Judicial Watch Investigates Ousted Ukraine Ambassador Order to Monitor Journalists, Trump Allies

[NightHawkeye]

Credibility matters. Whom should we believe? Ideologically driven organizations such as Judicial Watch or a diplomat with 32 years of foreign policy experience?

Combining credibility in the same sentence with diplomat operating within what is perhaps the most corrupt of western nations, Ukraine, seems a bit of a stretch.

The U.S. LOST unaccounted billions in aid for Ukraine. American diplomats were not uninvolved in that outrageously corrupt process. Jus' sayin ...

 

[NightHawkeye]

For the record ... Yovanovitch was directly involved in multiple Ukraine scandals.
Top Ukrainian justice official says US ambassador gave him a do not prosecute list

Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko told Hill.TV's John Solomon in an interview that aired Wednesday that U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch gave him a do not prosecute list during their first meeting.
...
“Actually, we got the letter from the U.S. Embassy, from the ambassador, that the money that we are speaking about [was] under full control of the U.S. Embassy, and that the U.S. Embassy did not require our legal assessment of these facts," he said. "The situation was actually rather strange because the funds we are talking about were designated for the prosecutor general's office also and we told [them] we have never seen those, and the U.S. Embassy replied there was no problem."

“The portion of the funds namely 4.4 million U.S. dollars were designated and were foreseen for the recipient Prosecutor General's office. But we have never received it,” he said.​

 

[wing2000]

For the record: The ambassador stated that is a lie:

[QUOTE

Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko told Hill.TV's John Solomon in an interview that aired Wednesday that U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch gave him a do not prosecute list during their first meeting.

 

[NightHawkeye]

For the record: The ambassador stated that is a lie:

A clear case of "He said, she said".

Who has the most credibility? Yovanovitch's credibility has been called into question for multiple reasons already, not just this one instance.

 

[DaisyDay]

A clear case of "He said, she said".

Who has the most credibility? Yovanovitch's credibility has been called into question for multiple reasons already, not just this one instance.

Yovanovitch is clearly more credible as attested by the people who work with her and have worked with her over the years. Lutsenko's statements are clearly self-serving and have only just popped up since Giuliani started pushing for Ukraine dirt on the Bidens.

Ukrainian Investigators Probing Ex-Prosecutor Lutsenko For Abuse Of Power

 

[NightHawkeye]

Yovanovitch is clearly more credible as attested by the people who work with her and have worked with her over the years.

I'm not sure statements from the Department of State qualify as credibility enhancements.

 

[DaisyDay]

I'm not sure statements from the Department of State qualify as credibility enhancements.

It's not only from the Dept. of State, but from the people who know her and have worked with her over the decades...But you're speaking against your own government in favor of an ex-prosecutor from a known corruption hotbed? Interesting choice.

 

[NightHawkeye]

It's not only from the Dept. of State, but from the people who know her and have worked with her over the decades...But you're speaking against your own government in favor of an ex-prosecutor from a known corruption hotbed? Interesting choice.

Some people would call it the Deep State ...

Like I said earlier, Yovanovitch may be the sweetest person in the world. It doesn't matter. Zelenskiy didn't want her as ambassador. Trump didn't want her as ambassador. Something was clearly wrong. Normally, the president of a country doesn't say anything about another country's choice of ambassador.

Apparently, rather than staying neutral, Yovanovitch didn't want Zelenskiy to be president and she made that clear well before Zelenskiy took office. Some might even say that Yovanovitch interfered in Ukraine's election.

There's also the matter of Yovanovitch using State Department resources to monitor journalist communications. Yovanovitch may even face indictment in the near future for that.

 

[DaisyDay]

Some people would call it the Deep State ...

Sure, those who would sully the reputations of people who have worked long and hard to maintain a stable democracy. Bully for them.

Like I said earlier, Yovanovitch may be the sweetest person in the world.

You sure didn't say any such thing here.

It doesn't matter. Zelenskiy didn't want her as ambassador.

I don't believe that. Do you have any evidence of that besides Donald, who is known for his lack of truthfulness, saying so?

Trump didn't want her as ambassador. Something was clearly wrong. Normally, the president of a country doesn't say anything about another country's choice of ambassador.

