The Bloom is Off The Ruse – Marie Yovanovitch Transcript a Case Study in Narrative Construction…

Good grief, it was always inferred that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff had assembled a ‘star chamber’ proceeding in the HPSCI basement, but after actually reading the transcript of former U.S. Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch to Schiff’s assembly the bloom is officially off the ruse.

Start by remembering: after the 2018 mid-terms, in preparation for the “impeachment” strategy, HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler hired Lawfare group members to become House committee staff.

Chairman Schiff hired former SDNY U.S. Attorney Daniel Goldman (link), and Chairman Nadler hired  Obama Administration lawyer Norm Eisen and criminal defense attorney Barry Berke (link).  House Speaker Nancy Pelosi then hired Douglas Letter as House General Counsel – all are within the Lawfare network.

Why is that important?  Because hired Lawfare contractor Daniel Goldman was the inquisitor for the “deposition” of Ms. Yovanovitch.  There are no Democrat politicians present other than Chairman Adam Schiff; it’s all staff. This deposition is a political ruse.

Not only was her appearance carefully orchestrated with Chairman Schiff’s staff, but Ms. Yovanovitch brought three lawyers with her to help construct the needs of the committee and protect Yovanovitch’s legal interests.  [Transcript pdf available here]

We can only imagine who actually paid for lawyers Lawrence Robbins, Laurie Rubenstein and Rachel Li Wai Suen at the rate of $1,500/hr, per lawyer, ($4,500/hr).

I honestly don’t think Chairman Adam Schiff anticipates anyone actually reading these transcripts; particularly this one.

By design the State Department, nor any official or representative therein, was not allowed to attend the ‘deposition’ to monitor the interests or “equities” of the executive branch.

This might strike readers as a little curious who remember the DOJ and FBI witness interviews of current and former FBI and DOJ staff, where FBI and DOJ lawyers attended testimony and stopped witnesses from answering any question they decided were adverse to the interests of the institutions.

How is it that House hearing rules in 2017 and 2018 did not forbid executive branch FBI and DOJ lawyers, but yet House hearing rules in 2019 block the executive branch?

A curious shift in priority.

Additionally, prior to her appearance before the HPSCI “committee” (staff, lawyers and not politicians) to give her “deposition”, Ms. Yovanovitch, working with committee staff for maximum impact, gave her opening statement to the Washington Post so they could coordinate the media narrative surrounding her appearance.   That little surface fact essentially encapsulates the entire purpose for Yovanovitch’s appearance.   This is all a constructed political pantomime.

The back-and-forth where Yovanovitch’s lawyers would not allow her to admit to working with Washington Post journalists, under the precept of that communication being coordinated through her lawyers and thus would be attorney-client privilege, is a case study in obtuse legalese.

The end result was Yovanovitch did not admit to working with the Washington Post, while it is clearly evident she was working with the Washington Post and the staff of Adam Schiff’s committee…. hence, her need for three lawyers.

You can read the full transcript HEREIt is pure propaganda.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Cold Anger, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Donald Trump, Impeachment, Legislation, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Secretary of State, Typical Prog Behavior, Ukraine, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

134 Responses to The Bloom is Off The Ruse – Marie Yovanovitch Transcript a Case Study in Narrative Construction…

  1. John says:

    When will these criminals be brought to justice?

    Liked by 19 people

    • Graham Pink says:

      Never.

      Liked by 6 people

    • Boots says:

      When they’re hanged.

      Liked by 2 people

    • repsort says:

      They won’t be, sorry.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Retired USMC says:

        Don’t be so sure….the people are waiting for justice yes….but they will get justice even if it has to be done by a mob ala French Revolution….it’s coming.

        Liked by 1 person

    • sDee says:

      When will these criminals be brought to justice?

      I tried to come up with an answer for ya’ but realized I’ve no idea anymore what justice means.

      It’s a rhetorical question then. Right?

      Liked by 1 person

    • Joshua2415 says:

      “And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done.” – Revelation 20:12-13

      Liked by 13 people

      • YvonneMarie says:

        Good answer.

        Like

      • Lucille says:

        Justice in this world is always a 50/50 proposition…we either get it or we don’t. History shows that mostly we don’t. Not so for the next life…there truth/Truth and justice matter.

        That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t work toward seeing justice done here. It’s part of our earthly responsibility. But expecting justice will only make an adverse decision that much harder to bear. There is something to be said for stoicism.

        Liked by 5 people

      • John-Y128 says:

        We need a little judging of the living, there’s ‘no fear’ in the afterlife justice, they already know where they’re headed.

        Liked by 1 person

        • prtomr says:

          John-Y128, not all people know which direction they are headed in the afterlife. Some are convinced of their ‘worthiness’ of Heaven just as much as they are convinced of their evil ways. Things will not turn out well for most of that kind of person in the afterlife.

          Liked by 2 people

      • amazed treetop downlooker says:

        Good, YES..ULTIMATE BEST answer, YES !

