US Secretary Of State Mike Pompeo Harangues Reporter With Claim That No One Cares About Ukraine

  
By:  john-russell  •  4 months ago  •  149 comments

US Secretary Of State Mike Pompeo Harangues Reporter With Claim That No One Cares About Ukraine

Mike Pompeo sat today for an interview with NPR. 

The reporter asked Pompeo about Iran and Ukraine. 

In the course of the questions about Ukraine the reporter asked Pompeo if he owed the one time ambassador  Marie Yovanovitch  an apology for the way she was treated before and at the time of her firing last year.  Pompeo said he has said all he is going to say etc. , defended his tenure , and apparently got up and left the room.  Shortly afterwards he asked to speak to the reporter with the recording turned off, and according to NPR he shouted at her, using expletives, and asked, "Do you think Americans care about Ukraine? " , which sure seems like a rhetorical question intended to be answered with a "no". 

The Secretary of State has essentially announced that Ukraine should be of no interest to Americans. 

It probably meant more to him when the Biden investigations were still on the table there. 


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
JohnRussell
1  author  JohnRussell    4 months ago
Pressed on whether he could point to specific remarks in which he defended Yovanovitch, Pompeo responded, "I've said all I'm going to say today. Thank you. Thanks for the repeated opportunity to do so. I appreciate that."

The exchange with Mary Louise Kelly, co-host of   All Things Considered , follows   the release   by House Democrats last week of messages suggesting that Yovanovitch may have been under surveillance in the days before she was told to return to Washington from her posting in Kyiv last year.

The messages were sent between Robert Hyde, a Republican congressional candidate and fervent Trump supporter, and Lev Parnas, an associate of president Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani.

Parnas has emerged as a central figure in efforts by Giuliani to pressure the government of Ukraine to investigate political rivals of President Trump. That campaign is now the focus of the ongoing impeachment trial against President Trump in the Senate.

Possible surveillance of a U.S. ambassador

The State Department itself is now investigating the possible surveillance of Yovanovitch, who during testimony before House impeachment investigators in November said she had felt threatened by President Trump. Before her recall, Yovanovitch had been accused of disloyalty by allies of the White House, and during his now-infamous   July 25 call   with Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, Trump said of Yovanovitch, "She's going to go through some things."

In an   interview last week   with the conservative radio show host Hugh Hewitt, Pompeo said he "never heard" that Yovanovitch may have been under surveillance. In her testimony before the House, Yovanovitch said she was told by the State Department that she was being recalled due to concerns about her "security."

Pompeo has come under criticism — including, at times, from career diplomats in his own department — for failing to more forcefully defend Yovanovitch in the face of political attacks. During testimony before impeachment investigators, for example, Michael McKinley, a former senior adviser to Pompeo, said he resigned from the department in part over what he interpreted as a "lack of public support for Department employees."

"I'm not going to comment on things that Mr. McKinley may have said," Pompeo said on Friday. But he dismissed the suggestion that a shadow foreign policy involving Ukraine was in place.

"The Ukraine policy has been run from the Department of State for the entire time that I have been here, and our policy was very clear," Pompeo said.

Immediately after the questions on Ukraine, the interview concluded. Pompeo stood, leaned in and silently glared at Kelly for a period of several seconds before leaving the room.

A few moments later, an aide asked Kelly to follow her into Pompeo's private living room at the State Department without a recorder. The aide did not say the ensuing exchange would be off the record.

Inside the room, Pompeo shouted his displeasure at being questioned about Ukraine. He used repeated expletives, according to Kelly, and asked, "Do you think Americans care about Ukraine?" He then said, "People will hear about this."

The State Department did not immediately respond on the record to NPR's request for comment.

read://https_www.npr.org/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.npr.org%2F2020%2F01%2F24%2F799244678%2Fpompeo-wont-say-whether-he-owes-yovanovitch-an-apology-i-ve-done-what-s-right%3Futm_campaign%3Dstoryshare%26utm_source%3Dtwitter.com%26utm_medium%3Dsocial
 
 
 
squiggy
1.2  squiggy  replied to  JohnRussell @1    4 months ago
leaned in and silently glared at Kelly for a period of several seconds

Was that an 'icy' or a 'through-you' stare. Oooo, the horrors

 
 
 
JBB
2  JBB    4 months ago

Um, shouldn't it probably concern us all that the United States of America's Secretary of State is maybe a full blown 100% Certified Nut Cake? Isn't that maybe disqualifying? I am asking for a friend...

 
 
 
Tacos!
2.1  Tacos!  replied to  JBB @2    4 months ago
the United States of America's Secretary of State is maybe a full blown 100% Certified Nut Cake?

Oh good. More psych evals from afar. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
2.1.2  Split Personality  replied to  Tacos! @2.1    4 months ago

No votes for you...lol

 
 
 
Tacos!
2.1.3  Tacos!  replied to  JBB @2.1.1    4 months ago
a fundie wacko and conspiracy nut

Sounds delicious.

 
 
 
squiggy
2.2  squiggy  replied to  JBB @2    4 months ago
I am asking for a friend...
It'll make you go blind.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3  author  JohnRussell    4 months ago

I just listened to the NPR audio story about this, and apparently Pompeo was  a bigger ass to the female reporter than the written article makes it appear, including using the F word to her. 

 
 
 
Larry Hampton
3.1  Larry Hampton  replied to  JohnRussell @3    4 months ago

Yup. I have a link below. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
3.2  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @3    4 months ago
including using the F word to her

Friendship? Falafel?

j/k I'm sorry, you're right. That's rude.

 
 
 
Larry Hampton
3.2.1  Larry Hampton  replied to  Tacos! @3.2    4 months ago

Some Evangelical Christian Pompeo is; I’m sure Jesus is so proud. 

John 11:35

Jesus wept

 
 
 
Split Personality
3.2.2  Split Personality  replied to  Tacos! @3.2    4 months ago

When I learned to drive in the 60's, it was during the Rizzo era, when he was Chief of Police of Philadelphia...

I was stopped numerous times to ask me if I was a Commie hippie, no other offense.

Sometimes I was roughed up for no reason, other than my long hair and antique car.

Sometimes they let me go because the smallest HS team in the region bested the the vast metropolitan Catholic and Public League Champions.

At least twice I was "beaten" because I was part of that Championship Season.

Strangely never ticketed.

I wonder if that could happen today with all of the electronics and body cams....

Don't be naive, of course it can, just not a fraction as much...

