Former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovich
There has been much public speculation on who might be the first major player to be called on the carpet for alleged crimes of sedition, conspiracy, obstruction, perjury, “mishandling” highly classified information, and other assorted transgressions committed during the Trump era. Now that some semblance of equal justice under the law is being restored to federal law enforcement and the Dept of Justice by President Trump and his various appointees who have all been confirmed by the US Senate, expectations are high (at least in some quarters), that the liars, knaves, and thieves who have been bleating boldly on legacy media “news” shows, in paid speeches in various forums, and on social media in defense of the various hoaxes and lawfare that have been perpetrated on President Trump, his supporters and the American people MIGHT – just might! – finally be held to account for their crimes.
Take your pick; it’s a target-rich environment! James Comey, James Clapper, John Brennan, Mary McCord, Norm Eisen, Marc Elias, Leticia James, Fani Willis, Eric Swalwell, Adam Schiff, Jake Sullivan, Tony Blinken, and of course the “brightest stars” in the communist Democrats’ firmament: Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and the kingpin Barack Hussein Obama. All of them are complicit in seditious conspiracy, massive corruption, and grifting on a scale once thought unimaginable. How many are guilty of obstruction by destroying files and public records (including classified information), too?
But what about some of the lesser names and small fry? There are tons of mid-level people who aren’t household names who are also up to their eyeballs in the grifting, lies, and hoaxes. What strategy will Attorney General Bondi and FBI Director pursue? Build a giant RICO case that sweeps a bunch of the bigs and their underlings up in one fell swoop? The whole Crossfire Hurricane gambit is crying out for a RICO investigation that nails people in the Obama White House, the FBI, DoJ, the federal judiciary, the Shrillary campaign, Congress, the legacy media, and the intelligence community.
Or will they pursue the time-honored law enforcement tradition of starting with small fry, squeezing them with conclusive evidence of their crimes, and getting them to rat out their superiors and/or “bigger names” who were involved?
Regardless, it will take some time to build rock-solid cases. I’m willing to give Bondi and Patel some time to go after some of the big names because they have a herculean task of cleaning out their corrupt bureaucracies and recruiting dependable and trustworthy replacements – no small task! However, we need to start seeing some indictments by July and August in order to begin to restore public confidence in DoJ and the FBI. There simply must be harsh accountability for these people as a deterrent to future criminal actions by the political class!
WHAT ABOUT MARIE YOVANOVICH?
One of my “favorite” small fry is former Ukrainian Ambassador Marie Yovanovich, who had her 15 minutes of fame during the second impeachment hoax/trial of President Trump in 2019 before she disappeared into the obscurity of the leftist hive-academia-thinktank swamp to receive her payback for services rendered. To refresh memories of her foreign service officer career, her senior postings included U.S. Ambassador to Armenia (2008–2011), Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs (2012–2013), and Ambassador to Ukraine (2016–2019). After being fired by President Trump, Yovanovitch was a diplomat in residence at the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University. She retired from the US Foreign Service in late January 2020 and has since become a senior fellow in the Russia and Eurasia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. She was periodically interviewed in recent years by friendly legacy media to bolster Joe Biden’s actions in Ukraine (for example, here). And why not, as she has always been part of the Ukraine grift?
You might recall her testimony before the Democrat-run impeachment inquiry orchestrated by Democrat majority counsel Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) on 15 November 2019 in which she complained about her firing by President Trump some six months earlier (among other things). Her opening statement to the committee was perhaps the most disgraceful and rambling statement ever made by a former US ambassador. It was nothing but innuendo, opinion, and feelings in service of helping build the impeachment narrative out of nothingness against President Trump.
At the time, I carefully dissected her interview to expose her disingenuous statements in service of the Democrat impeachment narrative. We should never forget what she said given what we now know about the Ukraine impeachment hoax and associated seditious conspiracy that has never been properly investigated and prosecuted. That she claimed ignorance of the Hunter Biden and Bursima corruption and subsequent official Ukrainian investigation defies belief.