        Like

    • Cicero says:

      Justice is the legal combat between a plaintiff and a defendant, it matters not the verdict. As long as criminality is unrecognized or tolerated by our executive branch there is no possibility of justice. It appears that Barr and the GOP Senate are AWOL!

      Liked by 3 people

    • Daniel says:

      There is a whole lot of political garbage between where we are today and where we need to be in order to accomplish that end. To overcome the politics, the media and others must have their credibility destroyed. They are the guardians of the criminals here.

      And awhile I absolutely identify with your view that it isn’t happening and may never happen, I want you to watch how the narratives have shifted over time and I want to point out the net results of the president in destroying the credibility of both the media and the corrupt. And let’s not forget the other patriot heroes out there getting the information through FOIA despite efforts to obstruct and deny. It is erosive and it is all working.

      The path to Justice must be cleared before it can happen.

      2020. Get out the vote. Talk to people. Speak around people frankly and with courage. Have conversations where you know you can be heard. There are more of us out there than you know but we are terrified of the left and those influenced by the left.

      The president isn’t magical. He simply gives no fear to those who want to destroy him. Fear is their weapon. Do not let them have it.

      Liked by 5 people

    • shirley49 says:

      We have been asking that question for 3 years. Still waiting for the Horowitz report.

      Like

      • aarmad says:

        Yes, and also some input from Durham.. How about a leak from the investigation…just kidding. We have been waiting for a long time. This is not a good sign. A reason may be that someone doesn’t want anything out before Trump is impeached! That is my take. The democrats are in a hurry to impeach the President so don’t hold your breath to see anything from Horowitz or Durham. FRUSTRATING!!!!

        Liked by 1 person

  2. snarkybeach says:

    I sure hope that AG Barr lowers the hammer on such a traitorous POS.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Caius Lowell says:

      Unlikely as Barr is part of 0bama’s DC swamp…

      Liked by 4 people

      • Jim in TN says:

        Correction, Barr has been part of the CIA swamp under Nixon and Ford, a minor part in Reagan’s White House, a big part of George H. W. Bush’s swamp, and parts of various corporate and legal swamps in the interim. During most of Obama’s swamp, Barr was advising companies on dealing with said swamp.

        https://www.justice.gov/ag/bio/barr-william-pelham

        Barr’s loyalties are to the DOJ and to the Bush side of the Uniparty swamp coin. And maybe to Verizon.

        Liked by 6 people

        • chipin8511 says:

          Drew Jive
          Dick, lets get it out in the open now that Mr Eric Ciaramella of the CIA and NSC has been outed by the liberal media. First of all this was not “whistleblowing” he conducted.
          Ciaramella instead performed espionage, conducting a crime against the People and President.
          es·pi·o·nage
          /ˈespēəˌnäZH/
          noun
          the practice of spying or of using spies, typically by governments to obtain political and military information.

          But then again, this all falls inline with what apparently President Obama had to of signed off on. The evidence of a high crime and misdemeanor, treason and bribes.
          This all what the previous administration has conducted against this new Administration and the People. Also Chairman Shiff(D) is now a part of that crime.
          As I’m sure Speaker (in name only) Pelosi has been aware and updated, step by step in this. I’m at the point right now that, you can expect anything illegal to take place with the current Speaker (in name only) Pelosi led Congress.

          So when AG Barr testified last summer about what’s been happening and his reviews. AG Barr mentioned he beleived spying took place against this President.
          And since AG Barr appointed John Durham, the U.S. attorney in Connecticut to begin the Russia origins probe. The Deep State and their allies ramped up their efforts attacking the President as well as AG Barr.
          Its pretty obvious these unelected bureaucrats are now scurrying for cover using people like Brennan to defend them. Even though Brennan and Clapper face almost certain indictment once Durham’s criminal investigation is complete.

          Sean Hannity always said, 2019 is the year of the boomerang, its all coming back to the deep state and Obama Administration. As it is sure looking like that more and more all the time.
          Keep America Great

          Liked by 4 people

          • PVCDroid says:

            The Dems have sacrificed Biden in their zeal to get Trump. They must have realized this would happen. They could have more likely covered up Biden’s issues in the background. Everything they do makes them only look more corrupt at this point.

            Liked by 4 people

      • aarmad says:

        My suspicion from the start……

        Liked by 1 person

  3. lotbusyexec says:

    I thought her name was Yu-want-abitch? Sorry could not resist!

    Liked by 3 people

  4. BestBets says:

    We’re running out of words to describe this waste of taxpayer money—kabuki dance, political pantomime, performance art. At this point, not even the low info voters are buying it. I was with one today and she thinks it’s stupid.

    Liked by 9 people

    • Zy says:

      Lets start a lawsuit against the Demosocialist leadership and party for massive waste of money and their massive fraud against us, the American taxpayers.

      Liked by 8 people

    • glissmeister says:

      Waste of money? Not for Democrats!

      IT’S A PAYDAY!!

      Yet another example of Democrat conversion/diversion of taxpayer dollars into Democrat pockets, particularly Democrat syndicate interests and the lawyers conspiring to represent them.

