Dinner download - Tape surfaces of Trump calling for envoy's firing

[GalaxyMan]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Why not simply call Secretary of State Pompeo?

Yes, I'm sure that he'd tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Uh-huh! ????

[Matzzon]

3 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

This is just incredible.

The only thing incredible is your post.

Edited January 27, 2020 by Matzzon

[Skallywag]

How is this news?  Yavanovich already testified she was fired "quickly" with no warning

[Saint Nick]

One would think, this kind of news would give all the Trump- fans time to pause!

...

...

...

Nope!

[Cory1848]

32 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

She was, supposedly, refusing to hang the POTUS photo up and being unco-operative due to political bias. Likely to get fired by any POTUS. Or these may be false accusations, she did hang the photo up and was just trying to do her job.

 

But wonder how you'd react if Hilary had been elected and an Ambassador was refusing to hang her photo up and showing political bias in her job?

More lies, and easily debunked by reading any of a million newspapers. Portraits of the president, vice president, and secretary of state are hung in every US embassy and consulate around the world, near the entrance somewhere; it’s a routine matter that ambassadors generally don’t have the time or interest in troubling themselves with (although the current president clearly spends inordinate amounts of time thinking about his own portrait). The Trump and Pence portraits arrived in Kiev (and other locations) late but were hung immediately on arrival, and I’m sure that Yovanovitch didn’t get personally involved in this or any other interior decorating matter at the embassy building.

 

A deflection and a lie spread by Trump to get his fans all riled up against a perceived “enemy,” and clearly he succeeded at that. Why do you mention Hillary? She lost the election more than three years ago.

[spidermike007]

Not always an easy thing to recount having dinner with someone you never met in your life. Especially, when you are having a direct conversation with the man. It barely matters. Trump's credibility is never really in question. At this point, if Trump says it, it is not true. If he denies it, it is true. After all, truth is not truth, right? 

 

One of the many consequences of installing a lifetime criminal, charlatan and scammer into the office of president. One cannot expect him to behave with honor, on any occasion. One has to wonder how often he used the term "take her out" during his former life, before becoming president.

 

She is not being completely loyal to me. She is questioning my motives, and the way I operate. I am the president. Nobody questions me! Take her out!

[ChouDoufu]

2 hours ago, Cory1848 said:

So many Trump supporters simply have no idea what they’re talking about; it’s no wonder the Internet is flooded with disinformation. Over 99 percent of foreign service officers (and most ambassadors) are career officers, not “Clinton and Obama appointees”; and when a president leaves office, those ambassadors he HAS appointed likewise step down. And while a president has the authority to remove an ambassador from a posting, to do so for political purposes as Trump did to Yovanovitch is an abuse of power.

that's just silly.

 

ambassadors are political appointees, with those slots often given to big campaign donors, with the prime postings reserved for the big money bagmen.

 

ambassadors serve "at the pleasure of" the president, who can hire and fire them at will and at whim.

 

not sure what the fuss is about, reports of rudy running a "campaign" to get rid of her.  no campaign needed, just call up his boss and say the lady needs fired.  end of story.

 

i wonder if the lady was actively undermining trump's (alleged) foreign policy as so many other officials have been found doing?

[GalaxyMan]

1 minute ago, ChouDoufu said:

i wonder if the lady was actively undermining trump's (alleged) foreign policy as so many other officials have been found doing?

My understanding is that she was helping the Ukraine government fight corruption and that that was in direct competition with Operation Rudy.

[Ricohoc]

Another bombshell poised to fizzle.

 

The POTUS can fire diplomats -- for any or no reason.  Just another attempt to try to criminalize legal behavior and damage Trump before the election.

 

And the "America First" doctrine marches on successfully.

[Redline]

5 hours ago, Chrysaora said:

How is this news? Trump can fire and hire anyone.  I'm sure running the US Embassy like a Hillary Clinton election office probably got her booted.

It seems you’re not following.  Don’t expect others to do your reading and research-it’s likely you have a phone that will read to you ????

[Sujo]

2 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Putting your own imagination to work and assigning meanings to words and expressions is never really convincing.

 

She was, supposedly, refusing to hang the POTUS photo up and being unco-operative due to political bias. 

 

Likely to get fired by any POTUS.

 

Or these may be false accusations, she did hang the photo up and was just trying to do her job.

 

But wonder how you'd react if Hilary had been elected and an Ambassador was refusing to hang her photo up and showing political bias in her job?

She didnt refuse to hang his pic, they hadnt delivered the pic to her.