 
 
 
Heartland American
3.2.3  Heartland American  replied to  Larry Hampton @3.2.1    4 months ago

“Every day you turn more and more folks who hate Trump into his future voters. The people who wouldn't vote for him in 2016 and were planning on doing the same in 2020 are done with your sh*t,” she wrote. 

“Keep going on CNN and making an ass of yourself. It'll make Donald Trump's reelection all the much sweeter for those of us who you look down on,” she added.  She also said that she’s college-educated, aced her geography class, and is not really a fan of Trump, but this nonsense the condescending elitism inherent in liberal America, is what she despises even more.   https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2020/01/28/cnn-mocked-trump-voters-sparks-this-twitter-user-to-deliver-a-blistering-response-to-the-liberal-elite-n2560228

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.2.4  Tessylo  replied to  Heartland American @3.2.3    4 months ago

Townhall as a source?  jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

That Gracie bitch sounds quite angry and bitter, like most tRump supporters.

 
 
 
MUVA
3.2.5  MUVA  replied to  Tessylo @3.2.4    4 months ago

I would say a person that name calls may be the bitter one wouldn't you agree. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.2.6  Tessylo  replied to  MUVA @3.2.5    4 months ago

No, I wouldn't agree.

Like this bitch wasn't going to vote for tRump in the first place.  

 
 
 
r.t..b...
3.2.7  r.t..b...  replied to  MUVA @3.2.5    4 months ago
I would say a person that name calls may be the bitter one wouldn't you agree.

Couldn't agree more:

  • "Little Marco" — Dumb.
  • "Lyin' Ted" — Dumb, Veering On Weak.
  • "Low Energy Jeb" — Weak.
  • "Crooked Hillary" — Pretty Dumb.
  • "Crazy Bernie" — Weak And Dumb.
  • "Goofy Elizabeth Warren" — Weak.

...and just a sampling of the bitter hits composed by DJ trump.

 
 
 
Heartland American
3.2.8  Heartland American  replied to  Tessylo @3.2.6    4 months ago

The fact is that this Wilson idiot of Lincoln project infamy was showing sheer and utter contempt for thevsry people he’s supposed to be trying to lure away from Trump.  That’s ok because we have the same feelings toward him and the Lincoln project. Don lemon has always been an idiot.  

 
 
 
It Is ME
3.3  It Is ME  replied to  JohnRussell @3    4 months ago
bigger ass to the female reporter

Are you "Verklempt" because you think he was an ass to a "Reporter", or because she was a "Women", that happened to be a "Reporter" ?

 
 
 
bugsy
3.3.1  bugsy  replied to  It Is ME @3.3    4 months ago

This

 
 
 
pat wilson
4  pat wilson    4 months ago

And Mulvaney publicly stated that people should "get over" the fact that quid pro quo was part of foreign policy.

We are watching the destruction of our democratic republic as we speak.

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.1  Tacos!  replied to  pat wilson @4    4 months ago
And Mulvaney publicly stated that people should "get over" the fact that quid pro quo was part of foreign policy.

I wouldn't say "get over it," but I would say "open your eyes." You have to be Pollyanna herself to think quid pro quo and foreign policy aren't business as usual. 

It might be neat if we all got outraged at a system that allows and encourages that kind of thing rather than sanctimoniously pretend Trump is the first person ever to do anything like that.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @4.1    4 months ago

[Deleted]

You have PROVEN through your repeated comments about this, that you dont understand why it was wrong for Trump to want to do a "quid pro quo" with the Ukrainan president Zelensky  "we''ll trade you 400 million dollars in military assistance for an announcement that your government will investigate my main election opponent".  Thats your quid quo pro right there. 

You dont get it. 

[Deleted]

Its not business as usual for the US president to try and jack up a foreign leader,  for the US presidents personal benefit, if it was Trump wouldnt be being impeached right now. 

[Deleted]

 
 
 
pat wilson
4.1.2  pat wilson  replied to  Tacos! @4.1    4 months ago
You have to be Pollyanna herself to think quid pro quo and foreign policy aren't business as usual. 

Not for political agendas.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
4.1.3  Freedom Warrior  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.1    4 months ago

I can never stop laughing every time I show up here I mean look at this whole thing I get the part about where they think they got something that they can pin on trump to you know tarnish his reputation whatever like that’s going to matter anyway, but when  it comes down to whether I really think that any of these,  whatever you want to label yourselves as, give a fuck about Ukraine no I don’t, I know you don’t because it’s all fucking Farce proven over and over and over again to the point of absurdity of a preposterously absurd travesty of a mockery of a sham.

[deleted]

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
4.1.4  Freedom Warrior  replied to  Tacos! @4.1    4 months ago

I know I can’t get over the fact that people are pretending to be accepting  of that level of stupidity, this is essentially what goes on practically every day at nearly every level of government. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1.5  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Freedom Warrior @4.1.3    4 months ago
C2nZtLkd_normal.jpg
Mehdi Hasan
@mehdirhasan
· 2h
Best part of this Pompeo tantrum is that he ‘made her locate Ukraine on a map with no writing’ which she did. Has he ever asked his boss, the President, to try and locate Ukraine on a map with no writing? https:// twitter.com/joshnbcnews/st atus/1220837160032620544
 
 
 
Tacos!
4.1.6  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.1    4 months ago
removed for context

[deleted]

 
 
 
Split Personality
4.1.7  Split Personality  replied to  Freedom Warrior @4.1.3    4 months ago
I can never stop laughing every time I show up here

Neither can I.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
4.1.8  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Split Personality @4.1.7    4 months ago

i don't get it....

possibly,

i was too busy,

laughing.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
4.1.9  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Freedom Warrior @4.1.3    4 months ago
preposterously absurd travesty of a mockery of a sham.

I find it hilarious that when people don't actually have any valid defense or argument, they often resort to broad unspecific rhetoric like "Farce!" , "Absurd!", "Travesty!", "Mockery!", "Sham!"... It's what we heard repeated over and over by the Republicans in the house and will now hear in the Senate, because they also have zero valid defense or argument. Friday they got torn to pieces by the well spoken, reasoned Democrat impeachment managers. All you're going to hear from Republicans for the next three days is whine, bitch, moan, and complain about process and how the Democrats hate Trump and it's all a "sham", "travesty", "absurdity" and "mockery". It's all they have left because they can't actually refute the facts presented.

 
 
 
It Is ME
4.1.10  It Is ME  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @4.1.9    4 months ago

I find it Hilarious, when "The Left" people only listen to only one "Left" side, and then constantly say "there is no defense or argument worth listening too".