      And the playbook is the same. Like the Chicagofication of California. Now it’s Gavin Newsome churning decades of Democrat self-inflicted government incompetence into massive inflows of federal funds. It’s just another device to bleed the nation’s taxpayers to offset the disaster of pension deficits and predatory Democrat sycophants milking the state’s public payroll and grant programs.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Sherri Young says:

    There’s a typo.

    $1,500/hr x 3 = $4,500, not $3,500

    Like

  6. Kerry Gimbel says:

    So many commies. I’d love to tell them what to do with their hammer and sickle

    Liked by 6 people

  7. Shyster says:

    I haven’t read it yet, but those damn republican representatives had better gone scorched earth on her. They better have pinned her down on her alleged bad mouthing of the Trump Admin and president Trump. If she lied on these points, it wouldn’t be that difficult to import the Ukraine witnesses to testify and prove this globalist foreverbamer is a perjurer.

    Liked by 5 people

  8. hokkoda says:

    She’s a liar, in the company of liars, represented by paid liars. Anyone expecting anything other than a liar to emerge needs serious mental health counseling.

    Keep in mind that she’s one of their “ace” witnesses. This is literally the BEST they can do.

    Which reinforces my point. This is a paperwork impeachment. Nancy has the votes. They march out “witnesses” to validate whatever law Schiff will claim was broken. It doesn’t have to be true. They just need somebody to say something, and that something matters not. Just know that it’s “bad” and therefore impeachable.

    All this while the a Democrats continue to buy votes and give Romney time to get the Senate 51 votes to convict. Trump won’t be removed, but we’ll get 8-10-12 months of …

    “The Senate voted by majority to convict and remove. Therefore Trump is “guilty”, and that damn “Constitution” thing that needs to be repealed kept us from removing Trump.”

    This will of course necessitate additional investigations, and stall all legislative action until after the elections. 24/7 “Trump convicted, saved by technicality” and McConnell will be told to hold a re-vote with just 16 senators, 10 Democrats plus Mitt Romney.

    I’ve noticed a shift in PDJT’s tone and request of his voters. The Angry Majority must be polling well. And he’s added that the 2020 election is an opportunity for said Angry Majority to deliver such a resounding shellacking to Democrats that they’ll never try this again.

    You will not find a more motivated group of voters than those with a mission that isn’t just voting for their guy, but a political wrecking ball aimed at the heart of the opposition.

    Impeachment is Obamacare…the hill Democrats are running to die upon.

    Liked by 7 people

    • Boots says:

      …Democrats are running to die upon…
      ——–
      Man, I just picture dozens of them old MG08 Maxim’s mowing them down like in WWI. The world would be a better, safer, saner place.

      Liked by 5 people

      • jonhabart says:

        If the Democrat party ceased to exist for whatever reason 88% of the problems afflicting the United States would become mute. A Republican MAGA Super Majority could literally undo any and all abhorrent and unconstitutional legislative actions and their toxic cultural ideology would be purged in short order.

        #NoMoreDemocrats

        Liked by 2 people

    • sdh says:

      did you know that USDA employees are on furlough because congress did not appropriate $$ for after Oct 1. WHere is the media on this? who else is on furlough? Gov shut down!!! whose fault? Dems.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Mark Motley says:

      It takes a Supermajority, 67 votes to convict.

      Like

      • hokkoda says:

        I know, but that’s my point. They’re going to drag this out until they get word from Romney that he’s got 51 votes to convict. It would not remove Trump from office, but getting a majority of Senators to convict would be a devastating blow to Trump and his agenda. If you think it’s bad now, if he got 51 votes to convict, the Bureaucracy would declare open war on Trump for the rest of his time in office. This stuff we’re seeing now – nearly open insurrection by the Government Party – would intensify 1000x.

        They know they cannot win a conviction. They’re going to try to win a majority vote. Or, if they can, try to force it so that the full Senate doesn’t get to vote. If they can get a “Jury” of, say 15-20 Senators instead of all 100, they will have fewer Senators to “flip” which is easier to do.

        Like

        • ezgoer says:

          Trump can never be removed with GOP votes — and McConnell and just about all Republican Senators know it (except Romney and Murkowski). They know in their bones that half the GOP base will be so outraged they will abandon the party, stay home in 2020 and the GOP will lose in droves. That will include turtle Mitch in KY. That is what will save Trump from the GOPe selling out and removing him. But it is quite likely there will be 4 GOP traitors who will vote with the Dems to produce a 51-49 “conviction”. Romney and Murkowski (who didn’t even vote to confirm Kavanaugh) are solid for conviction. Collins and Alexander are both strong possibilities. Alexander despises Trump and half the time votes with the Dems. He’s retiring and doesn’t have to face Trump loving voters again in TN. Collins is running in blue Maine and may feel she needs to vote for impeachment to help her plus erase her unpopular support for Kavanaugh. That’s 4 right there.

