Marie Yovanovitch - Another Bust for the Democrats

Jump to Last Post 1-7 of 7 discussions (63 posts)
  1. RJ Schwartz profile image90
    RJ Schwartzposted 4 months ago

    Former Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch was questioned in the inquiry today.  She was fired for cause by the President in May, but Congressman Schiff brought her in anyway.  She had no knowledge of anything that happened on either call with the Ukrainian President, but there she was, a disgruntled former employee crying the blues on Capitol Hill.

    After several hours of hard-hitting questions, Yovanovitch begrudgingly admitted that she had no information regarding Trump accepting bribes or committing crimes.

    Congressman Chris Stewart (R-UT) asked Yovanovitch, “Do you have any information regarding the President of the United States accepting any bribes?”

    Yovanovitch replied, “No.”

    Rep. Stewart asked her, “Do you have any information regarding any criminal activity that the president of the United States has been involved with at all?”


    Yovanovitch reluctantly replies, “No.”

    So after two days and three witnesses, we the people are left with no doubt that the President did nothing wrong & this whole impeachment attempt is a farce.

    1. Randy Godwin profile image91
      Randy Godwinposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      An honorable diplomat of several decades under both Republican and Democrat administrations was smeared so Trump and Rudy could have their way in the Ukraine and you're at a loss of what we witnessed today?

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Who could be at a loss here? We're witnessing a dog and pony show, very carefully orchestrated by Democrats to convince a gullible public of wrongdoing whether there was any or not.

        What other possible reason could there be to bring in someone that witnessed nothing?

        1. Randy Godwin profile image91
          Randy Godwinposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          Apparently you are dismissing the early stages of the hearing, Dan. Did you hear about the aide who had first hand info into the deal deposed today? And would it matter to you if Trump bribed the Ukraine president? I think not...

        2. PrettyPanther profile image82
          PrettyPantherposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          I see you're still denying your own eyes and ears, though I'm guessing you didn't actually watch the proceedings, did you?

          Have you adopted the Lindsay Graham Doctrine?

      2. MizBejabbers profile image89
        MizBejabbersposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        I think Ralph is a good person, but he needs to remove the blinders.

    2. Sharlee01 profile image84
      Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

      I was left scratching my head, and very sad for this woman. Marie certainly offered a glowing reputation and a good record of service to the country. She did not in any respect deserve to be treated as she was by the president...

      Not at all sure how the Dem's had hoped to tie her to any form of an impeachment charge. Once again she was not aware of anything that was going to help prove any form of crime Trump may have committed?

      The truth is the president had the authority to move her from her position in Ukraine. I must say  It certainly looks very odd that he did... But none the less there does not seem to be a crime involved,  only innuendo.

      Marie seemed actually very satisfied with the new administration's policies versus the Obama administration. It was clear she was deeply hurt, intimidated, and felt threatened by the president's actions. From what I could see she did not deserve to be treated this way...  I give her credit for her service and her testimony. 

      Not sure her testimony matters in regard to the inquiry? But, it has many of us taking note of how poorly she was treated for what seems to be no reason at all.

      I guess the Congress may be making an attempt to claim Trump abused his power by firing Marie or trying to infer she was let go because she would be a stumbling block? I must say they had better have more than this as they prepare impeachment charges.

      So far there just does not seem to be anything that would reach the standard kind of crimes to impeach a president. Hopefully, this will end soon. We need to see provable crimes not lots of smoke. It seems futile to have an impeachment trial if there are no crimes that can be proved., We will stand to be left with an unfinished puzzle.

      1. Randy Godwin profile image91
        Randy Godwinposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        If you cannot understand why her testimony is relevant to the extortion, then you are not paying attention, Shar. The constructing of this impeachment inquiry includes premeditative moves by Trump. Masha was in the way of Rudy's plan to leverage the Ukraine president into announcing an investigation into the Bidens.

        Give us your thoughts on why Donnie wanted the Ukraine president to announce the investigation on CNN, as he claims they are fake news.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image84
          Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

          I don't think Marie Yovanovich's testimony could be used to prove " extortion". She made it very clear she knew nothing about the interactions between the White House, Trump or Guliani, and the Ukraine officials. She was removed from her post in May of 2019 long before the phone call or the aid funds being held. You are presuming there were "premeditative moves " to extort Zelinsky. There is no evidence of such a plan I can see as of yet.

          The president openly asked president Zelinsky to investigate the Biden's. That's a fact. he did it on a phone call with at least 12 people listening which included Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Trump did not make any attempt to make the call private or any different from any other official call. That's a fact. The Cnn interview was canceled by Zelinsky. If he felt he was being extorted would he not have done what he was being extorted to do?

