Notice we still haven't heard any specific to justify this "smear campaign" allegation.
Which report was a smear?
We saw this a lot in the Russia hoax. Specifics are left out because the allegations in those reports are true, not smears.
Which report was a smear?
We saw this a lot in the Russia hoax. Specifics are left out because the allegations in those reports are true, not smears.
So far, this "smear campaign" against Marie Yovanovitch appears to really be unflattering, but well-sourced reports Democrats don't want us to believe.
For instance...
For instance...
Did she not lobby Ukraine to drop probes vs. the Soros-backed "Anti-Corruption Action Center"?
There's a letter from George Kent, Mr. Bowtie, confirming they did.
Did she not violate Geneva and piss off Ukrainians calling for the firing of an anti-corruption special prosecutor?
There's a letter from George Kent, Mr. Bowtie, confirming they did.
Did she not violate Geneva and piss off Ukrainians calling for the firing of an anti-corruption special prosecutor?
Yep, she did.
That leaves Yuriy Lutsenko (prosecutor) alleging Yovanovitch had a "do not prosecute list" for him in their first meeting in 2016.
We hear he recanted. But The New York Times reported he did not.
Why wasn't he invited to testify to find out under oath?
Again...
That leaves Yuriy Lutsenko (prosecutor) alleging Yovanovitch had a "do not prosecute list" for him in their first meeting in 2016.
We hear he recanted. But The New York Times reported he did not.
Why wasn't he invited to testify to find out under oath?
Again...
The "smear campaign" appears to just be a series of stories that they don't want us to read or know about.
They're not factually inaccurate "smears" but rather unflattering accounts of her behavior while serving in her former role.
They're not factually inaccurate "smears" but rather unflattering accounts of her behavior while serving in her former role.