          Liked by 1 person

          • hokkoda says:

            Yep, and I think this is the Democrats’ exact strategy. GOP should raise a “motion to dismiss”, which I think only requires 51 votes. I assume Pence can break a tie, but I don’t know. Anyway, move to dismiss gives the GOP flakes a way out. And it sends the right message to the House that they’re not even going to take it up.

            Liked by 1 person

  9. John Rawls says:

    I honestly don’t understand what relevant information she contributed. What;s important about her testimony to the Dems?

    Liked by 2 people

    • ALEX says:

      Narrative building as Sundance mentioned. We have to remember this is a script that dozens of people planned out well in advance. I’m actually surprised how amateur this has become, because these folks will be exposed soon enough

      Liked by 4 people

    • TarsTarkas says:

      Bulk. If a hundred bullshitters way it’s true, it must be true!

      Liked by 4 people

    • hokkoda says:

      She contributed nothing in her testimony. Her purpose is to show up and be some random administration person who showed up and said allegedly “bad things”. The Dems assume nobody will actually read the transcript, and that the media will just yell really loud that some important-sounding person said bad things about Orange Bad Man. They’ll leave out that she was fired for misconduct. These “hearings” are about creating an impression that there’s a landslide of damning information about Trump. It is being ignored that they’re all Trump hating losers with an axe to grind.

      “Look at all these dozens of people who came and said bad things about Trump.” It matters not what they say, only that there are a lot of time, they have impressive sounding resumes, and they universally hate Trump. The Media will take it from there.

      Like

  10. ALEX says:

    Good catch Sundance. My very first thought when this started was how the FBI and DOJ had lawyers protecting them from disclosure and how this process is violating the separation of powers among other standards

    The Lt. Colonel just can’t give a deposition against his Commander in Chief like its traffic court

    I heard this anti Trump ambassador is saying he wanted her to praise him. This is absurd and childish.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Jederman says:

      We are now at a point where ANYBODY “working” in the fed gvt with a dem voter registration, and/or appointed/hired during a dem regime should be assumed hostile and dis-loyal to any R CinC (and his voters). What more does it take?

      For example this vindman guy was a fanatic obama supporter who remained loyal to obama after he left office and is now burrowed into the system attacking obama’s political opposition. How many more are there?

      This ain’t like the old days when we simply disagreed, maybe even loudly disagreed. This is active backstabbing and sneaking around like lame little b!tches, whispering and conniving. All in hopes for a pat on the head or a chance to lick the hand of obama/clinton/msm PTB.

      Liked by 2 people

  11. davidberetta says:

    GET A ROPE! Actually We need to buy Rope in bulk at this point!

    Liked by 2 people

    • dd_sc says:

      Only need one rope to work a guillotine.
      And a spare.

      Liked by 3 people

      • davidberetta says:

        I suppose but dozens of traitors each need a rope – unless they each get their punishment form the same rope. Awe…. I see you are into saving money….great idea.

        Punish these traitors one-after-the-other with the same device. I like that too!

        Liked by 1 person

    • Deplorable Nazarene Zealot says:

      One hanging rope reused until it breaks. then charge the one that broke for a new one and rehang him or her. all hanging events on pay per view with proceeds to pay off US debt. also national raffle for opportunity to pull the lever on the gallows…again funds raised to pay off debt.

      Mad? Damn straight!

      Liked by 1 person

  12. At this point, you can more-or-less reduce the Democrat’s strategy – no matter how much they continue to be willing to spend on the same set of lawyers – to this final end-game: a Bill of Attainder.

    Fundamentally, these people want you to accept that (designated star-chamber committees of …) the US House of Representatives shall, in the end, be “the ones to determine whether the US President is ‘innocent’ or ‘guilty,'” and to decide exactly what “high crimes” he shall be found guilty of. This same “star chamber” shall thereafter meet out punishment – in the form of impeachment.

    So, does this sound familiar? (Both subsequent quotes come from Wikipedia … of course.)

    A bill of attainder (also known as an act of attainder or writ of attainder or bill of pains and penalties) is an act of a legislature declaring a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them, often without a trial. As with attainder resulting from the normal judicial process, the effect of such a bill is to nullify the targeted person’s civil rights, most notably the right to own property (and thus pass it on to heirs), the right to a title of nobility, and, in at least the original usage, the right to life itself. Bills of attainder passed in Parliament by Henry VIII on 29 January 1542 resulted in the executions of a number of notable historical figures.

    Or this?

    The Star Chamber (Latin: Camera stellata) was an English court which sat at the royal Palace of Westminster, from the late 15th century to the mid-17th century (c. 1641), and was composed of Privy Counsellors and common-law judges, to supplement the judicial activities of the common-law and equity courts in civil and criminal matters. The Star Chamber was originally established to ensure the fair enforcement of laws against socially and politically prominent people so powerful that ordinary courts would probably hesitate to convict them of their crimes. However, it became synonymous with social and political oppression through the arbitrary use and abuse of the power it wielded.

