Former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine to testify tomorrow

Marie Yovanovitch, the former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine who was ousted earlier this year, will testify in a public hearing Friday. Multiple witnesses have accused President Trump's personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, of engaging in a smear campaign against her. Political contributors Antjuan Seawright and Leslie Sanchez join CBSN to discuss the messaging tactics of both parties in the impeachment inquiry.

---
CBSN is the first digital streaming news network that will allow Internet-connected consumers to watch live, anchored news coverage on their connected TV and other devices. At launch, the network is available 24/7 and makes all of the resources of CBS News available directly on digital platforms with live, anchored coverage 15 hours each weekday. CBSN. Always On.

[ivankaspeadsforquincyjones]

Lock him up and make America great again.

[makeracistsafraidagain]

I'd like to thank the Republicans for insisting that these proceedings be public.

[yourstruly]

*Godspeed Ms. Yovanovitch!!*
You are a true American, thank you for being strong for those of us who are cowards, or, are being blackmailed.

[DavidJ]

The Founders understanding of bribery was derived from English law, under which bribery was understood as an officeholder’s abuse of the power of an office to obtain a private benefit rather than for the public interest. This definition not only encompasses Trump’s conduct—it practically defines it.

The Ukraine scandal began in the spring of 2019, with a series of contacts between Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy, and Ukrainian officials. In mid-July, Trump decided to withhold nearly $400 million in aid to Ukraine that had already been appropriated by Congress. The White House offered no explanation, except to blame “interagency delay.” A week later, Trump spoke by phone to the recently elected Ukrainian president, Zelensky. The memorandum released by the White House describing that call—which is consistent with the accounts of the whistleblower complaint that first brought this scandal to light—reads like a classic shakedown.

According to the memo, after exchanges of flattery, Trump states that “we do a lot for Ukraine” and that “we spend a lot of effort and a lot of time, ” before he complains that the relationship is not always “reciprocal.” Zelensky then raises the question of military aid to Ukraine, to which Trump immediately responds, “I would like you to do us a favor though, ” and proceeds to ask Zelensky to investigate two unfounded conspiracy theories: one involving the server containing emails stolen from the DNC during the 2016 election, and the other involving the thoroughly debunked claim about then-VP Biden, his potential reelection opponent.

Trump asks Zelensky to work with Giuliani and AG Barr to investigate his potential opponent and so aid his own reelection campaign. There can be no misunderstanding that Traitor Trump was abusing his official power in the conduct of foreign policy to get a foreign government to investigate his political rival.

Article II, Section 4, says the president “shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

[thomaswiegmann]

It is amazing how many comments condemn without hearing what Madam Ambassador has to say after faithfully serving the US and us for decades

[stevencooper]

Bless you from France Marie! Your courage and professionalism gives hope to us all. 🐩

[cluelesscortex]

I like my nothing burger
with extra#TDS 😄

[lincolnhare]

He'll have no fury like a woman scorned

[dedalus]

The President can fire any Ambassador he wants for any reason he wants to. FACT.

[Capt.sierra]

Is bravery don’t kid yourself
And everything very clear don’t be wishy washy

[quesadilla]

#LockHimUp #lockhimup #Impeach Donald Trump

[thurstonmr]

If she was intimidated by a tweet she doesn't deserve to be a ambassador for the strongest nation in the world.

[TeranceHealy]

SPEAKING IN BROAD GENERALIZATIONS.
But, just because you can say the generalizations does NOT make them accurate.

Consider that many of those who are calling Trump a liar are mandated by an improperly enacted and unconstitutional Rule promulgated by the Judiciary. There is no possible review of this Rule for Constitutionality. The Rule permits those who are abiding the rule to commit fraud (LIE) to prevent disclosure, and to commit fraud in the furtherance (LIE even if it makes the situation worse) to prevent disclosure. Those who work in government are required to abide the Rule with additional requirements of non-disclosure of the previous office holder 'frauds'.

