Yovanovitch Neatly Picks Apart GOP Talking Point That Ukraine Was Out To Get Trump
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Former ambassador to the Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch calmly dismantled Republican staff attorney Steve Castor’s line of questioning centered on the idea that Ukrainian officials were out to get then-candidate Donald Trump during the second half of her Friday hearing.
Castor started by bringing up Alexandra Chalupa, a former DNC contractor who conveyed her concerns about Paul Manafort’s hiring by the Trump campaign to her employers, due to his reputation in Ukraine. Republicans have painted her as the link between the Clinton campaign and Ukraine, part of their baseless conspiracy theory that the country meddled in the 2016 election.
Yovanovitch neatly brushed off Castor’s questioning, saying that she doesn’t recall ever even meeting Chalupa and didn’t have much further information about her.
Castor gave up and moved on to the black ledger, which revealed undisclosed payments to Manafort from former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych’s pro-Russian political party. Castor tried to spin Ukrainian journalist Serhiy Leshchenko’s exposing of the ledger as an anti-Trump attack.
“Just speaking about Mr. Leshchenko, he is an investigative journalist, as you said, and he got access to the black ledger and he published it, as I think journalists would do,” she responded. ” I don’t have any information to suggest that that was targeting President Trump.”
Yovanovitch shoots down black ledger line of questioning pic.twitter.com/bnKzs7RPJ2 — TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) November 15, 2019
Castor shifted gears and brought up an op-ed written by Valeriy Chaly, former Ukrainian Ambassador to the U.S., in which Chaly blasts Trump for musing that if elected, he may consider lifting the sanctions on Russia and making Crimea one of its territories.
Castor asked her if she could see how that piece of writing, regardless of the substance, could create the “perception” that the Ukrainian establishment was anti-Trump.
She replied that he was merely criticizing Trump’s policy position, and that Crimea’s status is a “tremendously sensitive issue” in Ukraine.
In his final feeble attempt to make out Ukrainians as hostile to then-candidate Trump, Castor brought up some anti-Trump comments Arsen Avakov, Ukrainian minister of internal affairs, made online.
“He said some real nasty things,” Castor said.
Yovanovitch raised her eyebrows. “Well, sometimes that happens on social media,” she responded, as the hearing room burst into laughter.
Tags
Who is online
77 visitors
The Republican lawyer who was questioning Yovanovitch thought he would list all the ways Ukraine had conspired against Donald Trump in 2016.
The list landed with all the impact of a deflated marshmallow.
It is easy to see why Trump didnt want this woman around as he was scheming to subvert anti-corruption activities in Ukraine.
If you read what she actually said, her statements are essentially substance free and doesn't really address the questions asked. And her agreeing that Minister Avaskov publicly said nasty things about candidate Trump undercuts the premise of the article.
She certainly didn't rebut the facts set forth by these reporters working for politico (the impeccably liberal news source that stooped to clearing stories with HRC before running them)
Do you think a US Ambassador should, in fact, tell a foreign minister that it's inappropriate to meddle in the US elections by attacking a Presidential candidate with an an op-ed in the American media?
Why was Rudy Giuliani running a smear campaign to get this woman removed? What the hell was he even doing over there? Why was there an "irregular" channel of "diplomacy" in Ukraine headed up by the president's personal lawyer who has publicly stated on twitter that everything he did in Ukraine was on behalf of his "client" Donald Trump? So when Giuliani smeared this woman he was doing so on behalf of his "client", not US foreign policy. Why?
iuliani running a smear campaign to get this woman removed
Well, she seemed fine with the Ukrainian government attacking Trump. Read the politico article and it's clear she was either totally ineffective in keeping Ukraine out of American politics or was quite happy they were helping HRC. Either way, she's not an appropriate representative.
Contrary to the Ambassador's belief, US foreign policy is not determined by Ambassadors, but the President. Her arrogance is breathtaking.
Because she was just another left wing political operative that was pissed because she got bounced because she didn't agree with Trump's way of wanting to do things. She never has met and talked to the president or even met him. She provided nothing new or relevant. Next witness!
I don't think you know what that two year old article actually lays out.
It talks about a woman that did investigating on her own about Manafort (now in jail), and corruption in Ukraine involving people that fled to Russia.
Odd that some think people in Ukraine shouldn't get upset when trump says the Russian invasion of Crimea might have been legal.
The entire basis for "Ukraine interfered in 2016" seems to be that some people in Ukraine didnt want Trump to be president, and they said something in public.
Did they hack into the Trump campaigns emails? lol.
Is the right ever going to present the world with FACTS, or are we supposed to humor their ridiculous conspiracy theories until kingdom come?
It's time for all Americans who arent batshit Infowars or Lou Dobbs sheep to step up and take sides.
That's false.
Yovanovitch did no such thing. She said that it probably not appropriate and then went on to praise Minister Avakov for being pragmatic and a good partner with the US.
For someone who insist on reading what she actually said, you get it wrong every time.
BTW, what 'facts' from you link was Yovanovitch asked to refute?
You're conflating the Ukraine Minister with the Ukraine US Ambassador.
Clearly the previous Ukrainian administration wanted Hillary Clinton to win in 2016. I find it beyond belief that Yavonovich didn't know that. Then again she claimed to not even have known that Joe Biden boasted about getting a Ukrainian prosecutor fired! She only seemed to know that she was smeared and that we should all be sympathetic about that and the fact that she was recalled. Somebody should have asked her what she thought of the President being smeared 24/7 for 3 years. Maybe they should have told her that life can be ruff at times, but I thought she told us she was "tuff". Wasn't she involved in dangerous assignments? Maybe she is just bitter or maybe, just maybe, she did have a "do not prosecute list." Maybe Schiff should call in Ukrainian Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko? On second though - that is never going to happen!