    In modern usage, legal or administrative bodies with strict, arbitrary rulings and secretive proceedings are sometimes called, metaphorically or poetically, “star chambers”. This is a pejorative term and intended to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the proceedings. “Star Chamber” can also, rarely, be used in its original meaning, for instance when a politician uses parliamentary privilege to examine and then exculpate or condemn a powerful organisation or person. Due to the constitutional separation of powers and the ceasing of the Star Chamber, the main powers of select committees are to enhance the public debate. Politicians are deemed to no longer wield powers in the criminal law, which belongs to the courts.[a]

    No, absolutely, none of these “Lawfare™ tactics” should be seen as “new, and therefore legitimate, and therefore terrifying,” because … they are not. “Star Chambers” first appeared almost eight hundred years ago, and “Bills of Attainder” (which are expressly prohibited by our Constitution) were used to execute 1,500 people, five hundred years ago.

    In our present system of justice, there is only one step forward: the US Supreme Court. Trump v. US House of Representatives. The legal case which will be described, by future historians hundreds of years from now, as “the most important legal case that the Court ever heard.”

    Liked by 9 people

    • sDee says:

      “the most important legal case that the Court ever heard.”

      and one the weasels would not be able to punt

      Liked by 1 person

      • It will be the legal case which affirms that the US Constitution says what it actually says, and that the well-documented and well-schooled intentions of its Founders will be preserved. That the safeguards, against centuries-old historical abuses (now repeated) will have once again vanquished their determined enemies, and stood the tests of time.

        Liked by 3 people

        • sDee says:

          Like so many others that could have affirmed the original intent of the Constitution?

          Overall, Supreme Court precedent has done more to destroy the Republic than strengthen it. Roberts court is no exception.

          I am just saying that as much as they’d like to punt, should a case as you describe comes forward to them, the weasels would have no where to hide.

          Antonin Scalia was a great loss to Liberty.

          Liked by 2 people

  13. gsonFIT says:

    I am not going to read it, but have one question. Has this women ever met or spoken to President Trump?

    Liked by 2 people

  14. hocuspocus13 says:

    It’s actually the next “sketch” for Saturday Night Live 😉😉😉

    Liked by 1 person

  15. WSB says:

    We the American Taxpayers unfortunately are paying for those high priced criminals. Our entire government is a gigantic washing machine.

    Liked by 5 people

  16. sDee says:

    “$1,500/hr, per lawyer”
    That more than the Biden’s shook down Bursima for.
    Sedition and subversion seems quite lucrative – time to burn that town down.

    Like

  17. She works with the Fake Reporters and wiretaps the Real Reporters.

    Liked by 3 people

  18. Bogeyfree says:

    If the Dems can do this to a President they can and will do it to anyone they don’t like and who doesn’t conform.

    McConnell needs to blast this ASAP as a massive fraud and reject any bogus articles of impeachment from the House.

    It’s an absolute joke

    Liked by 5 people

    • McConnell? Is he on our side yet?

      Liked by 2 people

    • icthematrix says:

      Mitch is party to this. He’s not a conspirator but definitely in on the plot, and seeking to use every aspect to his and the RINO’S advantage. Being compromised himself by corruption along with so many in Congress, President Trump threatens to upend everyone’s gravy train…and possibly put some in jail.

      This farce is quite the play…directed and produced by evil Lawfare pukes and cheered on by obsessed resistance TDS patients nationwide. Why are they able to do this? No active action push back from R’s and no press to challenge anything (only propaganda or cooperative cheering).

      Liked by 4 people

    • MDNA I says:

      I’m afraid Lawfare has him by the balls in the sense I think whatever they’ve designed blurs the lines so badly for McConnell to dismiss or rush a trial has become next to impossible…

      His “Team Mitch” campaign team Twitter account is still bashing impeachment,. & I wouldn’t sneeze at him being at the rally tonight w/ Rand Paul & supporting Bevin …..every Republican from KY seemed to be there tonight, which is a show of unity

      But don’t expect him to brag he’s gonna just dismiss it now that the Lawfare people’s payload is delivered……

      Put it this way: let’s assume for arguments sake that Senate GOP have huddled & decided “this is bullshit we’re not gonna convict” let’s pretend they have somehow communicated to each other that “the plan” is to not even entertain w/e case the House sends them

      What do you think would happen if they openly said so? vs Making an effort in public to sound like they’re not going to prejudice the result?

      Liked by 1 person

      • MDNA I says:

        It really falls on the House Republicans to grind this thing up so by the time it reaches the Senate, it’s a shadow of itself

        I don’t think there’s any other way to play it. If the Senate is too strident it looks prejudicial. If they kinda keep their hands to themselves & let the House Minority handle things there’s a lot better chance they’ll be able to say, by the time everything has come to pass, that POTUS has not done anything that warrants removal

        Liked by 1 person

  19. jx says:

    There is no evidence that any committee has been authorized to begin an impeachment inquiry or any inquiry incidental to an impeachment inquiry.

    This is no small matter. Without authorization the investigation, hearings, and subpoenas lack the authority vested by the Constitution.

    The appearance of authority has allowed the Judiciary Cmte to fraudulently induce a court to order grand jury information be supplied to the Cmte.

