Friday, November 15, 2019

My Take On Today's Impeachment Inquiry Hearing

Marie Yovanovitch, former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, testifies before a House Intelligence Committee hearing as part of the impeachment inquiry into U.S. President Donald Trump on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., November 15, 2019. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

WNU Editor: A minor player in this entire impeachment affair, and not a very good witness at that. And Marie Yovanovitch is the third "star witness" in this impeachment inquiry?!?!? I do not know why Marie Yovanovitch is there. Her main complaint is that the White House was not using regular diplomatic channels. But for purposes of this inquiry she witnessed nothing that pertains to why President Trump should be impeached. Her only reason why she is there is because she is upset that she was removed as ambassador. Big deal. Diplomats are always removed and/or transferred somewhere else. And after listening to her this morning, I would have removed her also. I can also now understand why President Trump wanted to use other channels. Diplomats serve at the pleasure of the President, and they do not have a say on what diplomacy should be pursued. Their job is to implement the policy of the President. What I saw on Wednesday and what I saw this morning confirms to me that these highly paid diplomats are not only way over-valued, but they were never interested in pursuing President Trump's Ukraine policy. In a normal situation they would be told to resign or be reassigned. How they are able to stay in their jobs this long perplexes me.  As to how the media will package this testimony, they are going to focus on Presdient Trump's tweet this morning .... 'Very intimidating' - Trump launches Twitter attack on witness during impeachment testimony (Reuters).

Update: Another closed session on this impeachment inquiry takes place this afternoon. So much for open sessions.

22 comments:

Anonymous said...


WaPo fact-checked only Republicans after first day of impeachment inquiry hearings

www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/11/wapo_only_factchecked_republicans_after_first_day_of_impeachment_inquiry_hearings.html

The usual in journalism or justice

Anonymous said...


They need closed sessions to control (or try to) the narrative via leaks and their willing running-dog media lackeys.

The open sessions have not helped their case at all. The needle has not moved the way they hoped it would.

Just moire smoke and mirrors by Schiff

Same Schiff, Different Day.

Anonymous said...

Closed sessions take place when classified stuff must be discussed. To ignore that simple fact is tragically biased, one sided, and simply dumb

Anonymous said...

Closed serssion: will GOP House members on these hearings be present? If so, then why upset? If not, indicate that

Anonymous said...


Fred, you know damn well that the closed session is precisely so democrats can leak and the Democrat Media Complex can shape a dishonest narrative.

Also there is the fact that none of this stuff is intel related. The phone calls have been declassified. They are usually classified Confidential NOFORN.

As confidential info, they would have to be put on a classified server despite how much Democrat politicians and activists like you lie.

Any the phone calls were declassified and I have not seen anything that was classified. So closed doors in the intel committee of all places is an abuse of power by Pelosi and Schiff.

PS: Fred, why do you have your kids or wife post for you?

Anonymous said...

Do not tell me what I think...the closed door sessions of this House s members. prove otherwise.
my kids? My "kids" are grown, out of the house.
How do you know what is intel related if it is not out there to inspect?
in sum: you are full of beans

Anonymous said...

Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) dismissed Republican suggestions that Marie Yovanovitch securing a fellowship at Georgetown University following her ouster as ambassador meant “this is all okay.”

“It not the end of a Hallmark movie, it's the end of a really bad reality TV show," he said, earning additional laughter when he added that this is "brought to you by someone who knows a lot about that."

Anonymous said...

But it was a presidential tweet in real time—not anything the veteran diplomat said—that could make it into an article Democrats draft to seek Trump’s removal from office.

“Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad,” the president tweeted at 10:01 a.m. eastern time, while Yovanovitch was answering questions from the Democratic-committee counsel, Daniel Goldman. Trump implied that Yovanovitch had contributed to the deterioration of countries where she was stationed on the president’s behalf, and he reiterated that he had the “absolute right to appoint ambassadors.” He falsely suggested that President Zelensky had asked for her removal as ambassador, even though the phone call in which both Trump and Zelensky criticized Yovanovitch occurred months after she was recalled to U.S. soil.

Anonymous said...

People can share computer accounts And your wife lives with you doesn't she?

I just remember the Rutgers project where you went off on tangents and had to be nudged back toward center.

Sometimes your comments besides being arch-liberal seem to be those of someone struggling. Other times they are clear. People have good and bad days, but I wonder if your wife sometimes jumps in to defend her husband. It would explain the comments that have some clarity and are not a total mess grammatically.

fred said...

Ah, glad to see you read the Rutgers oral history of veterans who served their nation and lived in NJ...golly, two-plus hours without notes and I might have gone off-topic! wow. Shame I was not as sharp and on target as you...would you like me to sign a copy of what you must have close to your computer? My wife, since you ask, sends regards

BREAKING: House Democrats had decried President Trump’s criticism of Marie Yovanovitch, former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, during her testimony Friday in the House impeachment probe, calling his remarks “witness intimidation.”

At a White House event on health care, Trump defended his comments: “I have the right to speak; I have freedom of speech, just like other people do.”

Roger Smith said...


Schiff is just not clever enough to pull this off. His balloons start out full and have been shown to quickly flatten.
What he says and what comes out after a little sleuthing on the part of some in the media are two different things. As a result his credibility is weakened and his charges increasingly questioned. And that is no one's fault but his.
As for the three plus million paid to various bidens and kerrys...just what did they do to "earn" this sum? As far as I can see Burisma was buying INFLUENCE. They never contacted me. And like biden's son, I too know that one puts oil in a car's engine at certain times. And probably unlike biden's son, I DO put it in my engine.
Where's my cut for my "knowledge" of the petroleum industry, Burisma?