It's what we heard repeated over and over by the Democrats in the house. 

"All you're going to hear from Republicans for the next three days is whine, bitch, moan, and complain about process and how the Democrats hate Trump"

So far, listening to the defense right now.....your so wrong. jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
MrFrost
4.1.11  MrFrost  replied to  Freedom Warrior @4.1.3    4 months ago
but when  it comes down to whether I really think that any of these,  whatever you want to label yourselves as, give a fuck about Ukraine

Odd. Clearly the right wing is concerned because one of the only defenses that they have is, "But....but....but...OBAMA withheld aid toooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!". 

 
 
 
MrFrost
4.1.12  MrFrost  replied to  It Is ME @4.1.10    4 months ago
I find it Hilarious, when "The Left" people only listen to only one "Left" side, and then constantly say "there is no defense or argument worth listening too".

I am listening to the hearings right now. Right out of the gate Cipillo{sp}, said that the dems are trying to over turn the 2016 election. Which is impossible because the election was legally certified. 

So far, all I have heard is, "Clinton, Obama, Biden, etc..". The right has nothing but rhetoric, spin and bullshit. They have NO facts and NO witnesses which means they cannot prove their case. 

 
 
 
It Is ME
4.1.13  It Is ME  replied to  MrFrost @4.1.12    4 months ago
Right out of the gate Cipillo{sp}, said that the dems are trying to over turn the 2016 election. Which is impossible because the election was legally certified. 

What does Impeachment do if processed in an entirety of agreement ? jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

"So far, all I have heard is, "Clinton, Obama, Biden, etc..".

You must be watching " Lazy Town" . Nothing of the sort has been brought up by the Defense.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
4.1.14  Sean Treacy  replied to  MrFrost @4.1.12    4 months ago
Which is impossible because the election was legally certified. 

This is too funny. Democrats of course, claimed the Clinton impeachment was an attempt to overturn the 1996 election. Hell, just a few years ago they were claiming the government shutdown was an attempt to overturn the 2012 election. 

But now that Republicans are using the same rhetoric, they pretend to be aghast. 

What new?

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.1.15  Tacos!  replied to  pat wilson @4.1.2    4 months ago

Yes, for political agendas. People are suddenly willfully naive. Because . . . Trump!

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.1.16  Tacos!  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @4.1.9    4 months ago
It's all they have left because they can't actually refute the facts presented.

Facts? No. Just last night we saw one of the House managers describing a meeting between two people for which he had no witnesses and said "they likely talked about . . . "

Seriously. "They likely talked about" is factual evidence? We should give weight to this crap?

 
 
 
Dulay
4.1.17  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @4.1    4 months ago
I wouldn't say "get over it," but I would say "open your eyes." You have to be Pollyanna herself to think quid pro quo and foreign policy aren't business as usual.

And utterly uninformed if you believe that the Ukraine hold was conduced as 'business as usual'. 

We've heard Trump's lawyers insist that this isn't the first time that Trump has withheld funding and that's true. Yet what they don't want to say is that we KNOW about that because Trump followed the fucking rules and notified Congress of the hold AND documented his reasons for doing so. 

We all KNOW that Trump didn't do that when withholding the funds for Ukraine. So it's BS to claim that it was 'business as usual'. 

 It might be neat if we all got outraged at a system that allows and encourages that kind of thing rather than sanctimoniously pretend Trump is the first person ever to do anything like that.

The 'system' allows it because SHIT HAPPENS between passage of appropriation bills and the actual obligation of those funds. An example of that is the coup in Eqypt. The 'system' also REQUIRES the POTUS to inform Congress and get their approval.

Trump IS the first person ever to withhold funding for his personal political benefit. 

 
 
 
Larry Hampton
5  Larry Hampton    4 months ago

Listened to this on the way home. 
We should be so grateful we have journalists doing this valuable work. 
Have a listen, about ten very worthwhile minutes. 

https://ondemand.npr.org/anon.npr-mp3/npr/atc/2020/01/20200124_atc_secretary_of_state_pompeo.mp3?orgId=1&topicId=1004&d=666&p=2&story=799244678&siteplayer=true&size=10647678&dl=1

 
 
 
Tacos!
6  Tacos!    4 months ago
ha·rangue
/ həˈraNG /
verb
lecture (someone) at length in an aggressive and critical manner.
Maybe he's rude or impatient. That's a legitimate point of view.
However, I'm not sure "Do you think Americans care about Ukraine?" constitutes haranguing , but maybe he lectured her for longer than that. I hear from other sources that he challenged her to find it on a map, and being something of a professional in the area, she could. One would hope so.
However, he's not wrong about his central point.
The Secretary of State has essentially announced that Ukraine should be of no interest to Americans.
He didn't say it should be of no interest. He asked if she thought it was actually of interest to Americans (you know: her audience).
It's not, though. It's really not. Sorry, but it's true. I know it's the sun, the moon, and the stars right now for Democrats, but that's  only because it's a scandal for Trump.
When Obama was in office, he declined to send weapons to Ukraine and it was fine. To hear Democrats now, they say such aid is critical and urgent. What changed? Trump is president. It all sounds like political BS to me. 
Meanwhile, your average American going about his daily business doesn't care two shits about Ukraine. 
The most recent Gallup poll on most important areas of concern for the 2020 campaign put general "foreign affairs" near the bottom of the list (14th out of 16, just above trade and LGBT rights). And that's not even pulling out Ukraine by itself. That's going to include Europe, Central and South America, Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Russia all by itself, Afghanistan, etc. You're going to be going a looooong way down the list before you get to anyone in America who actually cares about Ukraine.
In a little test conducted in 2014, only 1 in 6 Americans could find Ukraine on a map. That's 16%. That's worse than the 23% who could find Iran on a map in a seed that ran just a couple weeks ago.
So, I think asking a reporter if she thinks Americans care about Ukraine is a legitimate question.
 
 
 
Larry Hampton
6.1  Larry Hampton  replied to  Tacos! @6    4 months ago

Lol, yeah, sure, the big bad journalist beat up on the poor lying sack of shit Secretary of State pomp ous eo. 
jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_18_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.1.1  Tacos!  replied to  Larry Hampton @6.1    4 months ago

That would be so funny if I had actually said anything remotely like that. jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.1.2  Split Personality  replied to  Tacos! @6.1.1    4 months ago

C'mon, stop already. The article isn't about what he said on the record

but what he said in private "off the record" which has already been leaked...