    Worse, Schiff is threatening to hold people in contempt if they do not comply with his subpoenas. How can a person be found in contempt of an illicit proceeding? How can a president be found in contempt of an illicit proceeding? That is Schiff’s intent.

    Do not give life to the lie. Republicans must demand documentation of when any committee was authorized to begin investigation.

    Liked by 7 people

  20. clulessgrandpa says:

    So what was in the transcript? Anything worth noting?

    Like

  21. Ellis says:

    No crime.

    Like

  22. Jay Currie says:

    I read the thing…total waste of time for the Dems. They got the narrative with the opening statement, the “deposition” added nothing but did suggest that this woman remained in the loop, even with respect to classified information after she left her post. Jim Jordan asked some useful questions but they are buried.

    The fact Schiff is releasing the transcripts suggests that he is feeling some heat for running his wee Star Chamber. If this is the best the Dems can do they are screwed.

    Liked by 3 people

  23. John Rawls says:

    So we now know Burisma contacted Obama State Dept asking for political favors for Hunter Biden.

    https://johnsolomonreports.com/

    Liked by 1 person

  24. Justah says:

    This is interesting – I read a couple of days ago that the Leftist House rejected funding for Ukraine in the new appropriations bill – Source Senator Cotton – Arkansas.

    Democrats Vote Against Troops, Ukraine Defense Funding – October 31, 2019
    https://www.cotton.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=1244

    Today from Reuters – November 4, 2019
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-impeachment-prosecutor-excl-idUSKBN1XE20C
    Exclusive: Ukraine to fire prosecutor who discussed Bidens with Giuliani – source

    Hmmm – Dems deny funding – Ukraine stops the Investigation and fires the Prosecutor on Boy Biden’s Company. What an amazing Co-Inky-Dense, and it only took 4 days.

    Like

    • sDee says:

      “it only took 4 days.”

      Trump time. Good, bad or ugly he gets right to the root of the matter.

      In a week or so, not only did President Trump nix yet-another-middle-east-war, he exposed the IC warmongers and finisnhed it off with an epic slap down of Erdogan.

      Liked by 2 people

  25. fangdog says:

    The average Joe doesn’t care or understand all the ends and outs about this stuff. The average Joe just wants to see crooks accountable and justice served the criminals. The average Joe doesn’t care about how “cute” or cleaver. The average Joe just wants to hear the sound “clank” for those who he would hear the sound “clank” if it was “me”.

    Liked by 1 person

    • sDee says:

      As much as I would relish it, I do not think that just sentencing these crooks, even the Clinton and Obama gangs, would give us average Joes’ what we need to rise up and restore liberty, free market capitalism, and America’s powerful middle class.

      The ugly, seething underbelly of globalism and all its deep state henchmen needs to be exposed.

      Like

  26. TwoLaine says:

    Dobbs had Mike Pompeo on tonight. One of the things they discussed were all of these banana republic rules for this BS.

    Like

  27. CC says:

    Read most of the transcript – net/net:
    * Schiff actively worked to recuperate the the witness – essentially served as her counsel and openly coached the witness
    * Witness counsel – Robbins – is an asshole
    * Another democrat witness that has impeccable memory and lots of opinions when questioned by democrats hired attorney – and a total lack of memory/opinion when questioned by republicans
    * Democrats going after Rudy – and the president was mean

    Liked by 3 people

    • old deplorable owl says:

      I found it hard to believe that the woman had the creds she claimed. She sounded like a sophomore-year Valley Girl, not a 30-year State Dept. employee. Wish I had the wherewithal to count the ‘you knows’ in her gibberish. Literally hundreds. This is an ambassador? Really came across as having been coached by Ballsy-Ford and a Schifferbrains staffer!
      One caveat – I clicked the link provided, but only got about 130 pages of “testimony”, then it just stopped with the answer to a question. There were what looked like an equal number of pages that were blank left. Hate to have to find another link and wade through that again, but am curious what else Bugeyes and the sleazeballs (What a band name, huh?) lead her into later.
      The sacrifices we make………………

      Like

  28. Brutalus says:

    For my money, Trump is 3 for 3 in outplaying these chumps. 1) the late hit on Kavannaugh, any other Republican would have backed off on Kavannaugh…Trump brought him in and said go fight for it 2) the Mueller investigation…hot headed, rash Trump was supposed to fire him, setting up obstruction…Trump waited them out and they ended up with a whole Denver omelette on their face…3) and here Ukraine…think of the hyperventilating that would be going on in the press if Trump hadnt released the transcripts.

    The Dems (and Uniparty) are chasing this now…the Law of Diminishing returns has them…its sort of like the first hot fudge sundae is great…the second is ok…the third will make you sick…after the Mueller fiasco…this is anti climatic…this is flimsy…and obviously rigged…yes, there’s a lot of people who hate Trump…but even out here in California there’s a queasiness to all of this…

    And as far as Barr/ Durham…I share your frustration…but I think this is all part of the plan…Trump’s own outrage trap…look how worked up we all are…my God I cant wait to run through a wall to vote in 2020…like all of you, I’m beaten down by the one sidedness of all of this in terms of indictments and all….but I trust Trump’s track record and I’m betting he’s going to go 4 for when he finally makes his move on the coup plotters

    Liked by 2 people

    • Very interesting take on the way things seem to be Brutalus.

