Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, speaks during a House Intelligence Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Nov. 13, 2019, during the first public impeachment hearing of President Donald Trump’s efforts to tie U.S. aid for Ukraine to investigations of his political opponents. (Jim Lo Scalzo/Pool Photo via AP)
Jim Jordan got his chance to question canned former Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch and he left blood on the floor.
As I noted earlier today, the only reason I can see for Yovanovitch having any role at all in this hearing is that the Democrats are trying to set up a “#OrangeManBad picked on a girl.”
Apparently, her feelings were hurt by the way she was treated and because Trump is involved, this is an impeachable offense. But, as many have pointed out, it is kind of hard to square the narrative of the tough, gritty ambassador with the whiny little….well, you know…that we’re seeing today.
Dems: You're a bad ass woman who served in Mogadishu, isn't that right?
Also Dems: Please show me on the doll where the Orange man's harsh tweet hurt you.. pic.twitter.com/pfkpZ5xnkW
— GOP Pouncer (@mellecon2) November 15, 2019
Jordan started his question by going to Yovanovitch’s opening statement. He asks her, “Ambassador, should ambassadors ever try to influence host country elections?” It takes 11 seconds for Yovanovitch to come up with an answer. He then leads her through all of her statements as to why bipartisan support of Ukraine was so vital. And then he returns back to 2016, when she was ambassador, and when the Ukraine government put on a full-court press to assist Hillary Clinton. Not only did the Ukraine president make statements in her favor, the Ukraine ambassador to the US wrote an op-ed in The Hill in which he directly criticized candidate Trump:
Even if Trump’s comments are only speculative, and do not really reflect a future foreign policy, they call for appeasement of an aggressor and support the violation of a sovereign country’s territorial integrity and another’s breach of international law. In the eyes of the world, such comments seem alien to a country seen by partners as a strong defender of democracy and international order. The United States was among the 100 nations which supported the U.N. resolution “Territorial Integrity of Ukraine” not recognizing Russia’s attempt to annex Crimea.
A candidate for the presidency in any country ought to realize the challenges he or she will face to ensure consistency in foreign policy and uphold his or her country’s international commitments. Ukraine — a strategic partner of the United States — entered the 1994 Budapest multilateral commitment, giving away the world’s third largest nuclear arsenal in return for security assurances to its territorial integrity from three nuclear powers: the United States, the United Kingdom and Russia.
He documents the instances of meddling in detail, then Jordan then asks her if she ever told the Ukraine government to butt out of the 2016 election. She says she didn’t. Jordan is never able to get her to explain why she refused to tell the Ukrainian government to back off. But we know that answer. She wanted Clinton to win, she thought Clinton was going to win, and she didn’t see anything wrong with this particular foreign country meddling in our elections because it favored her desired outcome.
Finally, Jordan runs out of time as Yovanovitch refuses to even acknowledge questions and Schiff comes to her rescue.
“I have indulged you with extra time, but my indulgence is wearing out. There is a question here, right?”
If Rep. Stefanik hit Schiff with the stunner, Rep. Jordan just knocked him out. "Our indulgence wore out with you a long time ago, Mr. Chairman." pic.twitter.com/DxviDXAxzV
— ForAmerica (@ForAmerica) November 15, 2019
Two things were obvious today.
First, is that Yovanovitch had nothing to offer in relation to the alleged impeachment inquiry. Anything she did have to say was in favor of President Trump’s policy. She was only there as an emotional prop to rev up sympathy for her and animus towards Trump because he had the temerity to fire a girl. Not an ambassador he did not trust and with good cause, but a girl. That’s it.
Second, the House Intelligence Committee is broken and it can’t be mended so long as Schiff is in charge. Because of Schiff’s failed leadership and monomaniacal quest to carry out a coup against Trump, the White House and all presidential appointees are going to view that committee as another partisan foe bent on their destruction. As a result, the House Intelligence Committee is going to lose the voluntary cooperation it needs to be effective. That is a tragedy and the cost to the United States that comes from that is only the fault of Adam Schiff.