WATCH LIVE: Public Impeachment Hearings (Yovanovich)

Well makes sense to me that if you are going to charge someone with witness intimidation something to intimidate them them had to have occurred and that they were intimated into doing something. And how do you intimidate testimony that was already given?

 

A 30 year public servant dismissed because trump bought into a conspiracy theory that his state department knew to be false at the time and because two Giuliani associates funneled money illegally into a Trump Super PAC while advocating for her dismissal.

And Trumpettes think it is a good idea for Trump to personally attack her while she is testifying.

It's ****ing dumb.

 

SHE WAS ACTIVELY TESTIFYING WHEN HE ATTACKED HER. FFS.

 

Oh well she was not threatened nor specifically addressed to in his comment. As I said rapier stupid for him to tweet but not a threat or tampering or intimidation he has a right to comment on the attacks against him and his policies.

 

Attacked? Oh you poor buggers...

 

Testifying to her previous testimony just in public now.

 

She was replaced and given another job because both President no longer had faith in her. Pound sand.

 

The only way you can pretend that she was "not threatened" despite the fact that he objectively attacked her and she testified that she felt intimidated is if you want to argue that no reasonable person could ever reach the conclusion that his statement was intimidating.

Good luck meeting that standard.

 

I think I'll take option number 2: Impeachment.

 

Even if she was reciting her previous testimony verbatim - and you have to know that she was not - then she was STILL giving new testimony.

 

Well? Are we going to have to do a repeat of this in the House? All the witnesses will again testify before the Judiciary Committee now?

 

Never happened. She had no idea the tweet was even out there until Schiff mentioned it. Schiff has no right to distract the witness and ask her "how she feels"....

Schiff is a liar, though. that is for certain. His coup attempt could land him in prison.

 

As Robert Ray just stated her testimony was already locked in stone in her deposition and you have shown no distinction between that and her public testimony.

 

For replacing an ambassador, since when and why is that impeachable?

 

Good luck meeting the legal standard of witness intimidation.

 

Is that a serious question? I have no ****ing idea.... It's probably either going to be Yes or No, if that helps...

 

It's nice to know that truthful testimony has the effect of "trashing" Bonespurs.

 

You said the Clinton attorney's questioning the witnesses was in the Judiciary committee and that this is the Intelligence committee while Mr. Not so legal is saying he is getting better treatment than Trump. So we are going to have to go through this all over again so the Presidents attorney's can ask question in the House? This is the impeachment and Trump's attorney's have not questioned one witness.

 

Like I said in the other thread. You want Trump held to the same standard and granted the same authority as a dictator.

 

Which is what? And where?

Remember, this is the House, and the elements and the evidence are within it's purview. And they could simply consider it more "abuse of the office".

 

Look what truthful statements about the ambassador did.

""Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad. She started off in Somalia, how did that go? Then fast forward to Ukraine, where the new Ukrainian President spoke unfavorably about her in my second phone call with him. It is a U.S. President's absolute right to appoint ambassadors," "

Where it the threat, where is the intimidation?

 

I don't give a **** whether you think I have to prove that her testimony changed. That is not how witness intimidation works nor is it a required element of the charge.

I'll be fine with the charge being added to his articles of impeachment.

Since Trump abused his power by replacing an ambassador based on allegations that he knew to be false and because his super PAC took illegal campaign contributions from two indicted Giuliani associates.

 

Trump insinuates that Yovanovitch is responsible for Somalia and says that everywhere she went turned bad. That is an attack on her reputation and her character. And addressing the "absolutely right" to appoint ambassadors is a thinly veiled threat against every ambassador that he could just replace them if they should dare to testify against him.

 

He plainly had not watched or listened to her testimony.