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.1.3  Tacos!  replied to  Split Personality @6.1.2    4 months ago
C'mon, stop already

Stop what, exactly? Why do people feel like they can tell me to not express myself?

The article isn't about what he said on the record

Yes, I know. What leads you to think otherwise? Where did I reference anything he said as being on the record? The comment you are replying to wasn’t even about that.

 
 
 
Ronin2
6.1.4  Ronin2  replied to  Split Personality @6.1.2    4 months ago

Leaked,

And accepted hook, line, and sinker by the anti Trumpers. Just like every other leak that fits their weak narrow minded views.

Of course no one asked the relevant question if Ukraine was not a topic to be discussed before the interview? Nah, that wouldn't make any damn difference; nor explain his reaction.

As for the question. All Ambassadors serve at the behest of the President and can be removed at any time and any reason. Something she even publicly admitted.

https://spectator.org/did-you-know-this-about-marie-yovanovitch/

5. On October 2, 2008, towards the end of President George W. Bush’s tenure, she was asked while she was U.S. ambassador to Armenia what she would do if the newly elected president would change foreign policy, such as formally calling the Turkish Holocaust of Armenians a “genocide” even though she refused to do so.  The ARMINFO News Agency reported,

“[An] Ambassador serves his president and may be recalled anytime and for any reason,” newly appointed U.S. Ambassador to Armenia Marie L. Yovanovitch said in response to [an] ArmInfo question [as to whether] her personal stand on [the] Armenian Genocide will allow her further [to] work at the US Department of State if the new leadership of the White House recognizes Genocide.

“The decision to recall [an] Ambassador fully depends on the president,” the American diplomat said avoiding a direct answer to the question. To recall, the former Ambassador John Evans was recalled from Armenia in 2006 for his statements on recognition of [the] Armenian Genocide.

6. Read No. 5 again: “[An] Ambassador serves his president and may be recalled anytime and for any reason…. The decision to recall [an] Ambassador fully depends on the president.” The words of Marie Yovanovitch.

Obama can shit can a general that questions his decisions in a Rolling Stone article- can even get his underlings to smear the general afterwards with no repercussions; but Trump can't remove an Ambassador that has openly bad mouthed him? Love the double standard.  Of course Bush face the same damn thing when removing Federal prosecutors. Seems the trappings of the Presidency only apply when anyone with a D behind their name holds the office.

My only question for Trump is what the hell took him so long? I am sure he was told about the optics of it; but who gives a damn. You don't allow someone that doesn't respect you, and openly undermines you, to hold any post in your government.

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.1.5  Split Personality  replied to  Ronin2 @6.1.4    4 months ago
And accepted hook, line, and sinker by the anti Trumpers.

And any adult with an open mind who is aware of Pompeo's short fuse.

Just like every other leak that fits their weak narrow minded views.

Is that a personal attack? LOL

Of course no one asked the relevant question if Ukraine was not a topic to be discussed before the interview? Nah, that wouldn't make any damn difference; nor explain his reaction.

Actually, that is Pompeo's position. He never wants to talk about Ukraine or anything that is embarrassing to the President. He is insisting that Ukraine or anything connected (Burisma, Biden1 or Biden2 or the Ambassador(s), AG's or their Presidents ) was "off topic".  He also insists that the post interview was off the record, she says she agreed to no recording devices, nothing else.  So we have an SoS acting like Trump, great./s

Comments about the ambassador are irrelevant.  Comments by the Ambassador would be relevant.

There is no double standard.  Every President since Reagan has been replacing the previous President's US Attorney appointees, in some cases 100%.  Not an issue.

You don't allow someone that doesn't respect you, and openly undermines you, to hold any post in your government.

and yet there is no proof...they certainly didn't fire her.  She was reportedly surveilled for months and second guessed and disrespected by the dream team of Guilliani and Parnes.  Yet in the end, she got a better stateside job out of this mess.

In fact the only thing it shows is that Trump and many of his appointments simply aren't ready for prime time.

Now, the topic was Pompeo.

Pompeo has a history of berating reporters whose questions he dislikes.

In October, he accused Nancy Amons, a correspondent with Nashville's WSMV television station, that she has her "facts wrong" and "sounds like you're working, at least in part, for the Democratic National Committee" when she asked whether Trump's hold on security assistance to Ukraine was contingent on Ukraine's president announcing an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden.

He also used that attack -- of working for the DNC -- against PBS Newshour anchor Judy Woodruff in October, when she asked similar questions about whether it was appropriate for Trump to pressure Ukraine to investigate

NPR, PBS and a conservative Tennessee TV station....

And when Pompeo wants positive press for his Kansas Senate run, or his 2024 Presidential run, these "post interview" outbursts will haunt him.

Have a good weekend, friend Ronin2

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.2  Split Personality  replied to  Tacos! @6    4 months ago

Oh come on, Tacos.  Pompeo had dreams.  Governor, Senator, even President some day.

The longer his legacy is attached to Trump

the less likely that is unless we become Russia lite, a single party, all hail the leader, type of corporation.

Governments be damned.  Russia doesn't have a government, nor does China or North Korea or Saudi Arabia.

Long live Barron Trump.

 
 
 
dennis smith
6.2.1  dennis smith  replied to  Split Personality @6.2    4 months ago

Certainly agree that we would not be better off with a single party. We would be better off with different and/or more than two parties than the Dems and Repubs. They are both corrupt due to career politicians.

They have successfully split mainstream America apart over the last 20 - 30 years.

The media is to blame also as they do not report the news but put their partisan spin in their reporting.

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.2.2  Split Personality  replied to  dennis smith @6.2.1    4 months ago
The media is to blame also as they do not report the news but put their partisan spin in their reporting.

I don't believe the media is all that bad, for certain there are party or ideological syncophants

but not that many.....

Certainly not enough to cloud the vision of the average voter.

Just my opinion, mind you.

 
 
 
dennis smith
6.2.3  dennis smith  replied to  Split Personality @6.2.2    4 months ago

The news shows talking heads reveal their prejudice daily. FOX, MSNBC, CNN et al do it. They are unwilling/unable report the news or interview people without putting their spin on things.

IMO, Meet the Press had the last vestige of integrity until Chuck Todd took that over.

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.2.5  Split Personality  replied to  dennis smith @6.2.3    4 months ago

Well the format is certainly questionable.  Thank Ted Turner for that.

Now we only have reasonable news on the local affiliates because they only have 30 to 60 minutes to report actual news 

three or four times a day.

Cable news tries to be hip, relevant, sassy, snarky and in your face 24/7.