          NYT --"The Times reported that the decision to unfreeze the aid to Ukraine erased the need for Zelensky's televised appearance."

          If he was being extorted the funds would have been held until he did his part?

          CNN --- " Zakaria said Thursday that it was his belief that the White House did not specifically request that Zelensky appear on "Fareed Zakaria GPS" but simply that it should be a televised interview."
          https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/07/politics … index.html

          It certainly appears due to Zakaria's statement Trump or the WH did not request any certain news network.

          Marie Yovanovich's testimony was interesting. However,  I can't see it play any part in an impeachment charge. The president has the right to remove any diplomat from their post.  It is clear she was treated very badly, and this in itself is discussing.

          Randy, you may want to think about the fact her testimony although won't lead to aiding in an impeachment charge..It will lead to Trump losing parts of his base,  This woman was dismissed in a degrading manner after serving the country honorably for 30 years. I predict Marie is the first person to shake Trump's base.

          1. Randy Godwin profile image91
            Randy Godwinposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            And you have no opinion why Trump wanted the Ukraine President to announce the opening of an investigation into the Biden's on CNN? Seriously?

            Come on Shar, you're correct in seeing Trump's abuse of Masha, but you're also missing the whole picture of the bribery/extortion by Donnie.

            1. Sharlee01 profile image84
              Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

              Randy, I don't buy into the bribery/extortion charge. It makes no sense at all. It would be impossible to prove due to Trump's way of handling the Zelinsky call. My God, he had 12 people in on the call... He may as well shouted from a rooftop. Randy, they need to choose something they can at least have a bit of a chance o prove.   No money was paid, no deed was performed. The call was open and conducted via WH protocol. These are facts. The Dems need something else. Perhaps abuse of power? This charge could take conjecture into consideration.

          2. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            "Randy, you may want to think about the fact her testimony although won't lead to aiding in an impeachment charge..It will lead to Trump losing parts of his base,"

            And there you said it.  It isn't about finding and proving wrongdoing by President Trump: it's about ensuring he doesn't win in 2020.  Remove his base, even a portion, and he can't win.  A political game - the same game they claim Trump was playing and are so incensed about.

            1. Randy Godwin profile image91
              Randy Godwinposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              Are you okay with Trump extorting/bribing a foreign govt to investigate a political rival, Dan? Just say yes and get it over with.

            2. Sharlee01 profile image84
              Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

              I am very much in agreement. I say it as I see it. I pointed out because it needed to be pointed out. I am pleased you agree with me. This is a very corrupt scam that should not be taking place. The Dem's are making an attempt to remove a president with witnesses that offer nothing more than opinions... No facts, just roundabout smears from very distinguished witnesses. It is a ploy the Dem's feel will stick. It is nothing but the Dems making an attempt to disregard the people and overthrow a duly elected president.
               
              In the end it will fail, in the end, there will be more bitterness, in the end, it will cost the taxpayers cash. .I have become wary of following this mess, there is nothing factual being presented. Nothing but more fabricates opinions...

              1. wilderness profile image96
                wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                That's the way I see it.  Just more political games that will cost the taxpayers and destroy what little credibility our government has.  Unfortunately, that game will not cost them much for their power base among those that elect them is so strong, and they have convinced that gullible public that Trump is evil, that they will remain in power.

                1. peoplepower73 profile image93
                  peoplepower73posted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  https://hubstatic.com/14760092.jpg

                2. Sharlee01 profile image84
                  Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  Watching the testimony today. Two more witnesses that have nothing in the way of an impeachable crime? Actually, this further confirms this is a political smear campaign. This is no longer a gamble phase for the Dem's, this is the pay up you lost phase. My God how ridiculous we must look to other Countries.

  2. PrettyPanther profile image82
    PrettyPantherposted 4 months ago

    Eh, you'll be like those Republicans who supported Nixon to the very end. Wrong.

    1. peoplepower73 profile image93
      peoplepower73posted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Wilderness:  It's not about what Yovonovitch witnessed.  It is about why and how she was removed from her post.  The reason she was removed from her post is because she served as an obstruction to Trump's grand plans of having Guilianni and his Hench men try to get Zelinsky to make a public announcement on CNN that the Biden's were corrupt in the Burisma deal or he wouldn't release the funding for the security aid to the Ukraine. He only released the funding after he was outed by the whistle blower.

      She was told to take the first plane back to Washington and she arrived she was  told  by Sonland to say something great about Trump (kiss his ass), which she refused to do.

      The irony is that Trump calls CNN the fake news and the enemy of the people, but yet he wants the President of Ukraine to go on CNN and tell the world that the Biden's are corrupt.

      It's obvious you didn't watch the hearings or you just don't care about the details.