(ie The new AG cannot expose the corruption of a prior AG.)

When i indicated making things worse, that includes participation in actions and frauds even where those actions cause a complete denial of the protection of the Rule of Law and ignore EVERY AND ALL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.

The CONSTITUTIONAL CONUNDRUM is Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information

Anyone can lie to the media.
Lawyers are excused when lying to the courts (it's a judicial rule.).
Lawyers are NOT PERMITTED TO LIE TO CONGRESS (It's NOT a LAW. It is a judicial rule.) This is why the closed door testimony happens. LAWYERS ALL MUST ABIDE RULE 1.6.

The Confidentiality Rule also requires that its unconstitutional affect and damage be held confidential by the lawyers who must abide the Rule.
Non-Lawyers are not required to maintain Confidentiality. Rule 1.6 applies ONLY TO LAWYERS.

So how do you best conceal a lie you must tell. You accuse the other side of lying. And the lawyers in Congress have accused Trump of being the LIAR.

Each subsequent investigator and director in Justice and FBI (all lawyers) have each told a different story about each issue. The Rule requires them to cover for those before them and maintain the non-disclosure effort. Someone is lying. It's the one who is required to conceal someone else's prior actions.

Loretta Lynch covered for Eric Holder (who was involved in the litigation which exposed this conundrum.)

Every state Attorney General participated in the litigation. Every US Attorney was included in the distribution. Every justice on each state Supreme Court participated and was included in the distribution of documents.

Ask yourself why you never heard anything about THE CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE OF RULE 1.6 CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION? Terance Healy & Todd Krautheim on behalf of the People of the UNITED STATES v. Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane and the Attorneys General of the United States. When the AGs defaulted. The Rule was an unconstitutional nullity. Except the Lawyers committed multiple frauds and frauds in the furtherance to conceal the entire case. Those frauds in the furtherance included taking everything Healy & Krautheim owned and leaving them broke and homeless.

So I see things as LAWYERS v NON-LAWYER.

Trump knows the problem. And he knows he cannot fully trust any lawyer to present his case because he knows the lawyer will LIE - otherwise the judiciary will discipline - and THEY DO. Aggressively.

When you know the true problem, the chaos is organized and expected. Until Rule 1.6 is exposed as unconstitutional, expect the lies to spiral.
The American Bar Association created the conundrum INTENTIONALLY. It has earned their membership BILLIONS. Meanwhile Americans lost their homes, lives and any protection of the law. Foreclosure Crisis. Black LIves Matter, False Prosecutions, Shootings.... American Injustice Ignored.

Rule 1.6 began in 1983. Then, spreading to each state by 2007. Federally it began after two congressmen, McDade & Murtha couldn't get a law passed to include it. They slipped in one sentence in an appropriations Bill while everyone was trying not to shut down the govt. Newt Gingrich walked out of the session to avoid calling the bill for a vote. They did it anyway. Fraud in the furtherance.

All American Injustice is ignored pursuant to Rule 1.6.

[davidellis]

Her testimony will humble Trump. Point out what a petty man he is.

[jasperperrywinkle]

No turning back from this abject failure. It is now a wake form the dims. Bye Felicia...

[shyman]

I wish I could cry on TV whenever I get fired for stabbing my boss in the back.

[guitarplayer]

What a freakin joke! I don’t believe anything Adam Schiff does. 😡

[hydrogen]

Thank you for your skills and many years of service to this country in the USFS. And thank you now, again, for your voice and the truth which is such a "foreign" concept to the current occupant of our White House.

[TeranceHealy]

She will be telling a story that could be true, BUT, her story does not HAVE to be factual. It will be her opinion as to whether Trump COULD delay support, if he DID delay support, and what they WOULD do to get Trump to provide support. Conditional words which aren't going to produce facts.

The woman aslso risks spinning the strory incorrectly and making it appear that they were extorting support FROM the US. Because they COULD have done that also, would they have? Did they? The specualtion goes both ways.