We’re all supposed to accept that the ousted ambassador is as pure as the driven snow. If so, what about the inconsistencies in her testimony?
Biden and Burisma are central to the complaint here.
Documents have been produced tying Biden, Burisma, the Ukraine corruption inquiry and direct actions of Obama’s Administration.
The whistleblower has known connections to Biden, to Brennon… and to Schiff.
Some of the Dem’s own witnesses have acknowledged that there was at least the ‘appearance’ of a conflict of interest, and the guy in the bowtie actually flagged Hunter Biden as a concern back in 2015.
That’s ‘no big deal’ right? That’s what we keep hearing.
Ambassador Yovanovitch, on the stand yesterday, answered some questions about the Biden situation. After this, are you still thinking she is really ‘non-partisan’?
Does Amb. Yovanovitch contradict herself here?pic.twitter.com/WKpTMs9Juo
— Benny (@bennyjohnson) November 15, 2019
Is this ‘lying to Congress’?
Will Democrats demand that she get the Roger Stone treatment now? If not, why not? Is it because she is aligned with ‘the Resistance’?
Speaking of illegal acts, we are still wondering what will come of this news:
COUP UPDATE: List of those allegedly targeted for illegal monitoring by ousted Obama holdover Amb to Ukraine: @JackPosobiec@DonaldJTrumpJr@IngrahamAngle@seanhannity@McFaul@dbongino@RealSaavedra@RudyGiuliani@SebGorka@jsolomonReports@LouDobbs@PamelaGeller@SaraCarterDC https://t.co/fOIXoIeDtE
— Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) November 15, 2019
Judicial Watch has got wind of this same ‘pure as the driven snow non-partisan’ woman having instituted an illegal deployment of State Department resources against US persons.
The keywords were *particularly* interesting.