      “…even out here in California there is a queasiness to all of this.”

      You comment speaks to a “feel” or some sort that your friends and neighbors have about what Pelosi and the Dems are doing.

      I am seeing the same thing going on with all of my liberal leaning family and friends.

      They are not all quite sure exactly what is happening with the “impeachment” but they know that somehow it is phony and they do not like it at all.

      I was surprised to find out that they were SYMPATHETIC to Pres Trump and suspicious with what Pelosi was up to.

      Somehow they know that if the government can do this to a President then it can be done to them and they do not like it one little bit.

      They may be low info voters but they are not stupid.

      Liked by 3 people

  29. John Rawls says:

    Here’s some background… Lutsenko describing meeting with Yovanovitch..

    “She was accompanied, so was I. Mrs. Yovanovitch was interested in Vitaliy Kasko’s case. The fact was that Mr. Kasko’s mother got registered for official housing [in Kyiv], while she had never left Lviv. That had signs of abuse.”

    “I shared the details and explained that I could not open and close cases on my own. I listed some so-called anti-corruption activists under investigation. She said it was unacceptable, as it would undermine the credibility of anti-corruption activists. I took a piece of paper, put down the listed names and said: ‘Give me a do not prosecute list.’ She said: “No, you got me wrong.’ I said: “No, I didn’t get you wrong. Such lists were earlier drawn up on Bankova Street [the presidential administration’s address, Lutsenko meant the Yanukovych administration], and now you give new lists on Tankova Street [the former name of Sikorsky Street, where the U.S. Embassy is located]. The meeting ended. I’m afraid the emotions were not very good,” Lutsenko gave the details of his meeting with the ambassador.

    Read more on UNIAN: https://www.unian.info/politics/10520715-ukraine-prosecutor-general-lutsenko-admits-u-s-ambassador-didn-t-give-him-a-do-not-prosecute-list.html

    Vitaliy Kasko worked under Shokin, and was making allegations against Shokin. Yovanovitch was asking Lutsenko to drop the case.

    Liked by 1 person

  30. jus wundrin says:

    I started reading the report earlier, and became curious as why all of those names in attendance were redacted. Then I saw goodmans name, shook my head, and didnt read past page 10.

    Calling this an inquisition is an understatement

    Liked by 1 person

  31. And the msm are nothing more than fluffers for the commie dems………

    Like

  32. IGiveUp says:

    “The average Joe just wants to see crooks accountable and justice served the criminals. ”
    Worse. When he doesn’t see it, he knows the fix is in and it’s every man for himself. There is no way to save the country and let them go free. As it stands now, this woman will probably go out for a nice lunch with Hillary and Christine Blasey Ford tomorrow.

    Liked by 1 person

  33. IGiveUp says:

    I hate that they are still so sure of themselves that they will brazenly commit crimes confident that they won’t be touched. OTOH, is this all they got left? This aint a Howitzer, it’s a pop gun.

    Like

  34. mugzey302 says:

    The whole thing is performance art. For whom? The wacked-out communists? Or, the democrats’ globalist slave-owners?

    Like

  35. thedoc00 says:

    Looked through the transcript. One thing of interest.
    She had crystal clear recollection of 2nd and 3rd hand hear-say, press clippings, rumors etc. when asked by the Democrat Lawyers.

    Her memory was not so clear on any thing that directly involved her personally, when asked those questions by Republicans Zeldin and Medows. Plus, she had not a single bit of information to offer of any wrong doing by the President or Giuliani. She went full blown Clinton defense vs anything seeking direct facts.

    Her whole testimony revolved around disagreeing with the President (but she was loyal to him??), sour grapes about “rumors” circulated about her that cost her job, I know more than anybody what the policy should be, etc.

    She specifically defended Obama and had real clear memories of Obama.

    Liked by 4 people

  36. Tiffthis says:

    I’ll read this after I put the kids to bed, but I bet her only grief is disagreeing with trumps foreign policy

    Like

  37. pucecatt says:

    Geez got through about 30 min worth and that was enough for me , my short takeaway is that this is a woman scorned and that’s about it .. lol

    Liked by 1 person

  38. 6x47 says:

    The most absurd aspect of the Marie Yovanovitch story is the presumption that ambassadors are appointed for life.

    President Trump fired an Obama ambassador; who replaced a Bush Ambassador; who replaced a Clinton ambassador; and so on.

    Somehow, the President firing a holdover ambassador – for any reason, or no reason – is supposed to be a scandal?!

    Ridiculous.