The talking head BS on "cable" every night improves nothing in my opinion.  Just conspiracy lite and filler.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.3  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @6    4 months ago

According to the reporter , Pompeo shouted obscenities at her for many minutes.

 I think that qualifies as a harangue in anybody's book. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.3.1  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @6.3    4 months ago

My comment is appropriate based on the information you provided. [Deleted]

 
 
 
JohnRussell
7  author  JohnRussell    4 months ago
Mehdi Hasan
@mehdirhasan
As of right now, Pompeo holds the unique distinction of being, simultaneously, the most dishonest, hawkish, unpleasant, and sycophantic member of the Trump administration.
 
 
 
Larry Hampton
7.1  Larry Hampton  replied to  JohnRussell @7    4 months ago

Trump loves him, says he gives the best handies around. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
7.1.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Larry Hampton @7.1    4 months ago

Pompeo pretends Trump is a relatively normal human being, so I'm sure he is one of the president*'s favorites.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
7.2  author  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @7    4 months ago
Richard N. Haass
@RichardHaass
I thought it was the responsibility of the Secretary of State to explain to Americans why they should care about Ukraine, not to berate a journalist asking legitimate questions about his lack of support for foreign service officers acting professionally.
 
 
 
Split Personality
7.2.1  Split Personality  replied to  JohnRussell @7.2    4 months ago

Wrong era, apparently...

 
 
 
Tacos!
7.2.2  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @7.2    4 months ago
I thought it was the responsibility of the Secretary of State to explain to Americans why they should care about Ukraine

That would be true if he was the one trying to make people focus on Ukraine. He’s not. The reporter is. Therefore - assuming she wants people to read her writing - it’s her job to explain why Americans should care about Ukraine.

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
7.3  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  JohnRussell @7    4 months ago
As of right now, Pompeo holds the unique distinction of being, simultaneously, the most dishonest, hawkish, unpleasant, and sycophantic member of the Trump administration.

You left out one of his more annoying qualities.  The man speaks like he has a mouth full of marbles.  My mother taught me to never trust a man who speaks like he has a mouth full of marbles.

 
 
 
Dulay
7.3.1  Dulay  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @7.3    4 months ago

Which in any other Administration would preclude one from being our 'lead' diplomat.

 
 
 
Tessylo
7.3.2  Tessylo  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @7.3    4 months ago

That must be all of the shit that tRump spews

 
 
 
bbl-1
8  bbl-1    4 months ago

Never liked or trusted Pompeo.  Always thought he had more 'gawd than brains'.  Other than that, I wouldn't leave my wallet lying in the open when he was around either.  The guy reeks of sleaze.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
9  Vic Eldred    4 months ago

This is another one of those stories where we are expected to take the word of NPR's Mary Louise Kelly. Kelly is part of the resistance. She asked a question meant to pit the Secretary of State against the President. Something that has become routine with the left wing media.

Well I'm not the Secretary of State (I'm not in the middle representing any State department employees). So I'll answer that question. If Marie Yovanovitch was either talking against the President or actively working against his policies - she deserved to be fired - and with NO apologies!!!

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
9.1  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Vic Eldred @9    4 months ago
If Marie Yovanovitch was either talking against the President or actively working against his policies - she deserved to be fired - and with NO apologies!!!

But she wasn't. She was working on the official State department policy. Her firing came at the request of corrupt Ukrainians officials telling rim-job Rudy to get rid of her and because she was seen as being tough on corruption. The last thing Trump and his lackeys wanted was someone with a spine getting in the way of their corrupt scheme to coerce the Ukrainian President to publicly announce an investigation into Joe Biden.

I do believe that the attempt to sabotage Biden was more of an afterthought, the main thing Trump wanted was for them to publicly announce the investigation into possible Ukrainian meddling in 2016. That was the big ticket item he was going to run on this year and it's all fallen flat. The little man baby Trump was so excited at the possibility of using the Ukrainians to falsely support the Russian created conspiracy theory that it was Ukraine, not Russia, who interfered and hacked the DNC. And that fat turd with no brains sitting in the oval office might actually have believed Putin because he's just that monumentally stupid and gullible. But it doesn't matter if dishonest Donald believed it or not, what he did was definitely an abuse of power. And then in his attempt to cover it up he obstructed congress and is continuing to do so to an extent no other President in US history has ever done.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
9.1.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @9.1    4 months ago
She was working on the official State department policy.

What is that? There is American foreign policy, and that is set by the President. State doesn't have an independent policy.

 
 
 
lib50
9.1.2  lib50  replied to  Sean Treacy @9.1.1    4 months ago

She was working on the 'official' policy, as she clearly testified.  Rudy and the other goons were working on Trump policy, which diverged from official to personal at that intersection for her.  Why would she have known Trump had his side deal in play? 

So far this defense is a big whine fest about dems and how much time they talked,  which should not have even phased Trumpers, who were treated to the Trump narrative on Fox, who didn't show the hearings.  What is interesting is they are playing the defense side now.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
9.1.3  XDm9mm  replied to  lib50 @9.1.2    4 months ago
She was working on the 'official' policy, as she clearly testified.

Is it too difficult for you to understand that "OFFICIAL" foreign policy is set and established by the POTUS (President of the United States) and NOT//NOT some bureaucrat in an agency or department that operates UNDER the jurisdiction of the POTUS.

 
 
 
MUVA
9.1.4  MUVA  replied to  XDm9mm @9.1.3    4 months ago

Some will never understand that the president sets policy not the deep state.

 
 
 
Larry Hampton
9.1.5  Larry Hampton  replied to  MUVA @9.1.4    4 months ago

Some will never understand that the President of the United Staes running a drug deal through his personal lawyer, to coerce a foreign government, is illegal and obviously, impeachable.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
9.1.6  XDm9mm  replied to  Larry Hampton @9.1.5    4 months ago
Some will never understand that the President of the United Staes running a drug deal

That was Iran-Contra was it not?  Why mention drugs now?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
9.1.7  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @9.1    4 months ago

Trump got wind of the conspiracy theory about Joe Biden in Ukraine from right web sites and other alternative media and ran with it. That is what he does. He hears crank ideas that have the appeal of making him look better than he deserves and he jumps on them.  

No rocket science involved here. 

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
9.1.8  Dean Moriarty  replied to  JohnRussell @9.1.7    4 months ago

He is also the head of the intelligence agencies and has access to top secret information that you don't. 