DISSECTING YOVANOVICH’S TESTIMONY
In the analysis of her testimony that follows, I quoted her statements preceded by a “Y” for Yovanovich while my responses are preceded by a “C” for Cvrk. Here we go.
Y: Like my colleagues, I entered the Foreign Service understanding that my job was to implement the foreign policy interests of this nation, as defined by the President and Congress, and to do so regardless of which person or party was in power.
C: Wednesday’s [13 Nov 2019] witnesses were destroyed because they clearly disagreed with the President’s policies and sought to undermine them. This statement was likely inserted by Goldman as an attempt to counter that testimony. Won’t work, given Yovanovitch’s anti-Trump actions.
Y: It was my great honor to be appointed to serve as an ambassador three times— twice by President George W. Bush and once by President Barack Obama.
C: Yes, yes, attempt to hide behind supposed bipartisan support. The reality is quite different: anti-Trump Uniparty support. We have learned that W is a globalist, too.
Y: [lots of statements about her service, including being in harm’s way, as well as comments about Ukraine’s “importance” in Europe]
C: All meaningless attempts to establish her credibility in the context of the inquiry. It’s all irrelevant, as she has no direct evidence about President Trump, having never even met him.
Y: The U.S. has provided significant security assistance since the onset of the war against Russia in 2014.
C: A completely disingenuous statement! Obama refused to give Ukraine lethal aid to help them in fight off Russian incursions into Ukraine. She left that part out.
Y: [lots of statements about Ukrainian corruption and how important it is to wean them from those bad habits]
C: More virtue-signaling, sanctimonious B.S. She tried to pose as a “corruption fighter” when she neglected to mention anything about Democrat corruption in Ukraine, as noted here. She became ambassador in August 2016. Her job – especially after President Trump shocked the Democrat establishment in November 2016 – was to keep a lid on any and all Democrat corruption and election-meddling in Ukraine. That was her REAL job.
Y: That’s why they [Ukrainians] launched the Revolution of Dignity in 2014 demanding to be a part of Europe, demanding the transformation of the system, demanding to live under the rule of law.
C: What a crock! Here’s the reality: the Clintons and their major contributor Ukrainian Viktor Pinchuk were behind the 2014 coup, which PERPETUATED the corruption under Poroshenko, as summarized here.
Y: Corrupt leaders are inherently less trustworthy, while an honest and accountable Ukrainian leadership makes a U.S.-Ukrainian partnership more reliable and more valuable to the United States.
C: Yeah, right. Republicans need to ask her if she supported Poroshenko’s “election” in 2014. She once again lies like a rug. Was she talking about Poroshenko? LMFAO!
Y: It was—and remains—a top U.S. priority to help Ukraine fight corruption.
C: Laughable! The only “corruption” she mentions is attributed to those bad old Russians. She neglects to mention Chalupa, Pinchuk, Podesta, the DNC, and the Biden/Kerry/Pelosi corruption in Ukraine that she helped cover up.
Y: Significant progress has been made since the 2014 Revolution of Dignity.
C: Totally disingenuous and duplicitous! That progress was manifested in Zelensky’s election, not anything that the Obama Administration or Democrats in general were responsible for! He was voted in exclusively to replace Pinchuk/Clinton corruptocrat Poroshenko.
Y: [I]t was not surprising, that when our anti-corruption efforts got in the way of a desire for profit or power, Ukrainians who preferred to play by the old, corrupt rules sought to remove me.
C: Talk about projection! Zelensky wants to attack ALL corruption, including US involvement in that corruption. Yovanovitch did NOTHING to get to the bottom of Democrat corruption in Ukraine, which is why Zelensky thanked the President for removing her.
Y: What continues to amaze me is that they found Americans willing to partner with them and, working together, they apparently succeeded in orchestrating the removal of a U.S. Ambassador.
