Former US ambassador Marie Yovanovitch: Victim or co-conspirator?

Politics
1

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, made news in recent weeks with her testimony in the congressional impeachment enquiry. She was appointed ambassador by President Obama in August 2016, and terminated by the Trump administration on May 20, 2019. The thrust of the impeachment enquiry has been the President Trump unfairly pressured the Ukrainian government regarding its criminal investigations that included prominent Democrats.

My observation is that there is good evidence that Yavanovitch supported US efforts to quash Ukrainian investigations of Democrat supporters, which sounds very similar to the Democrat allegations against Trump. Here is a summary investigations by John Solomon, who as served in an editor at the Hill and the Washington Times and is now a contributor to Fox News:

Myth : Former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko retracted or recanted his claim that U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch in 2016 identified people and entities she did not what to see prosecuted in Ukraine.

The Facts: In a March interview with me at Hill.TV captured on videotape, Lutsenko stated that during his first meeting with Yovanovitch in summer 2016, the American diplomat rattled off a list of names of Ukrainian individuals and entities she did not want to see investigated or prosecuted. Lutsenko called it a “do not prosecute” list. You can watch that video here. . .

Here is Lutsenko’s full explanation to me back last spring: “At no time since our interview have I ever retracted the statement I made about the U.S. ambassador providing me a list of names of people and organizations she did not want my office to prosecute. Shortly after my televised interview with your news organization I was asked by a Ukraine reporter if I had a copy of the letter that Ambassador Yovanovitch provided me with the names of those she did not want prosecuted. The reporter misunderstood how the names were transmitted to me. I explained to the reporter that the Ambassador did not hand me a written list but rather provided the list of names orally over the course of a meeting.” Lutsenko reaffirmed he stood by his statements again in September. . .

Separately, both U.S. and Ukrainian official confirmed to me a letter written by then-U.S. embassy official George Kent in April 2016 in which U.S. officials pointedly (and in writing) demanded that Ukrainian prosecutors stand down an investigation into several Ukrainian nonprofit groups suspected of misspending U.S. foreign aid. The letter even named one of the groups, the AntiCorruption Action Centre, a nonprofit funded jointly by the State Department and liberal megadonor George Soros.

“We are gravely concerned about this investigation, for which we see no basis,” Kent wrote the Ukrainian prosecutor’s office in April 2016. You can read the letter here.

https://johnsolomonreports.com/debunking-some-of-the-ukraine-scandal-myths-about-biden-and-election-interference/

Is Ms. Yovanovitch a victim as is claimed by many Democrats?

Or is she part of an Obama-era conspiracy to block in investigations into groups associated with Democrats?

Trump supporters have made the argument that the primary purpose of any pressure on Ukraine was to reduce corruption, which is consistent with US laws and interests. Is there a similar argument for the alleged pressure that Ms. Yovanovitch exerted to protect Soros-supported groups from possible prosecution?

4 Likes
2

I thinks it’s a bit of both.

But the only thing she is a “victim” of is being in a high position when the parties in power swapped.

Anytime High offices change hands the high level employees of that office also change hands.

Are all the Bush appointees Obama replaces impeachable now as well? Or say Joe wins… can he be impeached for replacing Trump appointees?

The idea that her job was secure under Trump and its criminal that he fired her is laughable and sad. What’s actually surprising is that she stayed as long as she did after he took power.

2 Likes
3

It’s easy to attack her because she’s a woman.

4

Not surprising at all.

Trump has been laughably bad at filling positions in his branch of government.

5

You interviewed Lutsenko?
BTW, the link you provided has a few videos and none that I see is the one you’re referring to.

6

Does she have a British accent? If so, she must be a plant.

7

John “I had nothing to do with Rudy Giuliani even though he had advance copies of my stories” Solomon.

Lol!

1 Like
8

Now Taylor is on it… Keep the faith though, Rudy is appealing directly to the senate…

Question: Why can’t the president just order Taylor to issue the visas?

https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1198307402464059393?s=20

9

John Solomon interviewed Lutsenko and the Hill published it on March 20, 2019.

Here is a direct link:

Here is an except from the interview:

“Unfortunately, from the first meeting with the U.S. ambassador in Kiev, Yovanovitch gave me a list of people whom we should not prosecute,” Lutsenko, who took his post in 2016, told Hill.TV last week.

“My response of that is it is inadmissible. Nobody in this country, neither our president nor our parliament nor our ambassador, will stop me from prosecuting whether there is a crime,” he continued.

10

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

6 Likes
11

What is obvious is that these groups of professionals were bitter that Trump had selected a group of people he felt he could trust to represent the US in Europe. They called this group shadow representatives. If you get your authority from the President and coordinate with the Secretary of State you are not “shadow”.
The former ambassador made it clear that she was opposed to any investigation of Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election. It had been US policy to investigate Russian interference, now this was being expanded to interference by any country and coordination with Democrats. If the ambassador did not feel she could support his policy, then she should have resigned at that point. She and her unelected pals are not authorized to determine what US foreign policy is, though they seem to think so.

1 Like
12

Is there any evidence of Ukrainian interference beyond the John Soloman article we now know was based totally on information provided by an Oligarch?

13

Good post. Ukraine is one if not top country for money laundry…and everyone knows it. That’s the last thing democrats want an investigation into this.

By investigating Biden son you will expose all those involved…and libs can’t allow that.

So this was nothing but attempt to shut down any and all investigation.

If I was Trump I would step up this investigation…because libs are hiding something.

14

Yes, the President is ultimately in charge of US foreign policy, and he can choose ambassadors who support that policy.

Shielding Soros-supported groups from Ukrainian prosecution may have been the policy of the Obama administration, but it is not Trump’s policy.

1 Like
15

Treason?

16

Solomon’s reports about pressure to stop Ukrainian prosecutions certainly agree with Joe Biden’s comments about getting a Ukrainian prosecutor fired:

And I had gotten a commitment from Poroshenko and from Yatsenyuk that they would take action against the state prosecutor. And they didn’t.

So they said they had—they were walking out to a press conference. I said, nah, I’m not going to—or, we’re not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, you have no authority. You’re not the president. The president said—I said, call him. (Laughter.) I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. (Laughter.) He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time.

See video starting at 52:00. For video and transcript see:

Biden somehow forgot to mention that the prosecutor in question was investigating his son, Hunter Biden. Was that just a coincidence?

17

I’m pretty certain Trump supporters would like Giuliani to testify in order to clear up this whole story. It’s obvious he was just a special envoy doing his patriotic duty to root out Ukrainian corruption. Honestly he’s a hero. Everyone should welcome the chance to hear directly from him.

2 Likes
18

If Trump’s policy is “America First”, why would want any US citizen to be investigated within the judicial process of another country? That is completely unprecedented. Are you saying the judicial system of the Ukraine, a country riddled with corruption, is the one that you want to judge American citizens?

19

For the thousandth repetition, there is no evidence whatsoever that indicates that Shokin was investigating Hunter Biden. None, Nothing. Nada. Zilch.

Is there any way to make this more clear?

If the US government believes that Hunter Biden was involved in illegal activity in the Ukraine, it would be simple, Constitutional, and appropriate for DOJ to open an investigation under FCPA. Why hasn’t that happened?

20

SHE’S A WOMAN!

download%20(6)