States with honor and distinction during her 33 years of State Department service.

This is anathema to that traitorous self-serving criminal in the White House who put his own personal interests ahead of the best interests of the United States. Trump even attacked her as she was testifying.

---

Mike Pompeo also comes across as the partisan toady that he is.

Ambassador Yovanovitch:

Among the most senior diplomats at @StateDept
Served our country for 33 years
Appointed by presidents of both parties

Yet the Pompeo State Dept wouldn't defend her against false accusations, because they were concerned about a tweet from the President. WTF?

She made nothing but her own prejudices clear. And the fact that Obama was concerned about Ukraine corruption and Hunter B.'s connection to Bursima. IF they had to rehearse on that topic you can bet the Obamaites KNEW there was a lot of **** in the air about that.

 

[justabubba]

So what? This is an impeachment hearing not an HR meeting or a therapy session. She added nothing

it was a hearing to elicit testimony revealing the corruption of our own president (so he could conduct corrupt activities in the ukraine without a diligent ambassador's oversight)
and that hearing was highly successful

 

[Rogue Valley]

She made nothing but her own prejudices clear.

She received a standing ovation when the public House session was adjourned.

 

[humbolt]

To investigate facets of the whistle-blower complaint, and go where the evidence led.

Uh huh. Looks like it's going everywhere and anywhere. So Schiff's stated reason was just a pretext for another fishing trip. Yovanovitch had nothing to say of any relevance. She, like Taylor, are really pissed because bureaucrats don't dictate foreign policy. Too bad.

 

[trouble13]

please point out the fictitious parts and show us why we should find them other than credible

The entire opinion piece is nothing but washington post fan fiction for its subscribers.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Rogue Valley]

So Schiff's stated reason was just a pretext for another fishing trip.

If you believe that everything is already known before an inquiry is even commenced, then you're more pathetic than I imagined.

Yovanovitch had nothing to say of any relevance.

Certainly she did. Ms. Yovanovitch clearly articulated the many dangers to US National Security that Trump and Giuliani were promulgating.

She, like Taylor, are really pissed because bureaucrats don't dictate foreign policy. Too bad.

I'll take her 33 years of diplomatic experience every day over Trumps failed Twitter diplomacy.

 

[justabubba]

The entire opinion piece is nothing but washington post fan fiction for its subscribers.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

then there is nothing you can point to as being "fictitious"

as expected

 

[humbolt]

If you believe that everything is already known before an inquiry is even commenced, then you're more pathetic than I imagined.



Certainly she did. Ms. Yovanovitch clearly articulated the many dangers to US National Security that Trump and Giuliani were promulgating.



I'll take her 33 years of diplomatic experience every day over Trumps failed Twitter diplomacy.

If you believe a fishing trip of this nature is going anywhere meaningful, you're the one deluding yourself, not me.

Yovanovitch declared her opinions - nothing more.

And Biden has over 40 years of experience. He doesn't know what day it is, or where he is, and he's NOT NUTS! Don't talk to me about experience. The guy that has to fix your transmission six times has plenty of experience, too.

After the Arab Spring, Crimea, and Syria, I don't think you folks are in a position to comment on sound foreign policy. But thanks for trying, anyway.

 

[trouble13]

then there is nothing you can point to as being "fictitious"

as expected

You're right, they should add it to the articles of impeachment since its so true and egregious and all. Feel better now?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[justabubba]

You're right, they should add it to the articles of impeachment since its so true and egregious and all. Feel better now?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

you insisted the information was fiction

The entire opinion piece is nothing but washington post fan fiction for its subscribers.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

then you were unable to point to any fictitious element, when i challenged you to share it with us

so, you have been given an opportunity to defend your argument and you have failed

as was expected

 

[Rogue Valley]

If you believe a fishing trip of this nature is going anywhere meaningful, you're the one deluding yourself, not me.

Sorry bub, but most Americans know extortion when they see it.

Yovanovitch declared her opinions - nothing more.

She answered all questions.

And Biden has over 40 years of experience. He doesn't know what day it is, or where he is, and he's NOT NUTS! Don't talk to me about experience. The guy that has to fix your transmission six times has plenty of experience, too.

I'll talk about anything that I want to talk about. Take your Trump bullying elsewhere.

