Sure. But if it's part of an illegal scheme, there are consequences. You seem to believe that a President is like an emperor. You should familiarize yourself with our history and our Constitution to disabuse yourself of such uninformed notions.
More proof that the Democrats tried to rig the 2016 election for The Clintons before they started trying to nullify the election. "Mr. Lutsenko and his colleagues alleged, inter alia: that they possessed evidence that Ukrainian officials — namely, Head of the National Anticorruption Bureau of Ukraine Artem Sytnyk and Member of Parliament Serhiy Leshchenko — had “interfered” in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, allegedly in collaboration with the DNC and the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv; that the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv — specifically, U.S. Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, who had criticized Mr. Lutsenko’s organization for its poor record on fighting corruption — had allegedly obstructed Ukrainian law enforcement agencies’ pursuit of corruption cases, including by providing a “do not prosecute” list, and had blocked Ukrainian prosecutors from traveling to the United States expressly to prevent them from delivering their “evidence” about the 2016 U.S. election; and that former Vice President Biden had pressured former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in 2016 to fire then Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin in order to quash a purported criminal probe into Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian energy company on whose board the former Vice President’s son, Hunter, sat." https://www.npr.org/2019/11/09/7761...laint-has-largely-been-corroborated-heres-how
Yes and No. They can remove those ambassadors for any reason, but they can also be held accountable when the reason for that removal is an abuse of power.
Setting aside that some of those allegations, a la Yovanovitch provided a "do not prosecute" list, have been recanted by Lutsenko (or rather, he said that there was no proof of a list)...you are basically just quoting portions of the whistleblower complaint that was confirmed.
The President can remove an ambassador for any reason. and he's not required to answer for it. He can remove an ambassador if he doesn't like the ambassador's hairstyle. That said, I fail to see where there was any abuse of power...
It's fascinating to me that the party which believes it was perfectly fine for Hillary Clinton to mishandle classified information, destroy cell phones, wipe hard drives and violate not only the espionage but her oath of office, is losing their collective mind over Trump asking the Ukrainian President for a favor...
Bbbbbutwhatabout_________________again? Tell us about her "oath of office" because it's puzzling what you even mean by that.
Bribery: “3. The State Department Signed Off on the Deal but Hillary Clinton Wasn’t Involved, Her Campaign Contended Hillary Clinton. (Getty) The Washington Post reports that the State Department was involved. “The State Department was one of nine agencies comprising CFIUS, which vets potential national security impacts of transactions where a foreign government gains control of a U.S. company,” The Post wrote. The Post noted that Clinton’s campaign said “Clinton herself was not involved in the State Department’s review and did not direct the department to take any position on the sale of Uranium One.” However, the New York Times article, from 2015, noted, “Shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.” HEAVY.COM, Clinton ‘Uranium Deal’ & Russia: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know, 3/27/2017. http://heavy.com/news/2017/03/clint...one-foundation-donations-putin-frank-giustra/
I wouldn't ask you to do anything, because you would not do a very good job and I'd have to do it anyway. But you could at least try. I've done your job. Please don't let it go to waste. https://campaignlegal.org/update/ye...ted-campaign-finance-law-asking-ukraine-favor https://www.lawfareblog.com/self-dealing-ukraine-core-impeachment-inquiry
*LOL* Very informative. Now tell us how this was magically violated. And show your work--no conspiracy theories, no goofy conclusory statements and actual facts, please.
The NYT article was debunked a long time ago. Feel free to catch up: https://kdvr.com/2017/11/15/shepard-smith-fact-checks-fox-news-on-clinton-uranium-one-deal/ https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/21/opinion/uranium-deal-clinton-russia.html
Eh? You seemed confused about an oath of office.. I provided it for you.. Instead of thanking me you post the above nonsense?
I provided what you were confused with.. I can see where educating you can be seen as pointless though~
So, you have no idea what you're talking about and are concerned that any attempt to apply that statute to Hillary Clinton would confirm that. Got it. Thank you for a pointless exercise.
I thought you might be a serious person to discuss things with. Apparently, this is one of the few times I'm mistaken. What I read there is the author's opinion that Trump broke the law, but that carries about the same weight with me as your opinion does...