      1. Randy Godwin profile image91
        Randy Godwinposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Apparently Trump wanted the announcement on CNN because FOX is fake news. lol

      2. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        I thought this whole thing was about a phone call to the Ukraine?  Will he now be impeached for firing an ambassador?  An ambassador that witnessed nothing untoward or criminal, but that you are claiming was let go because she didn't witness a phone call she didn't like?

        I trust you understand how lame this sounds, and how lame the whole picture is getting?  This, just as the collusion "investigation" really does seem to be turning into nothing but an expedition to find dirt, anything, on Trump.  I know you've listed a dozen or more "impeachable" offenses, but that's not how we work in this country - just keep looking until we find something, and if it takes years, so be it.  Maybe they can get him on a speeding ticket from 20 years ago - that should count as a "misdemeanor", even if it can't be pushed as a "high crime".

        1. peoplepower73 profile image93
          peoplepower73posted 4 months agoin reply to this

          Wilderness:  I never said that she witnessed or did not witness a phone call.  You said that.  She was let go because she was in the way of Guilianni and his Hench men to try to find dirt on the Biden's and then give that information to the President of Ukraine.

          Then Trump wanted the president to make a public announcement on CNN that the Biden's were corrupt in the Burisma deal.  You do understand that Guilianni and his Hench men were in the Ukraine with no official government office, only as a separate communications channel set up by Trump, not the state department for foreign affairs?  That's why he got rid of Yovonivich. 

          In the phone call, Trump stated that "some things were going to happen to that woman" referring to Yovonovitch, Then he said I want you to talk to Guilianni and his people to investigate some stuff about the Bidnen's and Crowd Strike. 

          Crowd Strike was supposed to be a server for  Hillary's email that was in the Ukraine.  It turns out, it was the Russian's plant to make it look like there was a server and Trump bought into it.  Crowd Strike is a software company in San Jose California that had nothing to do with the Ukraine.

          It may sound lame to you, because you think it is just about a phone call, but this is much deeper than that.  That phone call triggered conditions that money already approved by congress for security aid to the Ukraine was held up until the president agreed to work with Guilainni and  his people to bad mouth the Biden's.  That was for Trump's personal gain and advantage in a U.S. election for President of the United States.  It's called bribery for personal gain.

          1. Randy Godwin profile image91
            Randy Godwinposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Sigh! Willful ignorance is rife among the Right if they can't understand what this is all about. Today's behind doors session with an aide who heard Sondland and Trump's phone call personally will add a bit more credence to the inquiry. But no matter, Donnie's defenders will thin out as the inquiry continues.

            1. PrettyPanther profile image82
              PrettyPantherposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              Well, ya know, closing their eyes and plugging their ears is the new right-wing tactic for surviving Trump

            2. peoplepower73 profile image93
              peoplepower73posted 4 months agoin reply to this

              Randy:  We can only hope. It was a good sign yesterday in the inquiry.  There were some GOP congressmen who did not have a bad thing to say about Yovonovich. In fact, they praised her for her work.

              I was really surprised and glad to see that everybody applauded her when the inquiry was over. It's refreshing to see and hear professionals who can articulate their situations.  Trump can't hold a candle to them, even with a teleprompter.

          2. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            That's what I said, isn't it?  It started out as an investigation into getting the Ukraine to investigate his political opponent in order to gain advantage in the 2020 election (even though that intent was always just assumed); now it has morphed into anything they can find, so they bring in a fired employee with an ax to grind in that effort.  Much like the collusion investigation - just keep looking until something comes up.

            If you want a misdemeanor they can impeach on I'm sure there is something.  Not leaving a big enough tip in the restaurant, maybe.

        2. MizBejabbers profile image89
          MizBejabbersposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          "An ambassador that witnessed nothing untoward or criminal, but ... she was fired?

          I know you've listed a dozen or more "impeachable" offenses, but that's not how we work in this country - just keep looking until we find something, and if it takes years, so be it.
          That's what Republicans did to President Clinton. When the shoe's on the other foot, it pinches, doesn't it?
          I don't understand why they keep looking either. Trump has already admitted that he did it, and Mulvaney backed him up in his testimony.

      3. Jean Bakula profile image93
        Jean Bakulaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        R's will just continue to watch Fox and believe the conspiracy theories. I watched Sean Hannity for about 10 minutes the other night, and was stunned by the nonsense. Trump actually committed obstruction by threatening Yovonovitch by tweet WHILE SHE WAS TESTIFYING, even Ken Starr agreed to that. The Mueller Report didn't clear Trump, there were at least 4 counts of obstruction in it, Barr lied to the public before they got to see it. Mueller didn't believe in prosecuting a sitting POTUS and should have said that in the beginning.