 
 
 
Larry Hampton
9.1.9  Larry Hampton  replied to  Dean Moriarty @9.1.8    4 months ago

Oh, you mean the intelligence agencies and generals who he doesn't believe and is better informed than?

Give me a break

 
 
 
JohnRussell
9.1.10  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @9.1    4 months ago

The Republican managers defending Trump went into some length this morning claiming that Trump was very interested in dealing with general corruption in Ukraine. 

To Trump , the only "corruption" in Ukraine he was interested in in Ukraine was one he could attach the name Biden to. 

AFTER the scandal broke about his demand for an investigation of Joe Biden by Zelensky , Trump continued to call for Ukraine to investigate the Bidens.  No mention of any other corruption. And, for a kicker, he called for China to investigate... ta da..... the Bidens. 

Trump and his lackeys want to assume the public is stupid. Is it? 

 
 
 
Larry Hampton
9.1.11  Larry Hampton  replied to  XDm9mm @9.1.6    4 months ago

C'mon man, where you been the last few months?

I'll lay it  out for ya then. John Bolton, the National security Advisor at the time, described the undercover Ukrainian coercion campaign run by the presidents personal lawyer (rather than the usual official channels.....hhhhmmmmmm) Rudy Giulliani, as a "drug deal".

Now do you understand?

 
 
 
Tacos!
9.1.12  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @9.1.10    4 months ago
To Trump , the only "corruption" in Ukraine he was interested in in Ukraine was one he could attach the name Biden to. 

That claim is contrary to the facts highlighted this morning. But facts that undercut the impeachment haven't interested you, have they?

 
 
 
Split Personality
9.1.13  Split Personality  replied to  XDm9mm @9.1.6    4 months ago
Why mention drugs now?

That's what Bolton called it.

 
 
 
Dulay
9.1.14  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @9.1.12    4 months ago
That claim is contrary to the facts highlighted this morning.

Gee, that's kinda vague. Please cite some of those 'facts' you speak of about ACTUAL corruption in Ukraine.  

 
 
 
Split Personality
9.1.15  Split Personality  replied to  Dean Moriarty @9.1.8    4 months ago

Really Dean?  That almost cost me a keyboard, lol

320

 
 
 
Split Personality
9.1.16  Split Personality  replied to  Dulay @9.1.14    4 months ago

Well apparently they pay top executives too much according to our top executives, lol

 
 
 
Dulay
9.1.17  Dulay  replied to  Split Personality @9.1.13    4 months ago

Anyone not knowing that hasn't been paying attention...

As I have stated a couple of times now, IF Trump had a real justification or any real evidence of corruption by Biden in Ukraine, Bolton AND Barr would have been leading the charge on investigations instead of distancing themselves and calling it a 'drug deal'. 

None of Trump's supporters here have wanted to address that. Wonder why? 

 
 
 
Tacos!
9.1.18  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @9.1.14    4 months ago

Guess you should have watched this morning. But I can understand why you would have been afraid to do that. It was pretty devastating for the prosecution's case.

 
 
 
Dulay
9.1.19  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @9.1.18    4 months ago
Guess you should have watched this morning. But I can understand why you would have been afraid to do that.

Actually, I have no fear of facts and I DID watch. 

It was pretty devastating for the prosecution's case.

Yet you seem incapable of citing even one of those facts' you speak of about ACTUAL corruption in Ukraine.  

Still waiting...

 
 
 
KDMichigan
9.1.20  KDMichigan  replied to  Tacos! @9.1.18    4 months ago

So now Ukraine isn't one of the most corrupt countries in the world according to the lefties? So why was Biden threatening to withhold money again? 

The TDS sufferers are killing me.

256

 
 
 
Tacos!
9.1.21  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @9.1.19    4 months ago

If you had watched it, you'd know. Maybe you should watch it again.

 
 
 
Tacos!
9.1.22  Tacos!  replied to  KDMichigan @9.1.20    4 months ago
So now Ukraine isn't one of the most corrupt countries in the world according to the lefties?

It's just like when the idea that Russia was a threat was so laughable because Romney said it. They really have no idea what to believe beyond mocking what the other side says in a kind of "nanny nanny horsey" kind of way. It's like kindergartners mocking college professors - too ignorant to realize how dumb they sound.

 
 
 
JBB
9.1.23  JBB  replied to  KDMichigan @9.1.20    4 months ago

If Ukraine is so damn corrupt then why in Hell were Trump, Pence and Guiliani illegally inducing Ukrainian to illegally interfere in our election? You can't have it both ways! SMH...

 
 
 
Dulay
9.1.24  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @9.1.21    4 months ago
If you had watched it, you'd know. Maybe you should watch it again.

I did watch it and didn't hear them citing specific corruption in the Ukraine. So tell me all about what YOU heard that I must have missed. 

 
 
 
KDMichigan
9.1.25  KDMichigan  replied to  JBB @9.1.23    4 months ago

As usual, what are you talking about?

Ukraine has a history of corruption are you arguing against this fact?

And I'm not surprised you missed it that the new Ukraine president ran on getting rid of the corruption in government and this subject was part of his phone call with President Trump if I remember correctly. I'm sure that wasn't in the rachel madcow talking points.

 
 
 
Tacos!
9.1.26  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @9.1.24    4 months ago
I did watch it and didn't hear them citing specific corruption in the Ukraine. So tell me all about what YOU heard that I must have missed. 

I never referred to a specific incident of corruption. The comment I responded to was about what Trump was interested in. I find it hard to believe you could have missed Trump's attorneys arguing that he a genuine concern for corruption in Ukraine.

 
 
 
bugsy
9.1.27  bugsy  replied to  JBB @9.1.23    4 months ago
If Ukraine is so damn corrupt then why in Hell were Trump, Pence and Guiliani illegally inducing Ukrainian to illegally interfere in our election?

When did they do that?

 
 
 
Dulay
9.1.28  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @9.1.26    4 months ago
I never referred to a specific incident of corruption.

Nor has Trump or his lawyers. 

I find it hard to believe you could have missed Trump's attorneys arguing that he a genuine concern for corruption in Ukraine.

Without supporting that claim with one iota of evidence. 

In contrast, the House Managers DID present evidence that Trump made NO effort to have ANYONE review issues of corruption prior to or during the time he ordered the hold on aid to Ukraine. 

John's comment reflects the evidence.

So unless and until Trump's lawyers submit EVIDENCE that Trump was  ACTUALLY interested in corruption in the Ukraine that had NOTHING to do with the Bidens or the BS about hidden servers, proclamations from his lawyers are baseless.