After the Arab Spring, Crimea, and Syria, I don't think you folks are in a position to comment on sound foreign policy. But thanks for trying, anyway.

Yes, you're that bad at this, and a Trump cultist all the way.

No sense talking with you. You're completely brainwashed.

 

[Bullseye]

She received a standing ovation when the public House session was adjourned.

So what?

 

[justabubba]

So what?

gives us a general indication about what the general public felt about her testimony

 

[Jonsa]

1) She worked for 4 Republican Presidents starting with Reagan
2) Nobody in the State Dept contested her credentials as an effective fighter against corruption and I would simply suggest that their opinion is more reliable than anything posters here are going to come up with
3) Rudy and his gang had been trying to have her recalled since 2018. They had little time left to pull off their scam for Fat Donald and for themselves by 2019. They finally torpedoed her. She was recalled the day Zalinsky was inaugurated. What they didn't expect was that Pompeo would appoint Taylor, a tough experienced Charge d' Affairs candidate that immediately went into the Acting Ambassador role. Taylor came up to speed faster than drunken Rudy anticipated and the gig was up. I suspect Fat Donald is not happy with Pompeo. Suddenly Taylor started making noise, Sondland could not keep his BIG MOUTH SHUT (what an idiot) and Igor and Lev were just a little too "gamey" for their own good. Nice choice of partners Don and Rudy. Congress started to make noise about the delay in sending the Military Aid and there were already OMB Officers nervous because they knew holding the funds was illegal. So the funds had to be released.

Poor DonDon. Apparently he did not know that if he had held on for two more days, Zalinsky would have given him his public announcement of Investigations on CNN no less. Dumbass DonDon....lost his nerve and premature ejaculated.....probably something Melania knows something about.

missed it by that much.

fate be blessed.

 

[trouble13]

you insisted the information was fiction

then you were unable to point to any fictitious element, when i challenged you to share it with us

so, you have been given an opportunity to defend your argument and you have failed

as was expected

Is that so.... lets disect this fairytale line by line, shall we? Why yes we shall
1. Firing her is inconsistent with US interests?
Except the newly elected president of Ukraine expressed concerns with her being the ambassador and it is in our interests to have a congenial relationship
2. Her testimony was compelling?
More like it was unneeded clutter
3. Her firing was orchastrated by corrupt Ukrainian actors she was trying to neutralize?
Might be true but no proof its just a conspiracy theory .
4. Firing her damaged US diplomacy around the world?
Absurd nonsense
5. Trump abused her on twitter?
Criticizing her job performance isn't abuse
6. Democrats were right to call it witness intimidation?
Not even close to being that
7. Lutenski launched a smear campagin against her in conjunction with Guiliani and 2 businessmen?
Just a continuation of the same CT in point 3
8. Lutenski won over Guiliani with false claims on Biden?
0 proof to validate that claim
9. Lutenski got Trumps ear by msking large contributions to a PAC.
No proof again, just speculation
10. They shared baseless accusations with Trump and convinced him to remove her?
They dont know what was shared with him or why he removed her.
11. The state dept fully understood the accusations against her were false?
The post has no idea what the state dept understood.
12. Then 2 questions are posed to the reader.
How could our system fail like this? It assumes the system failed when that is undetermined.
How is it that foreign corrupt interests can manipulate our gov?
Another faulty question that trys to get the reader yo assume something that's undetermined.

Like i said its nothing but a bunch of fan fiction for the left.





Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Jonsa]

Which in this case have nothing whatever to do with the issue at hand. Yovanovitch was recalled. Big deal. She claims she was there to fight corruption, but I've yet to hear of even a single instance of her doing that. Not one. Maybe you can share one with us.

Oh you mean like the event she was hosting an embassy award ceremony for a ukrainian corruption fighter who was murdered by an acid attack? Are you familiar with the embassy's COMPREHENSIVE anti corruption programs?

Easy to attack from ignorance and maintain the indefensible conduct of so many in the administration starting with the Dear Leader who got duped into believing the most idiotic conspiracy theories. No wonder he's the greatest useful idiot in the history of the intell community.