Overall, the hearing was quite a farce. Schiff denying Republican members transcripts and attempts to raise points of order and looking bad doing it. The witness had little to do with the question of any quid pro quo. She was obviously presented as a sympathetic figure. Once she felt comfortable that no real questions were coming, we got to see a bit of her mind set. She felt smeared & wronged, but supposedly had no knowledge of the wrongs done by the Ukraine to candidate Trump. Truly amazing!
I really got a laugh at the end of the hearing when what were most likely State Dept employees started applauding as Yovanavich left the room. They really think the people are stupid.
False.
You must have missed the memo about bitching and whining about witnesses giving their opinions.
That is because she was smeared and wronged and Trump did it again yesterday.
Actually, she knew all about some Ukrainians being mean to Trump.
I really got a laugh out of your assumption about 'State Dept employees'.
Or it just might be possible that the people there thought that Yovanovitch deserved the respect that she EARNED after 33 years of service.
Donald Trump is a PROVEN, liar , crook, bigot, and moron. Such a person cannot be "smeared". The idea that Trump has been treated badly, by anyone, is hilarious.
I wouldn't trust her to fetch my laundry. Trump should have done what Obama did before entering the White House - FIRE THE LOT OF THEM!
Well Trump disagrees with you because the Trump State Dept. extended her term and asked her to stay through 2020.
Really Vic? Please post a link proving that Obama took that action BEFORE he entered the WH.
He is a trusting soul.
Please post a link proving that Obama took that action BEFORE he entered the WH.
You might want to READ your own link Vic. It is about 'politically appointed Ambassadors' and it PROVES that Obama was giving them a heads up that their term would end upon his inauguration.
Here's one about Trump's EQUAL action.
In short, it's commonplace for incoming POTUS to clear out political appointees , Ambassadors included.
You were right.
OMG don't let the snowflakes see that. They have been crying about Trump doing it for 3 years.
You wouldn't want them to change their opinion of the messiah King Obama.
That's a lot of blathering that merely supports my statement.
A notification of a PENDING action is NOT the action itself. You're just trying to twist shit to fit your agenda.
I am viewing Texan's comments but ignoring them.
You did it now Tex. I see a BTFW in your future.
I am viewing Texan's comments but ignoring them.
I am viewing Texan's comments but ignoring them.
Then why did Castor, the GOP counsel, keep asking witnesses if they could understand why Trump FELT the way he does?
Trump lies so much if he told me the sky was blue I would walk outside and look up to make sure. She has 33 years of service under dem and repub presidents, but suddenly she is a partisan hack the minute trump says so? You have got to be fucking kidding me. Trump has told of 12,000 lies in 3 years, and you say you don't trust this Amb.? LMFAO!
I don't think either side landed any real punches the past two days of testimony. It's been mostly opinion and/or second-hand information and lacking in any facts TBH. The biggest for the Rep's was Stewart asking two questions (do you have any info regarding Trump of accepting any bribed and any info regarding any criminal activity that Trump was involved in) and both answers were no. Maybe next week we will finally hear some real facts when they bring in Tim Morrison & Jennifer Williams who were both on the actual call.
Yep, which is why support for impeachment sits at 44% according to a poll I saw this morning, down a point.
Clinton voters want him removed from office, as they have since before he was sworn in. Nothing has changed.
Day two of the House impeachment hearings, featuring Marie Yovanovitch, the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, may have appeared on the surface to focus on a sideshow. Yovanovitch was not directly involved in Trump’s efforts to extort Ukraine for political advantage, the main charge he faces. What her testimony instead accomplished was to put the lie to Trump’s ludicrous defense that he was pursuing an anti-corruption agenda in Ukraine — that his demands that Kiev investigate his rivals were simply about cleaning the country up.
The lawyer for House Republicans asked Yovanovitch to affirm that “the president has long-standing concerns about corruption in the Ukraine.” Her response was savage: “That’s what he says.” Her testimony was devoted to proving the hypocrisy of Trump’s claim. She testified how she had worked in Ukraine to promote reform, how her efforts to do so alienated corrupt oligarchs there, and how those oligarchs then worked in tandem with Rudy Giuliani to foment a backlash against her. She explained that the fired Ukrainian prosecutor that Trump praised to Ukraine’s president in a July phone call was in fact totally corrupt.
Yovanovitch recounted that she learned of her firing while presenting an award for a Ukrainian attacked for her reform efforts, a completely fitting juxtaposition. Trump fired Yovanovitch because she stood in the way of the corruption he and his allies were promoting. To the extent corruption motivated Trump’s diplomatic posture in Ukraine, it was that he wanted to encourage more of it.
.
Do Americans Support Impeaching Trump?
.
Trump Impeachment and Removal From Office: Support/Oppose
.
From the polls I keep seeing, today is just like the day Trump became President where more of America thinks he's unfit to be President and want him out than the shrinking minority that still consider him Presidential.
Will, about 25% of the Country thought Nixon was doing a good job the day he flew off into the sunset in disgrace.
Seriously BF, do you just pull stuff out of your anal vent? Most of the time that John Boehner and Ryan were Speaker, the House's approval ratings were BELOW 20%.
Do you remember that polls don't elect presidents?
The right wing arguments against honest people are ridiculous. They have been so brainwashed by Fox and right wing talking points they eagerly disavow any fact or any truth that contradicts their own narrow mindset.