  

 
 
 
Tacos!
9.1.29  Tacos!  replied to  Dulay @9.1.28    4 months ago
Nor has Trump or his lawyers.

Then stop asking for something no one is talking about! Geez!

 
 
 
Dulay
9.1.30  Dulay  replied to  Tacos! @9.1.29    4 months ago

I'm not. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
9.1.31  Tessylo  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @9.1    4 months ago

The 'president' was calling to 'TAKE HER OUT', Yovanovich that is.  

I take that to mean assassinate, not fire her.   They even had surveillance on her.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
9.1.32  Tessylo  replied to  MUVA @9.1.4    4 months ago

What is the 'deep state' MUVA?

 
 
 
Larry Hampton
9.1.33  Larry Hampton  replied to  Tessylo @9.1.32    4 months ago

It's a fairytale cabal invented by extremists to frighten their core, and invigorate their action.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
9.1.34  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Larry Hampton @9.1.33    4 months ago

I think it comes from Infowars level conspiracy theorists who saw it as a way to build their popularity and, well, make money. 

 
 
 
Larry Hampton
9.1.35  Larry Hampton  replied to  JohnRussell @9.1.34    4 months ago

yup,,,,well, it worked.

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
9.2  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Vic Eldred @9    4 months ago
Kelly is part of the resistance. She asked a question meant to pit the Secretary of State against the President.

A reporter asked Pompeo a question about his conduct during a series of legally questionable events.  How on earth is that considered 'pitting the Secretary of State against the President'?

If Marie Yovanovitch was either talking against the President or actively working against his policies - she deserved to be fired - and with NO apologies!!!

Trump's response to the Lev Parnas comment about Ambassador Yovanovitch's unwillingness to look the other way, was to say, "...Get rid of her.  Take her out."  How interesting that he was taking the word of a man he had never met, a man with whom he had never had meaningful dialogue, a man known for criminal activity.  

Trump needs his ass kicked, 'and with NO apologies!!!'.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
9.2.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @9.2    4 months ago
Trump's response to the Lev Parnas comment about Ambassador Yovanovitch's unwillingness to look the other way, was to say, "...Get rid of her.  Take her out."  How interesting that he was taking the word of a man he had never met, a man with whom he had never had meaningful dialogue, a man known for criminal activity.   Trump needs his ass kicked, 'and with NO apologies!!!'.

You are very smart Sister !

 
 
 
PJ
9.2.2  PJ  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @9.2    4 months ago

Well thought out.  Sadly reason and common sense aren't going to get you too far with this crowd.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
9.2.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @9.2    4 months ago
A reporter asked Pompeo a question about his conduct during a series of legally questionable events. 

What was the question?  Let me give you a clue...it was one of those questions the left wing media is know for, like yesterday when George Stephanopoulos asked Sen. Lankford if he thinks it is ok to solicit a foreign government to interfere in our elections. The question assumed that Trump was asking for election interference in asking for a corruption investigation. In this case it's do you defend the State Department employees and say Trump is wrong or do you stand by the President and look like you don't care about your own agency.

The real questions are did Yovanovich really have a "do-not prosecute" list for Ukrainian investigators and/or did she really tell the Ukrainians that "this President was going to be removed from office?"


Trump needs his ass kicked

Everybody on the left needs a good ass kicking!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
9.2.4  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.2.3    4 months ago

How long are you going to continue with the fantasy that Trump cared about corruption?  He is the most personally corrupt president we have ever had. According to what has been leaked about Bolton's book, he says Pompeo told him that Yovanovitch was not corrupt.

If Trump supporters keep up with this nonsense, they will prove what some people already suspect, that they are the worst people in America. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
9.2.5  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @9.2.4    4 months ago
If Trump supporters keep up with this nonsense, they will prove what some people already suspect, that they are the worst people in America.

We just have to try and keep up with the Trump Haters of society JR, nothing more.   It's a daunting task, but someone has to do it.

 
 
 
loki12
9.2.6  loki12  replied to  XDm9mm @9.2.5    4 months ago

I don't know why Pompeo would be upset, they treat everyone the same, they give democrats the questions in advance, including town hall planted questions, and then ask Pompeo questions that they had agreed on in advance to not bring up. (s)

The only one who showed that the have no manners or integrity was the reporter......But Trump!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
9.2.7  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @9.2.4    4 months ago
How long are you going to continue with the fantasy that Trump cared about corruption? 

Is that what I'm saying?  How about he wanted a simple inquiry into possible Ukrainian involvement in the 2016 election? 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
9.2.8  XDm9mm  replied to  loki12 @9.2.6    4 months ago
Pompeo questions that they had agreed on in advance to not bring up.

And then claim that there was never a post interview discussion 'off the record' in his private office.

Their hatred runs deep.  Almost as deep as the hatred of some here!!

 
 
 
XDm9mm
9.2.9  XDm9mm  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.2.7    4 months ago
How about he wanted a simple inquiry into possible Ukrainian involvement in the 2016 election? 

Weren't there actually Ukrainian officials here in the states that were publicly saying that they didn't want Trump to win pre-election? 

 
 
 
loki12
9.2.10  loki12  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.2.7    4 months ago
How about he wanted a simple inquiry into possible Ukrainian involvement in the 2016 election? 

How dare you, the democrats have already mindlessly screamed this has been debunked, despite the fact that there has been no investigation, still they will mindlessly scream it has been debunked, while beating the Russia drum knowing full well that is false. They have zero self awareness.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
9.2.11  author  JohnRussell  replied to  loki12 @9.2.6    4 months ago

Did you listen to the audio of the interview, or read the transcript? The reporter did not ask him any questions that were out of line. Pompeo has a temper and he chose to exercise it against a female reporter who was willing to fight back by reporting on what happened. 

If Pompeo still has a political career left after his association with Trump , maybe he will have learned a lesson on how to treat people. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
9.2.12  Vic Eldred  replied to  XDm9mm @9.2.9    4 months ago

Um-hum, starting with the Ukrainian Ambassador

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
9.2.13  Vic Eldred  replied to  loki12 @9.2.10    4 months ago

I can still recall Lindsey Graham asking 


still they will mindlessly scream it has been debunked

They will repeat it endlessly until somebody actually takes a look at it. Since the Politico article way back in 2017, it's been like the third rail!

