Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 4567891011 LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 162

Thread: Now the question is, why did trump fire Marie Jovanovic?

  1. #106 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    28,661
    Thanks
    7,782
    Thanked 17,551 Times in 11,821 Posts
    Groans
    5
    Groaned 983 Times in 942 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stretch View Post
    Yup. I believe Bama fired all the ambassadors.
    I doubt it was all of them but yeah lol.

    Incoming administrations put their own people in and it’s hardly ever newsworthy but when Trump does it it’s ‘impeachable’.
    Coup has started. First of many steps. Impeachment will follow ultimately~WB attorney Mark Zaid, January 2017

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Darth Omar For This Post:

    Stretch (11-16-2019), Truth Detector (11-18-2019)

  3. #107 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    7,221
    Thanks
    253
    Thanked 1,764 Times in 1,443 Posts
    Groans
    89
    Groaned 59 Times in 58 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarod View Post
    Now the question is, why did trump fire Marie Jovanovic?


    The president has the right to fire anyone under his employ for a good cause or no cause, he does not have the right to fire someone for bad cause. On its face it appears he fired her because she stood in the way of his corrupt effort to bully Ukraine.

    She was clearly not corrupt, you really can’t assail her character, If they are smart they will not try. Why did trump fire this woman?
    When you serve at the pleasure of the president he can fire you for any reason no matter whether it is good, bad, or no cause.

    I don't know why Republicans keep telling us this--nobody has challenged Trump's right to fire somebody. I'm not sure if he believed the false charges against her or whether he was involved in creating them.

  4. #108 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    7,221
    Thanks
    253
    Thanked 1,764 Times in 1,443 Posts
    Groans
    89
    Groaned 59 Times in 58 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    She's been in the foreign service since 1986 so that makes her a reagan, Bush41, Clinton, bush43 and Obama holdover lol.
    Foreign service officers are not presidential appointees--they are civil service. She only became a political appointee when she took higher level positions.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Flash For This Post:

    Truth Detector (11-18-2019)

  6. #109 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,801
    Thanks
    5,433
    Thanked 5,611 Times in 3,666 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 1,755 Times in 1,584 Posts

    Default

    Hello Darth,

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    I’ve actually been trying to make sense of their actions for about 9 weeks lol.

    So, in your mind there’s no way bureaucrats in the State Department would get in the way of the president’s agenda.
    Why would they? Their job is to serve the President. All he has to do is set policy. They don't question it. They enact it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    Why did Obama clean so many of Bush’s people out?
    This has nothing to do with President Obama.

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    And I’m not against impeachment of Trump—provided democrats would come up with a *legitimate* basis for it. Presently, they’re flailing: it started out as extortion, then it shifted to bribery and one of your comrades mentioned something about an ‘aggregate’ of impeachable offenses but democrats haven’t found even one yet.
    Setting up a rogue foreign affairs group that acted in opposition to US policy is not protecting and defending the Constitution from all enemies both foreign and domestic. Trump violated his oath of office.

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    And they can’t even settle on what IT is. It would be comical were it not for the fact all they’re accomplishing is setting nasty precedents future presidents will have to contend with.
    They are not jumping around. They are making a list. Those other charges don't just go away because more are being added. If you choose not to see them that is your prerogative.

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    Keep in mind a future Republican House Speaker can now decree an ‘impeachment inquiry’ based on nebulous charges; come up with imaginative crime theories and etc.
    They have always had that right. I am OK with that. As you say. Come up with viable charges and it is justified. These are viable charges.

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    All because they can’t/don’t want to wait on an election that isn’t even a year away.
    When a President has acted inappropriately it falls upon the House to oversee his actions. Waiting for the next election is not correct oversight.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  7. #110 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    16,414
    Thanks
    163
    Thanked 7,881 Times in 5,354 Posts
    Groans
    2,930
    Groaned 1,582 Times in 1,476 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash View Post
    When you serve at the pleasure of the president he can fire you for any reason no matter whether it is good, bad, or no cause.