 

Sje was following US foreign policy and know as a hard liner against corruption.

 

Unfortunately trumps corruption got in the way.

[Sujo]

1 hour ago, Ricohoc said:

Another bombshell poised to fizzle.

 

The POTUS can fire diplomats -- for any or no reason.  Just another attempt to try to criminalize legal behavior and damage Trump before the election.

 

And the "America First" doctrine marches on successfully.

No potus cannot fire anyone for corrupt reasons.

[Cory1848]

1 hour ago, ChouDoufu said:

that's just silly.

 

ambassadors are political appointees, with those slots often given to big campaign donors, with the prime postings reserved for the big money bagmen. ambassadors serve "at the pleasure of" the president, who can hire and fire them at will and at whim.

 

not sure what the fuss is about, reports of rudy running a "campaign" to get rid of her.  no campaign needed, just call up his boss and say the lady needs fired.  end of story.

 

i wonder if the lady was actively undermining trump's (alleged) foreign policy as so many other officials have been found doing?

A minority of ambassadors are political appointees; most are career diplomats. All serve “at the pleasure of the president,” but, in the US system, political appointees are usually donors to and often vocal supporters of the president, as you mention, whereas career diplomats such as Yovanovitch are not and are appointed based on their abilities and seniority in the diplomatic service. The false narrative perpetuated by Trump fans and by baseless “wondering” such as yours is that, because Yovanovitch was appointed to the ambassadorship of Ukraine during the Obama administration, she is somehow a diehard Obama supporter seeking to undermine a Republican president. While I’m sure she has her own personal political opinion, as every US citizen is entitled to, she is nonpartisan in her position as a career foreign service officer, and her allegiance is to the US constitution.

[JHolmesJr]

3 minutes ago, Cory1848 said:

The false narrative perpetuated by Trump fans and by baseless “wondering” such as yours is that, because Yovanovitch was appointed to the ambassadorship of Ukraine during the Obama administration, she is somehow a diehard Obama supporter seeking to undermine a Republican president.

 

Since you will believe anything try this?

She was reported to be going around opposing the presidents foreign policy and bad mouthing him

to the Ukrainians....try that in your company with your boss and see how quickly you're toast. And what's more

no one will care....they will probably applaud the boss for taking swift and corrective action. 

[ChouDoufu]

'most' means what?

 

here it says currently 45% were trump appointees.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/468169-bera-bill-would-cap-number-of-ambassadors-who-are-political-appointees-as

 

point being trump perhaps feels the other 55% are disloyal and subverting his foreign policy.  regardless, he has the power to fire them at will.

[Cory1848]

3 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

 

Since you will believe anything try this?

She was reported to be going around opposing the presidents foreign policy and bad mouthing him

to the Ukrainians....try that in your company with your boss and see how quickly you're toast. And what's more

no one will care....they will probably applaud the boss for taking swift and corrective action. 

"She was reported ..." By whom? That says it all doesn't it ...

[bristolboy]

5 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

 

Since you will believe anything try this?

She was reported to be going around opposing the presidents foreign policy and bad mouthing him

to the Ukrainians....try that in your company with your boss and see how quickly you're toast. And what's more

no one will care....they will probably applaud the boss for taking swift and corrective action. 

That lie was propagated by Parnas to get rid of the ambassador who was standing in the way of his making a natural gas deal with the Ukrainian government. Parnas has subsequently admitted it wasn't true.

[Cory1848]

11 minutes ago, ChouDoufu said:

'most' means what?

 

here it says currently 45% were trump appointees.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/468169-bera-bill-would-cap-number-of-ambassadors-who-are-political-appointees-as

 

point being trump perhaps feels the other 55% are disloyal and subverting his foreign policy.  regardless, he has the power to fire them at will.

Following the statistic you provided and doing the math, “most” means 55 percent, which is what I said. Generally, only around 30 percent of ambassadors are political appointees, and many columnists and others have commented on Trump’s higher number in that regard. I really don’t care what Trump “perhaps feels”; given the larger number of political ambassadors, however, he clearly does value rewarding loyalty, at the expense of competence, more than did his predecessors.

[GalaxyMan]

1 minute ago, Cory1848 said:

I really don’t care what Trump “perhaps feels”; given the larger number of political ambassadors, however, he clearly does value rewarding loyalty, at the expense of competence

That's been the story of his life. He thinks and acts like a mob boss.