    Liked by 4 people

  39. frances says:

    I copied three posts from zerohedge that I enjoyed, hope everyone enjoys them as well.
    “Ms. Yovanovitch, you were blocking visas from guys from the Ukrainian Ministry of Justice who were interested in cooperating with DOJ about Ukrainian interference with the DNC in our electoral process, and you were badmouthing the president saying he will be a 1 term president and will be impeached in line with the deep state coup. Why exactly do you think that the president recalled you? ”

    “And now the real story:
    1. Public prosecutors of the Ukraine wanted to discuss several major corruption cases with the US DOJ. 2. Communications (via US embassy) went missing/never arrived 3. When the prosecutors asked for visa to travel to US on official business, to confer with DOJ in person, ambassador Yovanovitch DENIED their VISA 4. Prosecutors contacted US persons in Ukraine who were there to do business & asked them to relay messages to USA, as embassy and perhaps SD as well were apparently ensuring that such communications never arrived where they needed to be, 5. And don’t forget about the “do not prosecute” verbally delivered list she handed to Lutsenko. She was removed for cause: Obstruction of Justice.”

    “The prosecutor [Lutsenko] that she says was out to get her was the guy she gave a list of people not to prosecute to [corrupt Obama friendlys] and the guy who replaced [Shokun], the prosecutor Biden had fired.”

    Liked by 3 people

  40. ann says:

    NPO?
    OUTSIDER Assessment. Warning , possibly ridiculous.

    why are we giving money to Ukraine?

    Does WA DC do ANYTHING PRODUCTIVE?

    Gossip w NSC Fiona whatsoever?

    We own a 110 year old metal fabrication business, note : union crews. Survived only by grace of God, Hard sacrifice and fixed determination.

    Read the transcript.
    Don’t see anything but nit picking innuendoes by a disgruntled oddly myopic functionary,

    .
    these DC folks are no different, or better than typical deadweight floaters, underperforming staff, or bad apples. on crews,, bored lazy secretaries. accustomed to slack supervision and loose oversight. , IMO.

    My experience, good people self focus & fixi evident problems

    Productive individuals don’t argue the obvious, gossip, foment stupidity, and never inflate
    petty crap stomp outside & churn up crap.

    This Ukraine USAID scheme is fishy. Reminds me of fly by nighters, w flashy business cards & hollow credentials, , skimmers who set up side jobs w bootlegged tools & material,

    Even had to dealt , harshly! , with couple bold fools who tried to divulge bids to generals for bribes.

    Either change their whittle admin regs, & FIRE THEM. Or choose to bankrupt America
    yeah, it’s a hard world, , but can be way worse,

    goes downhill REAL FAST when creeps run things & don’t count on them leaving easy either.!

    The last thing the Creep State DNC wants is Peace & a prosperous country.

    . . Businesses are not that different than states, although secular ideologists seem to worship government .

    In the long run, your viability rests on honoring your word, clean books & reputation,and reliable delivery of quality for value. None of those happened for US under past management last ten or more years.

    Basics.
    One doesn’t do business w or let employees, friends, colleagues, set up side deals, That’s peculation, fraud, malfeasance and poor management.

    all human orgs , survive & thrive by being open, adaptive, quickly responsive dynamic enterprises..
    Clan ,ethos, calling strike & huffily protesting plain common sense:

    dump these people, they work for us. Oh, and while your at it, ditch that union of immigration judges & attorneys!
    🇺🇸 My humble two cents .

    Liked by 5 people

  41. TwoLaine says:

    Nice to know someone still cares about attorney client privilege. Remember, they had no problem blowing up President TRUMP’s attorney client privilege.

    In fact, they have violated every lawful and legal right of Candidate, Nominee, President Elect and President TRUMP over the past 4+ years, and continue to violate his rights today.

    Liked by 2 people

  42. Tiffthis says:

    The first thing I learned is that the new house rules made no provisions giving the HPSCI jurisdiction to do an inquiry on a former state department official – that needs to be done in the Foreign Affairs Committee. When asked about this Schiff replied “I won’t allow any dilatory motions”
    Then on page 20- the Ukraine bird says she wasn’t employed till after the Shokin firing AND was terminated before the Trump/ Ukraine phone call.
    So I’m done reading I guess 🤷🏼‍♀️

    Like

  43. Bromdale says:

    There is extensive coverage of the ambassador’s testimony on Russia Today. They were not impressed. As they put it:

    Her most frequently used phrase was “you know” – but she didn’t actually know a whole lot at all.

    Liked by 1 person

  44. When all those criminals go to prison,i would like to soon,

    Like

  45. ale81inn says:

    They are playing defense. It’s like Chuck Knox’s “trick-knee” defense to combat the no huddle offense. All the establishment players in DC that Barr and Durham are preparing to execute their full case….and they all know that leads to even more. So they are employing the only defense that they have left: delay, divert and distract. We all know how these stiffs work. IF they really had ANYTHING this would have been all over but the crying already

    Like

  46. Nowut Ameen says:

    In attempting to cover up a crime by inventing a crime by Trump, the conspirators are committing a far greater crime with even more arrogance and disdain for America. They count on the complexity of the plot and their positions within the government to protect them from exposure and consequences. In the immortal, paraphrased, words of Rush Limbaugh:”I hope they fail.”

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s