    I don't know why Republicans keep telling us this--nobody has challenged Trump's right to fire somebody. I'm not sure if he believed the false charges against her or whether he was involved in creating them.
    Again, because he can does that mean he should? She was highly qualified and had great experience. She is respected and has done a great job with many awards. She did not want to participate in Trump's shenanigans. Trump does not permit that. So he found someone who was far less qualified to come in and allow his dirty work. He lowered the quality and ended the experience. He replaced her with a million dollar donor. Now that is qualifications.
    Even with that disgusting stuff in mind, there was no reason for Trump to verbally abused her. He lied and said she was a bad diplomat and she was in real trouble.
    This whole incident shows what an incompetent and disrespectful jerk Trump is. It is not a Voyanovich story. It is another bad Trump one.

  8. #111 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    28,661
    Thanks
    7,782
    Thanked 17,551 Times in 11,821 Posts
    Groans
    5
    Groaned 983 Times in 942 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Darth,



    Why would they? Their job is to serve the President. All he has to do is set policy. They don't question it. They enact it.



    This has nothing to do with President Obama.



    Setting up a rogue foreign affairs group that acted in opposition to US policy is not protecting and defending the Constitution from all enemies both foreign and domestic. Trump violated his oath of office.



    They are not jumping around. They are making a list. Those other charges don't just go away because more are being added. If you choose not to see them that is your prerogative.



    They have always had that right. I am OK with that. As you say. Come up with viable charges and it is justified. These are viable charges.



    When a President has acted inappropriately it falls upon the House to oversee his actions. Waiting for the next election is not correct oversight.
    You keep using the term ‘official US Policy’ like it was something in the constitution lol.

    The official US policy is whatever the executive branch decrees it is. Unelected officials at the State Department either work to advance that policy or they get pushed out of the way. And again, this is hardly new or nefarious. Obama did it, Bush did it—in a word it’s a normal process.

    If voters decide they don’t like the ‘official US policy’ the proper [legitimate] remedy is the next election. That’s the way it’s supposed to work in our constitutional republic.

    What the House is engaged in is constructing imaginative crime theories based almost exclusively on hearsay. Just saw on Twitter where one individual said Trump’s conversation with Zelensky was ‘unusual and out of the norm’.

    Well, sending crates of cash to the Iranians was ‘unusual and out of the norm’ lol. Not only that, that involved an *actual action* by a president as opposed to Trump’s conversation that was never acted upon. And I would appreciate it if you didn’t invoke the ‘this is not about Obama’ bit because the whole point is all presidents engage in ‘out of the norm’ things from time to time.

    In trying to make ‘out of the norm’ actions of presidents an impeachable offense democrats are taking us down a very dark road.
    Coup has started. First of many steps. Impeachment will follow ultimately~WB attorney Mark Zaid, January 2017

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Darth Omar For This Post:

    anatta (11-17-2019), Truth Detector (11-18-2019)

  10. #112 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    48,828
    Thanks
    35,380
    Thanked 23,304 Times in 16,672 Posts
    Groans
    3,599
    Groaned 2,305 Times in 2,200 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ralph View Post
    What....you missed the TWEET? Mr. Trump revealed exactly why she was fired......she did not promote nor meet the standards of the Trump administration, as POTUS/Commander in Chief.... the STAFF....ambassadors (even self professed elite ambassadors) serve solely at the pleasure of the POTUS. Were you that concerned when OBAMA fired every damn BUSH ambassador in 2008? What makes this pompous BITCH "special"? Is she mentally challenged/retarded or is it her position as president for the Hair Club for Women?

    TRUTH: She was pissed/disgruntled that she was fired because she did not agree with the President of the United State's foreign policy. Forgetting "her place" at the back of the bus (remember....elections have consequences thingy declared by Obama.....republicans must now set at the back of the bus?)…….she thought she had the power to establish foreign policy instead of her civil service duty of IMPLEMENTING the policies of the POTUS. Its not rocket science. She was so bad at not carrying out standing orders......the Ukrainian President had her fired.