C: More claptrap. This is complete speculation inserted by Goldman here to further the Democrats’ impeachment narrative. The reality is that her own actions warranted her replacement, and as she herself noted, the President could fire her any time he liked.
Y: How could our system fail like this? How is it that foreign corrupt interests could manipulate our government? Which country’s interests are served when the very corrupt behavior we have been criticizing is allowed to prevail? Such conduct undermines the U.S., exposes our friends, and widens the playing field for autocrats like President Putin.
C: She is projecting the sins of the Democrats onto President Trump here! Outrageous! We are just beginning to learn about Democrat corruption in Ukraine, and MUCH more will come out, including DNC/Clinton actions during the 2016 campaign. And THAT is the conduct that undermines the US, not the President’s actions to get to the bottom of Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 election – which is the exposure that the Democrats greatly fear, and which is the reason for their impeachment gambit. Note: all of her sweeping statements and claims about “corruption” purposely gloss over the truth, and that is why she made them – because most Americans don’t know the extent of Democrat-Ukraine corruption and meddling in the 2016 election on behalf of Shrillary.
Y: I arrived in Ukraine on August 22, 2016, and left Ukraine permanently on May 20, 2019.
C: Note the timeframe and all that we have learned about Spygate, Crowdstrike, US pressure on Ukrainian prosecutors/investigators, Hunter Biden, etc. Why was she picked, and what did Obama detail her to do? Imagine how the corruption would have continued had Shrillary won the election!
Y: The events that pre-dated my Ukraine service include: …
· the departure from the office of former Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.
C: Yet she happily comments on her opinions of the “corrupt” Shokin under questioning. Of course anyone looking into Hunter Biden et al would be considered “corrupt” by someone trying to cover up those crimes!
Y: Several other events occurred after I returned from Ukraine. These include:
· President Trump’s July 25, 2019 call with President Zelensky;
· The discussions surrounding that phone call; and
· Any discussions surrounding the delay of security assistance to Ukraine in Summer 2019.
C: In other words, she has nothing but hearsay to contribute about core matters, including the fake whistleblower’s complaint. She’s there exclusively to help the Democrats’ build a false narrative. She needs to be challenged HARD on her actions and claims.
Y: I want to reiterate first that the allegation that I disseminated a “Do Not Prosecute” list was a fabrication. Mr. Lutsenko, the former Ukrainian Prosecutor General who made that allegation, has acknowledged that the list never existed.
C: Not so fast! While Lutsenko recanted on the “list,” he reaffirmed that there were four people she wanted to see removed from their offices. Time for some direct questioning from Republicans on that score!
Y: I did not tell Mr. Lutsenko or other Ukrainian officials who they should or should not prosecute. Instead, I advocated the U.S. position that rule of law should prevail and Ukrainian law enforcement, prosecutors, and judges should stop wielding their power selectively, as a political weapon against their adversaries, and start dealing with all consistently and according to the law.
C: More prevarication and obfuscation! That’s a weasel way of saying, “I would like you to squelch any officials independently looking at Democrat-oriented corruption in Ukraine; please keep your people focused on Ukrainian corruption.”
Y: Also untrue are unsourced allegations that I told unidentified Embassy employees or Ukrainian officials that President Trump’s orders should be ignored because “he was going to be impeached”—or for any other reason. I did not and would not say such a thing. Such statements would be inconsistent with my training as a Foreign Service Officer and my role as an Ambassador.
C: Nice try! The allegations are entirely credible, and this will all come out in due course. She was/is a big Shrillary supporter, and her frustration carried over after the election. To assume that a career foreign service officer would not have made negative comments overseas about a Trump victory over her former boss and role model (Clinton) would take a special kind of denial mechanism.
Y: The Obama administration did not ask me to help the Clinton campaign or harm the Trump campaign, nor would I have taken any such steps if they had.