Anonymous said...

That oral history was of some elderly person who was slow and confused as if they had deterioration. Others can read it for themselves and judge.


You do not try to be on target at all. You have ceased any serious attempt at learning. Last time I suggested it your words were to the effect "FU".

Myself, I am seriously considering taking a geology course or 2 or 3 of them. Believe it or not geology related to climate. You have no need to take a course for enrichment or whatever. You have your tribal shamans.



Anonymous said...

CNN legal analyst Elie Honig blasted Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) for arguing that President Donald Trump hadn’t engaged in witness intimidation by tweeting attacks on a former ambassador as she testified against him in the impeachment inquiry.

Jordan argued the tweet can’t be witness intimidation because Marie Yovanovitch wouldn’t have known about the attack if Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) hadn’t read it to her, but Honig said the GOP lawmaker’s claim was ridiculous.

“His point is nonsensical,” Honig said. “Of course, she was going to find out about a tweet that went out to 60 million people-plus. The law covers any way you look regarding timing.”

“There are two different statutes,” he added. “One of them is witness tampering, that covers actions before or during witness testimony. The other is witness retaliation, that covers actions intended to intimidate a witness or retaliate after the fact, so it doesn’t really matter when she would have found out.”

Legal analyst Laura Coates agreed, saying Jordan’s argument was as “nonsensical” as saying your house wasn’t robbed because you weren’t home.

“That’s how you said nonsensical, how stupid his actual argument is,” Coates said. “(The idea that) if they hadn’t told her about it she wouldn’t have felt threatened. What happens afterwards? When the camera goes off on her she has to go back to live her life, the same people told by corrupt Ukrainians to watch out and now she has to watch out because people who may be sycophants or minions of the president or crazed in some way also takes issue with her testimony.”

Coates added that Schiff immediately addressed Trump’s tweets, because they could also be taken as a threat by other witnesses who have not yet testified.

“The reason he had to is because he knows full well tomorrow there is a testimony from somebody and next week, there are people watching, figuring out,’Listen, do you have our back or is it just for the camera or the sake of the democracy? Will I be protected?'” she said.

Anonymous said...

Parrpot,

I only reply and refute your inane dribble that you post here.

And you do post a lot of drivel.

Seriously, does anyone stalk you? Does anyone post anything at you stupid "Hey guys free pics of naked women" website?

People use to visit graveyards to figure you which babies dies in their 1st week after birth so they could steal their identities. Sometimes I wonder if intent trolls visit old folks homes to figure you whose identity they can steal. Why? Because it would be very hard to be as purposefully dumb as you. It must be trolling.

How much are you paid to troll?

Anonymous said...

#NoNutNovember: How Online Pornography is Hurting Men


Now figure the odds.

Anonymous said...

Any American citizen paying attention to the opening statement and testimony of Ms. Yovanovitch will experience a historic eureka moment.

This brave and heroic woman has no agenda other than to serve the country she loves. Her clear, straightforward depiction of the abuse and smears she received and the corruption of United States foreign policy and security to serve the political and financial interests of the president and his enablers cannot be ignored or dismissed.

Ambassador Yovanovitch deserves a Presidential Medal of Freedom. Instead she is defamed, dismissed and threatened.
Sign Up for Debatable

Agree to disagree, or disagree better? We'll help you understand the sharpest arguments on the most pressing issues of the week, from new and familiar voices.

Anyone, including the president and the Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee, who continues to attack Ambassador Yovanovitch will do so at considerable risk.

The American people deserve and expect their elected leaders to put the public interest ahead of their own personal interest in power and greed.

Anonymous said...

Parrot posted

Any American citizen paying attention...

Anonymous said...

The No. 3 Republican in the House says President Donald Trump “was wrong” to post tweets critical of former Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch during her testimony in the impeachment hearings.

Rep. Liz Cheney said Yovanovitch “clearly is somebody who’s been a public servant to the United States for decades and I don’t think the president should have done that.”

Anonymous said...

CHUDS. I'm a white man that benefitted greatly from the Trump tax cut.
CHUDS.

Anonymous said...

JUST IN!!

(CNN)David Holmes, the state department aide who overheard President Donald Trump's conversation with the US ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland, said that Sondland told Trump that the Ukranian President would do "anything you ask him to," and that he confirmed the Ukrainians were going to "do the investigation."
"Sondland told Trump that (Ukrainian President Volodymyr) Zelensky 'loves your ass,'" Holmes said, according to a copy of his opening statement obtained by CNN. "I then heard President Trump ask, 'So, he's gonna do the investigation?' Ambassador Sondland replied that 'he's gonna do it,' adding that President Zelensky will do 'anything you ask him to.'"
Holmes explained that Sondland placed the call to Trump, and he could hear Trump because the call was so loud in the restaurant where they were with two others.

Anonymous said...

Generals serve decades and many get political.

Diplomats serve decades and many get political.

So why the crying by Dims?

Just saying she is a diplomat and served decades does not mean she is not a political hack or being used.

www.ausa.org/articles/primer-generals-and-admirals-and-politics

Roger Smith said...


Much ado about nothing. It appears the ex-ambassador gave a mixed performance in Ukraine.
DJT is simply too unorthodox for many in government. There is too much rigidity.
This is how we've always done it....I don't care about the economy's gratifying employment figures, I just can't tolerate his wife's hair color. Impeach him.

Etc. Etc.

Frankly, whiners, shifty schiff is hilarious. Now go home and practice your faux outrage in front of the mirror. See if you can outdo gretta. I can't wait for something with "weasel" in it.