    This so called Congressional INQURIY …… not a legal proceeding as per the declarations of the SHITSHOW production staff....SHITLESS and FANCY....but a congressional inquiry to DISCOVER truth. Mr. Trump used his 1st amendment rights to present DISCOVERY void of SHITLESSES permission. And it PISSED HIM OF GREATLY. Trump circumvented the stage show. Look for more of the same every time one of the STAR CHAMPER "witnesses" who did not actually witness a damn thing are paraded in front of the camera for OPTICS. Genius.


    Now AFTER refusing to abide by the standard US RULE OF LAW in a court room sitting.....THEY DEMAND to use the rule of law against the POTUS....who was not under oath, not at the location nor forbidden from exercising his Constitutional Right of FREE SPEECH? Really? How's that cake tasting now? Trump used the lack of transparency and their own rules AGAINST THEM.....this was no legal hearing.
    You really are a hack... "she did not agree with [trump's] foreign policy. That's vague, how about some specifics? What did or didn't she do that she was brought to trump's attention? The Ukrainian president didn't have her fired, trump had her fired. Stop reading RW rags with all their lies.

    Now riddle me this Batman: Kurt Volker and Gordon Sondland were the official channel to Ukraine negotiations, and Rick Perry also had input. These people are trump loyalists. So why did trump need a back channel composed of Ghouliani, Lev Parnas and Ivor Fruman to work behind the scenes? These three are the ones who worked to discredit Yovanovich and dig up dirt on the Bidens. If trump was really trying to "fight coruption" (ha ha), why weren't Volker, Sondland and Perry the ones doing it out in the open? Those of us not wearing trump blinders know the answers to this.

    "Re: two recently indicted associates, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman... the indictment recounts an alleged scheme by Parnas and Fruman to get the then-U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, removed from her post. The indictment also says the pair was pursuing this goal at the behest of a Ukrainian official."

    If you were honest you'd admit that these people were worried about what Yovanovich knew, and what she'd do with that knowledge. Nobody but trump claims she was bad at her job and we all know what a lying liar he is.
    #Not My President



    "Alabama was going to be hit or grazed, and then Hurricane Dorian took a different path (up along the East Coast). The Fake News knows this very well. That's why they're the Fake News!"





    "christiefan" stands for Agatha, not Chris

  11. #113 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    48,828
    Thanks
    35,380
    Thanked 23,304 Times in 16,672 Posts
    Groans
    3,599
    Groaned 2,305 Times in 2,200 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash View Post
    Foreign service officers are not presidential appointees--they are civil service. She only became a political appointee when she took higher level positions.
    Thanks for the correction.
    #Not My President



    "Alabama was going to be hit or grazed, and then Hurricane Dorian took a different path (up along the East Coast). The Fake News knows this very well. That's why they're the Fake News!"





    "christiefan" stands for Agatha, not Chris

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to christiefan915 For This Post:

    Flash (11-17-2019)

  13. #114 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    48,828
    Thanks
    35,380
    Thanked 23,304 Times in 16,672 Posts
    Groans
    3,599
    Groaned 2,305 Times in 2,200 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    Snake Dept.. a real den of LW idealogs..
    one reason he used Gulliani is because he can't trust regular State channels
    The "official" people, Kurt Volker and Gordon Sondland, were his supporters.
    #Not My President



    "Alabama was going to be hit or grazed, and then Hurricane Dorian took a different path (up along the East Coast). The Fake News knows this very well. That's why they're the Fake News!"





    "christiefan" stands for Agatha, not Chris

  14. #115 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    life
    Posts
    33,939
    Thanks
    8,731
    Thanked 12,260 Times in 8,824 Posts
    Groans
    188
    Groaned 1,510 Times in 1,435 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    The "official" people, Kurt Volker and Gordon Sondland, were his supporters.
    not all were Creeps for sure, but the "WB" was a CIA NSC highly motivated partisan. (ex)
    Then you have "Anonymous" / constant leaking / undermining POTUS

    I won't even get into the Russian hoax -let Horowitz and Durham speak to those

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to anatta For This Post:

    Truth Detector (11-18-2019)

  16. #116 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    6,797
    Thanks
    2,067
    Thanked 2,284 Times in 1,754 Posts
    Groans
    407
    Groaned 198 Times in 191 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarod View Post
    Now the question is, why did trump fire Marie Jovanovic?


