OK, keep digging your hole of stupidity deeper. Again, she was the Ambassador of Ukraine. Doesn't matter if she was named that under Bush, Obama, or trump. Her firing has been a major part of the news. The question as to whether pompeo supported her has been in the news, especially in light of current events. You are regurgitating pompeo's outright lie that Kelly deceived him by saying the interview was about Iran and not Ukraine. Kelly's statement (backed by her own reputation for integrity), substantiated by emails clearly stating she would ask about Ukraine, further demonstrated pompeo is a liar. The entire rest of your argument is just more stupidity.
Ambassadors dont set policy. She has nothing to do with current Ukraine policy. Sje just carries out orders
Did you read anything I wrote? So why did you bring up yet another completely irrelevant discussion point?
No, we are telling the truth. You are unable to make the connection between the ambassador and Ukraine. This time the fault lies in your understanding.
How about Nuclear Warfare, or the need for countries to boost up their nuclear arsenal? I think you need to do some research on the Soviet States post WW2 through the Cold War as the allies established an alliance that allowed for smaller countries to not have to build nuclear weapons as a means for protection because the alliance is headed by the US, Britain, etc. Vladamir Putin's ultimate goal is to take back the Soviet States that are now trying to be independent free democracies. If Ukraine falls, and the US refuses to uphold our responsibility to protect NATO allies, NATO falls apart, and then you'll see Europe descend into chaos with smaller countries needing to go Kim Jung Un to protect from Soviet/Russia expansion. Instead of Germany being the aggressor to establish dominance in Europe like in WW1 & 2, I think you'll have to watch out for countries like Turkey, Iran, and even China to establish military alliances. Turkey I have concerns about outside the constraints of NATO feeling the need to invade neighboring countries in order to establish their dominance without US support. So yeah... the US has a HUGE amount of vested interest in the stability of Ukraine as Ukraine is the first country Putin will need to retake in order to re-take the Soviet States & destroy the Democracy movement in the Baltic/Soviet region because he fears that more than anything... that if Democracy is popular in those countries and they do well economically, Russia will suffer the consequences of being more and more economically & culturally irrelevant.
You keep bringing up irrelevant arguments. The former ambassador to the Ukraine is still very important to the current news, and the NPR reporter was completely justified in asking the secretary of state a question about both Ukraine and the former ambassador. Either your stubborn determination to defend trump and pompeo in all threads or your utter ignorance drives you to continue this ridiculous debate.
Where in the emails did she explicitly say she wouldn’t like you insist? Nowhere. Again... She is a reporter. I think this shows the type of behavior you respect.... Instead of Pompeo being polite, he acted like a little b**** and you respect that.
Yovanavich has been working for the US in the region since Reagan coming out of the Cold War. She was a huge asset to the US in the region. Bill Taylor seemed to be a very fine ambassador to replace her initially, but I worry about replacing these ambassadors with a Trump sycophant whose stance is pro-Russia. Even the signal of appointing someone from the Trump camp send a HUGE message to our NATO allies. The person representing the US in Ukraine supporting pro-Putin talking points would cause chaos alone. It signals that the US is supporting or sympathetic of Putin's goal of expansion. ..... However the main issue she was targeted for is because the former Ukraine leadership & prosecutor wanted her out of the way because she supported rooting out corruption in Ukraine & having a more accountable democracy. Ukraine's former prosecutor made a deal with Trump to get her out of the way, and then he'd help Trump with annoucing fake investigations into the Bidens to help with 2020. So Trump doing what he did in accepting that part alone of the quid pro quo (get Yovanavich out in exchange for help in 2020 election) is incredibly un-patriotic because it works against American interests of keeping NATO in place to keep world peace. You remove Yovanavich and replace with a pro-Putin talking point Trumper, you signal to Putin that he's got the green light to take Ukraine back. Not sure how this can be more simple. The Yovanavich quid pro quo is kind of a big freaking deal. She was replaceable sure, but the circumstances of her removal in the context is incredibly alarming considering the goals in the region with Russia & Putin.
The current situation is impeachment. Impeachment would happen regardless of who was ambassador But im glad you admit the question is the current situatio. Impeachment
So Trump changing the policy would be a relevant question. If Trump wanted her out cause she had a difference of opinion that's fine. Be sets policy not ambassadors
Pompeo and Trump targeted the ambassador because she wouldn’t go along with their abuse of power. The ambassador was then removed by Trump, who lied about not being involved. Again... politely refuse to answer the question.
Again, you bring up an irrelevant argument. This discussion topic is about pompeo, and his treatment of the NPR reporter, and his lies about it. The reporter in writing told pompeo's aid she would ask questions about Ukraine, and the former ambassador of Ukraine is on topic (especially a question asking the sos about her dismissal, reports of her being under surveillance, and efforts to demean the former ambassador of the Ukraine. The fact that you are the only one whining about this is added proof you are making a ridiculous argument. If you want to whine about impeachment there are a few discussion threads where you can defend trump.
