Posted on 11/14/2019 6:54:53 AM PST by Sir Napsalot
When diplomats enage (sic) in a quid pro quo, it's for the benefit of our national security, not the president’s political security.
My former diplomatic colleagues Bill Taylor and George Kent were put in a very unfamiliar, uncomfortable position on Capitol Hill on Wednesday. In contrast to their day jobs promoting American interests overseas, often through discrete conversations, Taylor, the top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine, and Kent, the deputy assistant secretary of state for Europe, were asked to publicly testify against an administration and a president they continue to serve.
Fundamentally, their role — and the role of the many diplomatic officials slated to appear at the high-profile congressional hearings to determine whether President Donald Trump should be impeached — is to help define what constitutes the legitimate practice of diplomacy and whether the president crossed the line into making demands for personal or political favors.
I’d like to clear up some confusion. There are regular things that U.S. emissaries do that involve “quid pro quos” or “conditions.” The Trump administration alternately denies using such leverage with Ukraine or claims their actions were in keeping with normal diplomatic practices. The most important difference, though, is that when diplomats do so, it is for the benefit of our national security, not the president’s political security. (emphasis mine) And in fact, when there are signs that things are amiss, there are mechanisms in place for those same diplomats to act — with no need for (or history of) the president getting involved.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
Brett Bruen, former director of global engagement in the Obama White House and a career American diplomat.
All you need to know.
Another one of those "Deep State = Patriots" careerists.
Deep State = Parrots............................
High crimes, misdemeanors and break the rules of diplomacy.
Should read: shows how he broke the Deep State rules of diplomacy.
Didn't break any laws, just the PC rules of the liberal state dept.
The President sets foreign policy, not diplomats.
So they let him read today’s script first, or decided to simply report his readin g first.
Eviscerate — our domestic enemies’ Word of the Day.
And here is the problem. Low information voters don’t watch, they simply wait for NBCABCCBSCNNMSNBC to tell them what they think.
Bullshit!!!!!!!!!!!!
Rules of diplomacy. Ok
I’m amazed how many Miss Cleos exist in the dem party.
Instead of investigating credible allegations of 2016 interference, they all avow that President Trump was thinking about getting dirt on Biden for 2020 - despite the five hundred some-odd words between “favor” and “Biden” in the actual evidence (the transcript).
It’s almost like a terrible case of projection!
Outside of the wall, I think Trumps main campaign promise was to change America’s diplomacy. So I think he’s doing it. Whats wrong?
GOOD! That's one way to get the job done!!!!
These clowns want us to believe that career State Dept. flunkies set policy and the President is required to follow......IDIOTS!
If Trump decides the State Dept. isn't getting the job done, he can ask Rudy to work it.
“...broke the rules of diplomacy”????
Where in the Constitution or statute law are those rules?
All of the diplomatic scumbags are subordinate to the President, are there to advise, to implement his decisions, and they serve at the pleasure of the president.
When Trump took office, the top two tiers of all of the cabinet agencies should have been removed and the agencies put on emergency only operations until replacements were made.
Democrats are the enemies of the Constitution.
I listened to part of yesterday’s farce with Taylor. The only thing that was clearly established, was that there was no “quid pro quo” whatsoever, of any kind. Quid was completely, 100% destroyed by Taylor’s answers to Jordan’s questions. To say otherwise, is a lie and propaganda.
In a real court, not a star chamber, neither Kent nor Taylor would be called as witnesses, since they have zero credible information - only their own worthless opinions. Then, if they had testified, the case would be dismissed immediately by the judge after Jordan’s questions and Taylor’s answers and the prosecutor admonished for bringing the case with zero evidence.
Not fully. Congress voted to send them these missiles. It was wrong when Obama held these back because he was a pacifist and it was wrong when Trump did it too.
The rules of diplomacy?! “Eff” the “rules of diplomacy”! That’s exactly the sort of thing I voted for him to go to Washington to break.
Have these inviolate ‘rules’ produced any results apart from death, destruction and depravity especially in the Middle East?
The rules of diplomacy.
Really?
They are going with that one.
I just can’t afford to roll my eyes any longer as my eye doctor has informed me that it may cause blindness.
Hey Brett, guess what! The Dems are NOT going to impeach Trump! Taylor was the best Schiff had for this charade, and he was a disaster!
You idiots are once again setting up the nation’s Libs for a devastating loss in 2020!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.