[ChouDoufu]

10 minutes ago, Cory1848 said:

Following the statistic you provided and doing the math, “most” means 55 percent, which is what I said. Generally, only around 30 percent of ambassadors are political appointees, and many columnists and others have commented on Trump’s higher number in that regard. I really don’t care what Trump “perhaps feels”; given the larger number of political ambassadors, however, he clearly does value rewarding loyalty, at the expense of competence, more than did his predecessors.

there apparently is no requirement that ambassadorships go to the qualified.  they are often handed out by the president to reward his supporters.  most, least, more than, less than....the actual number is irrelevant.  the president may, if he so chooses, give 100% of these slots to his golf buddies.

 

the president sets foreign policy.  if he 'feels' one of his ambassadors undermining his policy, he gets to fire 'em.

 

i'm in no way supporting trump.  i think he's an idiot. 

'peach him, but get him for something real.

[Opl]

31 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

 

Since you will believe anything try this?

She was reported to be going around opposing the presidents foreign policy and bad mouthing him

to the Ukrainians....try that in your company with your boss and see how quickly you're toast. And what's more

no one will care....they will probably applaud the boss for taking swift and corrective action. 

Yes, Putin did not like her

[JHolmesJr]

27 minutes ago, Cory1848 said:

"She was reported ..." By whom? That says it all doesn't it ...

Trump was accused of horrible things.

By whom?

That says it all, doesn't it?

[JHolmesJr]

29 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

That lie was propagated by Parnas to get rid of the ambassador who was standing in the way of his making a natural gas deal with the Ukrainian government. Parnas has subsequently admitted it wasn't true.

 

Parnas is another avenatti....an opportunist donor who was trying to get some favours by

getting himself photographed with VIPs. You can't let him near a witness stand....he's tainted

goods. Next! 

[ballpoint]

38 minutes ago, Cory1848 said:

A minority of ambassadors are political appointees; most are career diplomats. All serve “at the pleasure of the president,” but, in the US system, political appointees are usually donors to and often vocal supporters of the president, as you mention, whereas career diplomats such as Yovanovitch are not and are appointed based on their abilities and seniority in the diplomatic service. The false narrative perpetuated by Trump fans and by baseless “wondering” such as yours is that, because Yovanovitch was appointed to the ambassadorship of Ukraine during the Obama administration, she is somehow a diehard Obama supporter seeking to undermine a Republican president. While I’m sure she has her own personal political opinion, as every US citizen is entitled to, she is nonpartisan in her position as a career foreign service officer, and her allegiance is to the US constitution.

You're wasting your time.   He's too busy trying to get the mailman, who started work during the Obama presidency, fired for being a Democrat appointee to listen to any facts.

[bristolboy]

17 minutes ago, ChouDoufu said:

there apparently is no requirement that ambassadorships go to the qualified.  they are often handed out by the president to reward his supporters.  most, least, more than, less than....the actual number is irrelevant.  the president may, if he so chooses, give 100% of these slots to his golf buddies.

 

the president sets foreign policy.  if he 'feels' one of his ambassadors undermining his policy, he gets to fire 'em.

 

i'm in no way supporting trump.  i think he's an idiot. 

'peach him, but get him for something real.

It depends on his motive for dismissing her from her post. If he believed that she was interfering with his desire to pressure the Ukrainians to investigate Biden in exchange for aid, that would be grounds for impeachment.

[metisdead]

A TDS troll post has been removed. 

[Saint Nick]

25 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

Trump was accused of horrible things.

By whom?

That says it all, doesn't it?

...and he put out a script of the phone call, directly incriminating him!

That says it all, doesn't it?

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, JHolmesJr said:

 

Parnas is another avenatti....an opportunist donor who was trying to get some favours by

getting himself photographed with VIPs. You can't let him near a witness stand....he's tainted

goods. Next! 

Do you understand that Parnas taped Trump at this dinner? That Trump denied knowing Parnas?That Trump believed what Parnas was saying and responded accordingly? That Parnas was supplying Giuliana with this information?  Do you have any use for evidence at all?

[Ricohoc]

1 hour ago, JHolmesJr said:

 

Since you will believe anything try this?

She was reported to be going around opposing the presidents foreign policy and bad mouthing him

to the Ukrainians....try that in your company with your boss and see how quickly you're toast. And what's more

no one will care....they will probably applaud the boss for taking swift and corrective action. 

And even better, Trump needed no reason whatsoever.  Poof. Gone.

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, Ricohoc said:

And even better, Trump needed no reason whatsoever.  Poof. Gone.

If the dismissal was for a corrupt purpose, like targeting a political opponent, not gone at all.