C: Misdirection here. She wouldn’t have been directly involved except to facilitate visas for Democrat operatives to visit Ukraine in 2016. It was THOSE people who were helping the Clinton campaign. Her job was to keep the lid on public exposure of Democrat corruption in Ukraine. Her last phrase in tweet #41 is a total smokescreen.
Y: I have never met Hunter Biden, nor have I had any direct or indirect conversations with him. And although I have met former Vice President Biden several times over the course of our many years in government, neither he nor the previous Administration ever raised the issue of either Burisma or Hunter Biden with me.
C: Lots to unpack here! Burisma was being investigated for corruption, yet the Obama Administration never raised the issue with their US ambassador there? LMFAO! Her claim that “no one in the Obama Administration” asked her about Burisma is misdirection. She is implying elected or appointed officials, which leaves the door wide open for unelected staffers, DNC operatives, John Podesta, and others to have discussed Burisma with her.
Y: I do not understand Mr. Giuliani’s motives for attacking me, nor can I offer an opinion on whether he believed the allegations he spread about me. Clearly, no one at the State Department did.
C: Of course, no one at Foggy Bottom (filled with Never-Trumpers!) would believe any allegations against Yovanovitch. They’re all just reliable Deep State actors, don’t ya know?
Y: What I can say is that Mr. Giuliani should have known those claims were suspect, coming as they reportedly did from individuals with questionable motives and with reason to believe that their political and financial ambitions would be stymied by our anti-corruption policy in Ukraine.
C: Thanks for conveying the unsubstantiated Democrat narrative, as well as expressing your “opinions” and those of unnamed others at the State Department.
Y: After being asked by the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs in early March 2019 to extend my tour until 2020, the smear campaign against me entered a new public phase in the United States.
C: The Undersecretary was appointed by Obama as Special Envoy for Middle East Peace (2011-2013), and previously Deputy Special Envoy (2009-11). Was that extension request made with the foreknowledge of Secretary Pompeo and President Trump? I highly doubt it. The smear campaign is immaterial. She can be – and was – fired, and the real reasons will come out in due course.
Y: When I returned to the United States, Deputy Secretary of State Sullivan told me there had been a concerted campaign against me, that the President no longer wished me to serve as Ambassador to Ukraine, and that in fact, the President had been pushing for my removal since the prior summer.
C: Well, whaddayaknow! Looks like President Trump wasn’t pre-briefed about that supposed extension request. No surprise there! And that means that the supposed “smear campaign” in 2019 was NOT the primary motivating factor for her removal.
Y: Although, then and now, I have always understood that I served at the pleasure of the President, I still find it difficult to comprehend that foreign and private interests were able to undermine U.S. interests in this way.
C: She tries to deflect once again from the real reasons for her firing, which predated the “smear campaign.” And again, she conflates who was really undermining US interests – corrupt Democrats and Ukrainian oligarchs working together.
Y: As various witnesses have recounted, they shared baseless allegations with the President and convinced him to remove his Ambassador, despite the fact that the State Department fully understood that the allegations were false and the sources highly suspect.
C: The smokescreen continues. “The allegations were false.” Not the ones that you were covering up for Democrat corruption, Marie!
Y: If our chief representative is kneecapped, it limits our effectiveness to safeguard the vital national security interests of the United States.
C: Yep, those career FSOs don’t like it when separate channels are used in dealing with foreign countries because they like to control all the dialog. Someone needs to remind her about FDR’s use of Harry Hopkins to get around Foggy Bottom back in the day.
Y: Our Ukraine policy has been thrown into disarray, and shady interests the world over have learned how little it takes to remove an American Ambassador who does not give them what they want. [plus more along the same sob-story lines]
C: That’s YOUR opinion, Marie, and is thereby irrelevant. And you know perfectly well why you were removed.
Y: At the closed deposition, I expressed grave concerns about the degradation of the Foreign Service over the past few years and the failure of State Department leadership to push back as foreign and corrupt interests apparently hijacked our Ukraine policy.
Y: I remain disappointed that the Department’s leadership and others have declined to acknowledge that the attacks against me and others are dangerously wrong.
C: Now we get to the core of her lying. This is sheer projection of EXACTLY what transpired during the Obama Administration and what WOULD have happened with Viktor Pinchuk getting his pound of flesh during a Shrillary Administration! The reality is that the State Dept leadership has been trying to unscrew that prior corruption and Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 election, and getting rid of the roadblock of a Clinton-backing ambassador is a great step in that direction.
Y: This is about far more than me or a couple of individuals. As Foreign Service professionals are being denigrated and undermined, the institution is also being degraded.
C: Give me a break! We’ve already learned that the Deep State has been undermining President Trump’s foreign policy at every step, including in Ukraine. FSOs don’t set policy – or undermine policy with which they disagree. That’s NOT their job and are rightfully castigated for doing so.
Y: Moreover, the attacks are leading to a crisis in the State Department as the policy process is visibly unravelling, leadership vacancies go unfilled, and senior and midlevel officers ponder an uncertain future and head for the doors. [plus more along those lines]
C: That’s complete spin and is NOT what is happening. Foggy Bottom perfidy is being exposed with each passing day: State Dept employees are losing security clearances for looking the other way about Shrillary’s illegal email server; Obama appointees are being exposed for Spygate sedition; State Dept facilitation of Democrat Uniparty corruption in places like Ukraine are being exposed. Damn straight those people who were involved and who are still at Foggy Bottom are getting nervous! Good!
Y: We are professionals, public servants who by vocation and training pursue the policies of the President, regardless of who holds that office or what party they affiliate with. We handle American Citizen Services, facilitate trade and commerce, work security issues, represent the U.S., and report to and advise Washington, to mention just a few of our functions.
C: More virtue-signaling! They also facilitate corruption involved with US foreign aid, hiding corruption of politically-connected US citizens, and other actions that are decidedly NOT altruistic – as we are indeed finding out in Ukraine.
Y: We are the fifty-two Americans who forty years ago this month began 444 days of deprivation, torture and captivity in Teheran.
C: Conflating her corrupt activities with the honorable service of those Iranian hostages in 1979-80 is disgraceful.
Y: And we are Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Patrick Smith, Ty Woods, and Glen Doherty—people rightly called heroes for their ultimate sacrifice to this nation’s foreign policy interests in Libya, eight years ago.
C: This is the ultimate insult! And from a Clinton supporter, no less! Obama and Shrillary were complicit in the deaths of those four Americans, and they’ve never been held to account. And yet Yovanovitch has the audacity to cite them in her closing statement!
Her closing statement finished with more virtue-signaling. It made me puke back then.
CONCLUDING THOUGHTS
Marie Yovanovich’s impeachment inquiry testimony has been lost in the avalanche of lies and hoaxes repeated endlessly by the Democrat-media complex from 2016 to the present day. She knew what she was doing as ambassador – and that was ensuring that the Ukrainian grift (and especially the Biden family connection!) did not see the light of day. President Trump caught her out in that and fired her as the Ukrainian phone call hoax unfolded.
And think about the Democrats’ persecution of Rudy Giuliani that flowed from his successful defense of President Trump in 2019-2020 to which Yovanovich’s testimony contributed! Giuliani was one of the first Trump supporters to be successfully targeted by Democrat lawfare.
Since Yovanovich was not on Joe Biden’s pardon list, perhaps a future special prosecutor investigating the Ukrainian grift should interview her under oath and pry out from her what she really knows about the 2014 Obama-Biden color revolution in Ukraine and the Burisma-Biden grift, not to mention the seditious conspiracy to impeach President Trump in 2019. And if not a special prosecutor, then how about a select congressional committee investigating same?
These people all need to be remembered, their lies exposed in the public square, and real accountability for their actions dispensed as both punishment and deterrence.
Don’t forget about Marie Yovanovich.
The end.
