You may recall an article I published in October entitled, “Ukraine, what really happened.” To understand the latest coup attempt by House Democrats to remove President Donald Trump from office, you need to read it.
Adding to that article, regarding the inquiry and last week’s testimony from supposed witness and former Ukrainian Ambassador Maria Yovanovitch, let’s take another trip back to February 2014.
At that time the Ukrainian “Revolution of Dignity” had just taken place. The Revolution of Dignity, as you heard it referred last week during the Democrat’s sham of a hearing featuring Ms. Yovanovitch, as I explained in October, was in reality an Obama State Department/CIA overthrow of the elected government of Ukraine.
Recalling that article, among other reasons we know the glorious revolution was an Obama coup is because Obama’s Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, Victoria Nuland (whose real name is Nudelman), along with then U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, conspired in a recorded phone call and personally selected the new Ukrainian Prime Minister, who they decided would be former ECB banker (no big surprise) and notable George Soros associate (again, no big surprise), Arseny Yatsenyuk.
In the recording, Nuland proposes, “I think Yats is the guy who’s got the economic experience, the governing experience. He’s the... what he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside. He needs to be talking to them four times a week, you know.”
On the other end of the call, U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt answers the Assistant Secretary, “Yeah, no, I think that’s right. OK. Good. Do you want us to set up a call with him as the next step?” Nuland’s selection, “Yats,” shortly became Ukraine’s Prime Minister. Predictably, the Obama State Department denied any role in the events.
Now if you were listening to the testimony last week, the Democrat’s third “witness,” the former Ukrainian Ambassador Yovanovitch, whom President Trump refers to as “the woman” in his phone conversation with newly-elected Ukrainian President Zelensky, took over Pyatt’s former ambassadorship in 2016. It was shortly before her time as ambassador that Vice President Joe Biden traveled to Kiev and made his now famous threat demanding then Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko fire prosecutor Victor Shokin who happened to be investigating Biden’s son, Hunter. Hunter Biden, as it turns out, was receiving a stipend of $83,333/month serving in absentia on the board of Burisma, Ukraine’s largest natural gas company.
Now Ms. Yovanovitch would love for America to believe she did not know about any of that. According to the replaced ambassadress, the fired prosecutor Shokin, who had opened an investigation into young Biden, was the true corrupt one.
So did Ambassador Yovanovitch really not know about the Obama State Department overthrow of the Ukrainian government? Did she really not know about Hunter Biden’s ties with Burisma? Did she really not know of the obvious conflict-of-interest of Hunter’s father, the vice president of the United States, especially after hearing that the elder Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in U.S. aid if the Ukrainian president did not stop the investigation of his son? Obviously Yovanovitch knew.
In fact, she could not have avoided knowing. That is because, as we learned in testimony last week, that the vice president, through his son Hunter’s activities, had a huge conflict-of-interest was part of a question posed to Yovanovitch as she was prepped for Senate confirmation to her proposed new ambassadorship by the Obama State Department. Yovanovitch obviously knew it all, even though she claimed she didn’t know anything about Hunter Biden and Burisma. She lied. She could not have “not known.” That she knew about Hunter and his dad’s conflict of interest is in her previous sworn deposition. Did she not know the true cause of the Revolution of Dignity? That would be impossible as well. If I know it, and you know it, Yovanovitch knows it.
But remember, that Obama and his State Department are responsible for overthrowing the elected government of Ukraine is truth the U.S. government can never admit. Even Trump can’t come out and say that because the U.S. government would be culpable. Think of the lawsuits. The markets would tank. To that degree Trump must play along.
But perhaps you can begin to understand why President Trump would tweet that Yovanovitch is “bad news.”
Yovanovitch is part of a foreign service culture that thinks nothing of overthrowing foreign governments. In that regard, perhaps you can also begin to understand why new Ukrainian President Zelensky was relieved to discover Trump had replaced her, and why he agreed she was a “bad ambassador.”
Zelensky told Trump, “she admired the previous President …was on his side,” and “would not accept [Zelensky] as the new President.”
Yovanovitch would not accept Zelensky because Obama’s puppet government in place after the 2014 Obama State Department overthrow was itself overthrown by the people of Ukraine in the last election.
Zelensky, like president Trump, is a true reformer. The people of Ukraine are solidly behind Zelensky and his efforts to, as the new Ukrainian president expressed to Trump, “drain the swamp here in our country.”
Now I can understand how the American people might be hoodwinked by seemingly sympathetic figures like Maria Yovanovitch. She presents herself as pure as Ivory soap. They all do. But knowledge should change all that. When you understand the backstories underlying what otherwise seems perfectly innocent, everything changes.
And one thing is for sure, Trump knows all the backstories. And notice, everything is changing.
Hank Sullivan is a Forsyth County resident, businessman, author and speaker on American history, economics and geopolitics.