    The president has the right to fire anyone under his employ for a good cause or no cause, he does not have the right to fire someone for bad cause. On its face it appears he fired her because she stood in the way of his corrupt effort to bully Ukraine.

    She was clearly not corrupt, you really can’t assail her character, If they are smart they will not try. Why did trump fire this woman?
    For bad cause? Dumbest thing I've read. He can hire and fire anyone he pleases.

    Real questing is, why was she testifying? She has no information to give. This whole thing is a dog and pony show.
    Intersectionality Hierarchy of Victimhood:

    Muslims
    LGBT
    Blacks
    Latinos
    Women
    Native Americans
    Sometimes Asains

    Not included: White males, Jews, sometimes Asians.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to Irish For This Post:

    Truth Detector (11-18-2019)

  18. #117 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    life
    Posts
    33,939
    Thanks
    8,731
    Thanked 12,260 Times in 8,824 Posts
    Groans
    188
    Groaned 1,510 Times in 1,435 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    I doubt it was all of them but yeah lol.

    Incoming administrations put their own people in and it’s hardly ever newsworthy but when Trump does it it’s ‘impeachable’.
    I think it was all, just like he fired all the US District Attys. again his purview

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to anatta For This Post:

    Truth Detector (11-18-2019)

  20. #118 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    16,414
    Thanks
    163
    Thanked 7,881 Times in 5,354 Posts
    Groans
    2,930
    Groaned 1,582 Times in 1,476 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Irish View Post
    For bad cause? Dumbest thing I've read. He can hire and fire anyone he pleases.

    Real questing is, why was she testifying? She has no information to give. This whole thing is a dog and pony show.
    She supplied lots of information. I guess you did not watch it.

  21. #119 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    7,221
    Thanks
    253
    Thanked 1,764 Times in 1,443 Posts
    Groans
    89
    Groaned 59 Times in 58 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nordberg View Post
    Again, because he can does that mean he should? She was highly qualified and had great experience. She is respected and has done a great job with many awards. She did not want to participate in Trump's shenanigans. Trump does not permit that. So he found someone who was far less qualified to come in and allow his dirty work. He lowered the quality and ended the experience. He replaced her with a million dollar donor. Now that is qualifications.
    Even with that disgusting stuff in mind, there was no reason for Trump to verbally abused her. He lied and said she was a bad diplomat and she was in real trouble.
    This whole incident shows what an incompetent and disrespectful jerk Trump is. It is not a Voyanovich story. It is another bad Trump one.
    I agree with your post but whether he "should" remove her is not our decision to make. There are a lot of things I don't think presidents "should" do.


    And, historically, ambassadors have been appointed because of their campaign contributions including those who did not even know where the country was located.

  22. The Following User Says Thank You to Flash For This Post:

    Truth Detector (11-18-2019)

  23. #120 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    28,661
    Thanks
    7,782
    Thanked 17,551 Times in 11,821 Posts
    Groans
    5
    Groaned 983 Times in 942 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nordberg View Post
    She supplied lots of information. I guess you did not watch it.
    I wonder if anybody is lol.
    Coup has started. First of many steps. Impeachment will follow ultimately~WB attorney Mark Zaid, January 2017

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-15-2019, 01:58 PM
  2. Kudos to Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch
    By Cinnabar in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 10-13-2019, 07:52 AM
  3. Replies: 47
    Last Post: 11-06-2017, 07:57 AM
  4. Serious question for libs with their hair on fire
    By I Love America in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 05-11-2017, 02:41 PM
  5. Marie Le Pen at Trump Tower
    By tsuke in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-12-2017, 08:44 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •