Fox News: Yovanovich Proves the Democrats Have No Case

[gooddad409]

@Kelby

@gooddad409

@Kelby

@gooddad409

@DougBH

Her interview doesn’t prove there is no case (though I think there isn’t). It proves she didn’t do anything to add to the case though. And why would they have the first big witness, Taylor, who only had opinions on what he heard from other people, and the other big witness being the ambassador who basically left before anything was supposed to have happened? Why would you put your first big witnesses as two people who had very little if anything to add to the “case”?
She had an opinion that Hunter and Burisma should not be investigated, and that Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election should not have been investigated. Fine, any Democrat in the country could have been called up to give the same opinion. All that proved is that there were policy differences between the President and Yovanovich which would have been justification enough for replacing her.

Makes no sense. Nobody ever accused Schiff of being smart though.

Graduate of Stanford and Harvard Law.

Educated and smart are not always the same thing.

Schiff is crooked as hell but certainly not smart.

I understand your need to believe that.

#facts matter.

[WuWei]

@Kelby

You don’t get into Stanford or Harvard without being very bright.

Lori Loughlin 'concerned' by hefty sentence for parent who pled guilty in...

[Kelby]

@WuWei

@Kelby

You don’t get into Stanford or Harvard without being very bright.

Lori Loughlin 'concerned' by hefty sentence for parent who pled guilty in college admissions scandal | Fox News

Lol!!

…

[H_Arendt]

@gooddad409

@Kelby

@gooddad409

@DougBH

Her interview doesn’t prove there is no case (though I think there isn’t). It proves she didn’t do anything to add to the case though. And why would they have the first big witness, Taylor, who only had opinions on what he heard from other people, and the other big witness being the ambassador who basically left before anything was supposed to have happened? Why would you put your first big witnesses as two people who had very little if anything to add to the “case”?
She had an opinion that Hunter and Burisma should not be investigated, and that Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election should not have been investigated. Fine, any Democrat in the country could have been called up to give the same opinion. All that proved is that there were policy differences between the President and Yovanovich which would have been justification enough for replacing her.

Makes no sense. Nobody ever accused Schiff of being smart though.

Graduate of Stanford and Harvard Law.

Educated and smart are not always the same thing.

Schiff is crooked as hell but certainly not smart.

Underestimating your opponent is usually a very poor strategy. Please stick to it.

[Plasmaball]

Clearly it’s too complicated for you.
That’s not why she wss there.

[WuWei]

@Plasmaball

Clearly it’s too complicated for you.

Are you smarter than him?

[Plasmaball]

Rhetorical?

[WuWei]

@Plasmaball

Rhetorical?

Not at all.

[GrandWazoo]

@Camp

Trump appears to be the most honest and transparent president we have had in the last hundred years.

Trump supporters on the hill and on these boards keep using the argument that so far the witnesses only have hearsay knowledge. Yet the people who have first hand knowledge are not appearing before committee. If they have done nothing wrong why are they not coming forward and clear the President?
Most honest and transparent is on it’s face laughable.

[Roxiebelle]

@Kelby

She was there to provide testimony about her experience in this administration, the inexplicable motives given for her removal, and the nonsense happening with Giuliani.

The woman was telling Ukraine officials that President Trump would be impeached, that is information undoubtedly uncovered by Giuliani’s investigation which he was asked to do by the State Department.

Inexplicable motives her lying rump as this seditious weeping willow knows exactly why she was removed from her position whatever the reason given, or not given, by her employer!

[PurpnGold]

@Roxiebelle

The woman was telling Ukraine officials that President Trump would be impeached, that is information undoubtedly uncovered by Giuliani’s investigation which he was asked to do by the State Department.

Was she? Proof?

Also, you trust anything Guiliani says?

@Roxiebelle

Inexplicable motives her lying rump as this seditious weeping willow knows exactly why she was removed from her position whatever the reason given, or not given, by her employer!

And ethical organization would give the employee a reason for removing her.

[H_Arendt]

@Roxiebelle

@Kelby

She was there to provide testimony about her experience in this administration, the inexplicable motives given for her removal, and the nonsense happening with Giuliani.

The woman was telling Ukraine officials that President Trump would be impeached, that is information undoubtedly uncovered by Giuliani’s investigation which he was asked to do by the State Department.

Inexplicable motives her lying rump as this seditious weeping willow knows exactly why she was removed from her position whatever the reason given, or not given, by her employer!

Can you cite any basis for these assertions, or is fantasy character assassination all you have left to defend Dear Leader Donald?

[Smyrna]

@madasheck

Generalities mean little in this discussion. What specific incident are you referring to?

Just listen to the exchange between Rep. Jordan and Yovanovich at the 1 minute mark and it’s all quite clear.

JORDAN QUESTIONS YOVANOVITCH: Day 2 of the Impeachment Hearing

[tnt]

@ohknow35

I didn’t even have to read the transcript to know the dimocrats have no case.

Lol.

Yep, sounds about right!

[H_Arendt]

@Smyrna

@madasheck

Generalities mean little in this discussion. What specific incident are you referring to?

Just listen to the exchange between Rep. Jordan and Yovanovich at the 1 minute mark and it’s all quite clear.

JORDAN QUESTIONS YOVANOVITCH: Day 2 of the Impeachment Hearing - YouTube

Please send the video of the exchange you mentioned between Jordan and Yovanovitch. Jordan is just pontificating for the cameras on this clip.

Gym Jordan is hard to take seriously on on these matters given that he has a well documented history of not noticing crimes occurring in front of him.

[Smyrna]

@H_Arendt

Please send the video of the exchange you mentioned between Jordan and Yovanovitch. Jordan is just pontificating for the cameras on this clip.

Gym Jordan is hard to take seriously on on these matters given that he has a well documented history of not noticing crimes occurring in front of him.

Thanks…and sorry about that. Here it is.

WATCH: Rep. Jim Jordan’s full questioning of Amb. Yovanovitch | Trump's first impeachment hearings

[tnt]

@gooddad409

Obama fired every Bush Ambassador on his 1st day in office. None of the dems on that committee had a problem with that!

Correct.

And if trump had just fired Yovanovitch, there wouldn’t be anything to say about it.

But he fired her after he and his cronies spread lies about her, and he fired her after his SoS asked her to stay on…and he did so because his personal atty thought removing her would make it easier for him to get the Ukrainians to play ball.

[WuWei]

@H_Arendt

Gym Jordan

Mr. President?

[Eclipze]

Are you?

[Camp]

Trump needed an Ambassador that performed better WRT his policy.

If she was threatened by a tweet that said she was not a good performer?

Case closed.