Giuliani and his minions were working behind the scenes to get rid of her for their own motives which seem to have to do with natural gas contracts and her not playing along with them.

Apparently, rather than staying neutral, Yovanovitch didn't want Zelenskiy to be president and she made that clear well before Zelenskiy took office.

Where and when did she do this? It seems unlikely that a seasoned professional would do such a thing but very likely that she would be lied about in just that way.

Some might even say that Yovanovitch interfered in Ukraine's election.

Again, when and where - citation required.

There's also the matter of Yovanovitch using State Department resources to monitor journalist communications. Yovanovitch may even face indictment in the near future for that.

And where is the actual evidence for that beyond Judicial Watch's unevidenced accusation? This is a smear campaign that you seem to be embracing to judge by your repeated libelous posts.

 

[NightHawkeye]

And where is the actual evidence for that beyond Judicial Watch's unevidenced accusation? This is a smear campaign that you seem to be embracing to judge by your repeated libelous posts.

My repeated libelous posts?

Oh please! Yovanovitch is simply the latest pawn in the Democrat impeachment narrative. The Mueller report failed. The whistleblower report failed. Now, we have a nefarious plot involving Rudy and associates conspiring to oust Yovanovitch.

Yovanovitch served at the pleasure of the president and she was removed at the pleasure of the president. Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if we start hearing a lot more about Ms Yovanovitch in the near future. As for my earlier statements about Yovanovitch you can find more of her story with a Google search, though you'll have to get past all the noise of the past week to find other history, but it'll be fun.

 

[wing2000]

Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if we start hearing a lot more about Ms Yovanovitch in the near future.

No doubt you will make it so.

 

[DaisyDay]

My repeated libelous posts?

Yes.

Oh please! Yovanovitch is simply the latest pawn in the Democrat impeachment narrative. The Mueller report failed. The whistleblower report failed. Now, we have a nefarious plot involving Rudy and associates conspiring to oust Yovanovitch.

You're contending that they had nothing to do with it?

Yovanovitch served at the pleasure of the president and she was removed at the pleasure of the president.

This is true and would have gone unremarked if it were not for the vicious smear campaign against her by Rudy and associates (how many have been arrested this week?).

Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if we start hearing a lot more about Ms Yovanovitch in the near future. As for my earlier statements about Yovanovitch you can find more of her story with a Google search, though you'll have to get past all the noise of the past week to find other history, but it'll be fun.

Ah yes, much can be found on the interwebs! A goodly amount of that stuff is utter dreck. So far, all you've posted is evidentless, bald assertions lavishly topped with insinuations. Classic smear campaign. #sad

 

[childeye 2]

Because we never sully the names of our public servants?

When did the 'left' put that rule into effect?

When you don't love others as yourself, it's sin. That's the simplicity of Christ.

 

[The_Barmecide]

She served under six different presidents, and has forgotten more about diplomacy than you’ll ever know.

...but then she became a stumbling block for Dear Leader and now she must be thrown into the Memory Hole! (But first, a quick trip to Room 101 where her entire existence will be systematically disassembled until she sees 4 fingers!)

 

[cow451]

Who has the most credibility?

Yovanovitch.

 

[NightHawkeye]

When you don't love others as yourself, it's sin. That's the simplicity of Christ.

A worthy objective certainly.

And when ye come into an house, salute it. And if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it: but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you. And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.

 

[childeye 2]

A worthy objective certainly.

You're missing my point. Why do you post a character assassination of someone who testified against Trump?

 

[NightHawkeye]

You're missing my point. Why do you post a character assassination of someone who testified against Trump?

Seeking information via FOIA on bad actions by the former ambassador is character assassination?

Discussing other other bad actions allegedly done by the former ambassador is character assassination?

 

[Arcangl86]

Seeking information via FOIA on bad actions by the former ambassador is character assassination?

Discussing other other bad actions allegedly done by the former ambassador is character assassination?

When they is no evidence to suspect that those bad actions actually exist, yes. JW has a history of making up outlandish claims, filing FOIA requests and when they can't be fulfilled complaining about a coverup.

 

[NightHawkeye]

When they is no evidence to suspect that those bad actions actually exist, yes. JW has a history of making up outlandish claims, filing FOIA requests and when they can't be fulfilled complaining about a coverup.

Got a citation for that ... or is this just character assassination of JW?