 

[trouble13]

gives us a general indication about what the general public felt about her testimony

You think that was the heneral public in attendance, lmao

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Jonsa]

Is that so.... lets disect this fairytale line by line, shall we? Why yes we shall
1. Firing her is inconsistent with US interests?
Except the newly elected president of Ukraine expressed concerns with jer being the ambassador and it is in our interests to have a congenial relationship
2. Her testimony was compelling?
More like it was unneeded clutter
3. Her firing was orchastrated by corrupt ukrain actors she was trying to neutralize?
Might be true but no proof its just a conspiracy theory .
4. Firing her damaged US diplomacy around the world?
Absurd nonsense
5. Trump abused her on twitter?
Criticizing her jpb performance isnt abuse
6. Democrats were right to call it witness intimidation?
Not even close to being that
7. Lutenski launched a smear campagin against her in conjunction with Guiliani and 2 businessmen?
Just a continuation of the same CT in point 3
8. Lutenski won over Guiliani with false claims on Biden?
0 proof to validaye that claim
9. Lutenski got Trumps ear by msking large contributions to a PAC.
No proof again, just speculation
10. They shared baseless accusations with Trump and convinced him to remove her?
They dont know what was shared with him or why he removed her.
11. The state dept fully understood the accusations against her were false?
The post has no idea what the state dept understood.
12. Then 2 questions are posed to the reader.
How could our system fail like this? It assumes the system failed when that is undetermined.
How is it that foreign corrupt interests can manipulate our gov?
Another faulty question that trys to get the reader yo assume something that's undetermined.

Like i said its nothing but a bunch of fan fiction for the left.





Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Wow 0 outta 12.
I see you didn't watch her testimony nor are you actually following all the bouncy balls.

 

[Jonsa]

Oh, you think she added something to impeachment? What was it?

I guess you missed how she blew a few trumpian defenses completely out of the water.

I guess you missed how she detailed how guiliani and an alternative channel were screwing with official foreign policy

I guess you missed the fact that she clearly identified the people who Guliani was running around with and listening to in ukraine were actually corrupt actors.

I guess you missed the fact that the prosecutor that got fired was fired for not fighting corruption and recanted some of his accusations about the ambassador

I guess you missed the various anti-corruption programs that she had implemented.


Made a helluva an impression as one of America's finest public servants and is impervious to the attempted sleazy slurs from that master of them.

 

[Jonsa]

You think that was the heneral public in attendance, lmao

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

I guess you also missed her standing ovation from the public at the end of the session. Keep laughing its a good look.

 

[trouble13]

Wow 0 outta 12.
I see you didn't watch her testimony nor are you actually following all the bouncy balls.

Wow such a compelling repudiation i dont know how i ever could dispute you

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[trouble13]

I guess you also missed her standing ovation from the public at the end of the session. Keep laughing its a good look.

Clearly you have won again, lol

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[humbolt]

Sorry bub, but most Americans know extortion when they see it.



She answered all questions.



I'll talk about anything that I want to talk about. Take your Trump bullying elsewhere.



Yes, you're that bad at this, and a Trump cultist all the way.

No sense talking with you. You're completely brainwashed.

Most democrats do, that's for sure. The big three are extortion, racketeering, and loan sharking. I know you have the first two covered, but tell me, are you guys into loan sharking too now? Maybe Biden...

As nearly as anyone with a brain can tell, many were prevented from asking her questions at all, so your claim has no merit.

I'm not trying to stop you from talking. The more you talk, the less credible you are. I'm fine with that.

And you support Schiff. Good luck. Tell me about all that collusion evidence he has. I'll wait.

 

[Jonsa]

Wow such a compelling repudiation i dont know how i ever could dispute you

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Brandolini's law being what it is.

You make broad unsubstantiated claims and I point out that you haven't bothered to watch or read for yourself, yet you have these strong opinions predicated on that lack of knowledge.

So if you are looking for "compelling" repudiation of your perception, I suggest you first present a compelling informed argument.

 

[humbolt]

Oh you mean like the event she was hosting an embassy award ceremony for a ukrainian corruption fighter who was murdered by an acid attack? Are you familiar with the embassy's COMPREHENSIVE anti corruption programs?

Easy to attack from ignorance and maintain the indefensible conduct of so many in the administration starting with the Dear Leader who got duped into believing the most idiotic conspiracy theories. No wonder he's the greatest useful idiot in the history of the intell community.

Whew! Let me tell ya, nothing - and I mean nothing - puts a stop to corruption like an embassy award ceremony. I bet all those corrupt guys are quaking in their boots at that one.