 
 
 
katrix
9.2.14  katrix  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.2.13    4 months ago
I can still recall Lindsey Graham asking 

I can still recall Lindsey Graham stating that he wouldn't bother reading the evidence because apparently, he knows he's a Trump toadie and doesn't give a crap if the evidence shows guilt or not. He will refuse to convict Trump no matter what.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
9.2.15  Vic Eldred  replied to  katrix @9.2.14    4 months ago

The House will have their chance to make their case. They already took all of 21 hours for a very repetitive opening argument

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
9.2.16  Vic Eldred  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.2.15    4 months ago

BTW, Graham had a reason:

"I am trying to give a pretty clear signal I have made up my mind. I'm not trying to pretend to be a fair juror here," Graham said, adding, "What I see coming, happening today is just a partisan nonsense."

 
 
 
katrix
9.2.17  katrix  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.2.16    4 months ago
Graham had a reason:

There is no reason good enough to outright say he would violate the oath he'd have to take to be an impartial juror. If he were a Democrat, you would have probably been calling for him to recuse himself - and I would have agreed with you.

But I wasn't referring to that. I was referring to when he said he wouldn't even bother reading the transcripts of the testimony back in early November, before what you brought up where he said he would violate his oath.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
9.2.18  Vic Eldred  replied to  katrix @9.2.17    4 months ago
If he were a Democrat, you would have probably been calling for him to recuse himself - and I would have agreed with you.

All but of a few of the dems in the House did exactly that. They wanted impeachment for this President from the day he was elected and btw that is reason enough for Graham to feel as he does.

A bogus impeachment just like a bogus investigation (2 of them as a matter of fact) do not merit one ounce of credibility. Case dismissed!

 
 
 
Dulay
9.2.19  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.2.7    4 months ago
How about he wanted a simple inquiry into possible Ukrainian involvement in the 2016 election? 

Then he should have read the SENATE report that looked into the issue and DEBUNKED it.

 
 
 
Dulay
9.2.20  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.2.12    4 months ago

False. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
9.2.21  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dulay @9.2.19    4 months ago
Then he should have read the SENATE report that looked into the issue and DEBUNKED it.

Who debunked it and when?
Link please.

 
 
 
Tessylo
9.2.23  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.2.21    4 months ago

You were looking for Jefferson XX whoever recently Vic?

I think you found him, DonaldJtRumpfan1 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
9.2.24  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @9.2.22    4 months ago
Don't like this source?

You are talking about the Senate Inquiry?  As an investigation?

Here from The Hill piece you linked:

EK0iVgEWwAE2vW9.jpg

That says it all!

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
9.2.25  Sean Treacy  replied to  XDm9mm @9.2.9    4 months ago

Yes, but Ukranian officials interfering in the election is "legitimate meddling" per the New York Times. The nonsensical  lengths progressives  will go to is quite amazing.

 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
9.2.26  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @9.2.23    4 months ago
You were looking for Jefferson XX whoever recently Vic?

Thanks for your concern, but NO.

 
 
 
Tessylo
9.2.27  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.2.26    4 months ago

You questioned me about that at one time like I had something to do with it.  LOL!

No concern whatsoever.  

Thought he was your buddy

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
9.2.28  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @9.2.27    4 months ago

The topic is a reporter's pointed question of the Secretary of State.

 
 
 
Tessylo
9.2.29  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.2.28    4 months ago

US Secretary Of State Mike Pompeo Harangues Reporter With Claim That No One Cares About Ukraine

is the topic

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
9.2.30  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @9.2.29    4 months ago

384

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
9.2.31  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @9.2.29    4 months ago

I guess it depends upon one's point of view.

 
 
 
Dulay
9.2.32  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.2.21    4 months ago
Who debunked it and when?

Did you miss the SENATE report part of my comment Vic? 

Link please.

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/publications/report-select-committee-intelligence-united-states-senate-russian-active-measures

It's been part of the record since May 2018.

I'm surprised that such an informed member doesn't know what it says. /s

 
 
 
Dulay
9.2.33  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.2.24    4 months ago

Post a link to the article Vic, it's part of the CoC. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
9.2.34  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dulay @9.2.33    4 months ago

The link has already been provided and I already referred to it.  Post 9.2.22

Stop trying to silence people and derailing articles.

 
 
 
Dulay
9.2.35  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @9.2.24    4 months ago
That says it all!

From the same link:

In the wake of Russia's election meddling, the GOP-led Intelligence Committee reportedly looked into the theory, recently resurfaced by allies of President Trump, that Kyiv also sought to influence the 2016 vote. But the panel halted the probe in the fall of 2017 after an interview with Alexandra Chalupa, a Democratic consultant linked to the Ukraine meddling allegations, bore no significant information, Politico reported. 

Committee Chairman Richard Burr (R-N.C.), reportedly made no other interview requests related to the issue. 

...

Multiple former administration officials have dismissed allegations of Ukrainian interference. Tom Bossert, a former homeland security adviser in the Trump administration, said in late September that the allegation that Ukraine hacked the DNC was a "completely debunked" conspiracy theory.

Fiona Hill, a former top Russia analyst for the White House, testified before the House last month that the claim was a "fictional narrative that has been perpetrated and propagated by the Russian security services themselves." 

Intelligence officials have also briefed senators that Russia engaged in an effort to frame Kyiv for its election interference, according to The New York Times.

So Burr's committee questioned Chalupa and realized that the allegations were BUNK. Everyone knows that Russia is fingering Ukraine to deflect from their own actions.

 
 
 
Dulay
9.3  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @9    4 months ago
So I'll answer that question.

Yet you didn't.

The question: What specific remarks did Pompeo make in support of Yovanovitch? 

Answer? 

 
 
 
Tessylo
9.3.1  Tessylo  replied to  Dulay @9.3    4 months ago

Don't hold your breath on that Dulay!

 
 
 
Dulay
9.3.2  Dulay  replied to  Tessylo @9.3.1    4 months ago

I never do when asking them to support their proclamations. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
10  Sean Treacy    4 months ago

I saw that Obama's adviser David Axelrod attended a focus group with Democratic voters in Chicago. It was 80 minutes before a Democrat even brought up impeachment. Democrats don't care about Ukraine. Democrats don't care about impeachment.

No one who doesn't live on twitter cares about this.  

 
 
 
Dulay
10.1  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @10    4 months ago
Democrats don't care about Ukraine.

What did Axelrod say that lead you to that conclusion? 

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

The People's Fish, Still "Hand Of The Queen"
JohnRussell
Trout Giggles
Snuffy
ThereAreFourLights
Sparty On
Veronica
FLYNAVY1
JumpDrive
Transyferous Rex



31 visitors