        R's keep moaning there is no "first hand evidence." That's because the ones who had first hand info ignored subpoenas and Trump ordered them to do that. This is obstruction of justice. If you or I did that, we would be arrested. This is the most corrupt administration ever. Look how many of Trump's henchmen are in prison.

        A POTUS can't withhold aid to a country after Congress approved it, because he wants dirt on a political opponent. He is supposed to be working for our country's interests, not his own. Now we once again look bad to our allies because they are afraid they can't trust the US. Ukraine did finally get the aid, but it was held up because Trump wanted Zelensky to attack the Bidens on CNN. Zelensky didn't want to do it. It's not unusual for a son or daughter of a wealthy politician to get a good paying job they don't really deserve. Look at Ivanka.

  3. Live to Learn profile image78
    Live to Learnposted 4 months ago

    It's increasingly obvious that facts are of no interest in the Trump witch hunt. They already have the tar and the feathers. They are just scraping the bottom of an empty barrel for excuses to use them.

    1. peoplepower73 profile image93
      peoplepower73posted 4 months agoin reply to this

      LTL:  So you call professional foreign ambassadors who have sacrificed and some by giving their lives to protect us, the bottom of the barrel?  You have to be getting your information from Trump Central (Fox News).

      1. Live to Learn profile image78
        Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Love the way you pull things out of thin air. Did I say anything you just accused me of? Nope.

        But, since no witness thus far has any first hand knowledge of anything the witch hunt is predicated on, I guess you could say they reached down past credible witnesses with pertinent information to find some that vaguely fit their narrative.

    2. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      They don't need an excuse; as the news pointed out the other day, impeachment is not a matter of legalities.  It is a matter of politics and what can be pushed through, which is why it took so long (insufficient political will) and now has turned into a circus (gain public support as well).

  4. PhoenixV profile image60
    PhoenixVposted 4 months ago

    Whats the skinny on the Biden boy being thick as thieves with Ukrainian oligarchs?

    1. peoplepower73 profile image93
      peoplepower73posted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Phoenix:  Why don't you do the research and analysis?

      1. PhoenixV profile image60
        PhoenixVposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Just when you think that the Ukraine could not get any more corrupt:

        Here come the Bidens.


        My analysis.

        1. Live to Learn profile image78
          Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          Dig a little deeper and you can say here came the democrats.

          1. Randy Godwin profile image91
            Randy Godwinposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Are you fine with Ivanka getting lucrative deals, LTL?

            1. Live to Learn profile image78
              Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              What lucrative deal Randy?

              If you're taking about her China trademarks then, no. I personally think if she wanted to work in the White House she should have stepped completely away from outside business. To avoid any semblance of conflict of interest or enrichment from her, or her father's, position.

              1. Randy Godwin profile image91
                Randy Godwinposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                On this we agree. Now about the Doral deal which seems to be getting rather sticky for the Don.

                1. Live to Learn profile image78
                  Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  Randy, if these things bother you, could you explain why the Biden mystery is not important to unravel prior to the possibility of that man taking office?

                  That deal, on the surface, with no logical explanation other than the obvious, appears to be cronyism and solicitation of a bribery. It's like the crap we hear in government every day. I'll give you a lucrative no bid contract, you give me part of the payment under the table.

                  Until the left honestly approaches this process it makes it difficult to sympathize. What I see is 'no, no, no' if the party isn't yours but 'Pay no attention to the corruption' if the party is yours.

                  My position is if you aren't going to advocate a full clean up why would I support an effort to demonize one side which appears to possibly be doing a soft version of what the other side has clearly done?

                  1. promisem profile image97
                    promisemposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    There is no "mystery". His alleged corruption was approved in writing by Republican senators 3 years ago and has been fully public since then.

                    https://www.vox.com/2019/10/3/20896869/ … an-johnson

                  2. Randy Godwin profile image91
                    Randy Godwinposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    As Scott said, there is no mystery. Sure it looks bad Hunter got a lucrative deal in Ukraine, but they wanted him on the board to give a bit of oversight and integrity to the process after a long corrupt administration.

                    What has Hunter supposed to have done illegally?

              2. Tim Truzy info4u profile image96
                Tim Truzy info4uposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                OmG! Kitty, we can agree on something. That's great. Armagedon must be near. I'll go with JC and you guys will be in the trunk(Trump)-sorry, with the savior of Israel.
                Americans don't believe politicians should use their positions to gain financial, political, or other benefits-Wait, isn't that what this impeachment is about.
                Swing your partner do-si-do! Promenade Richard Spencer style. Only to the right. Don't get dizzy. And the square dance goes on.

                1. Live to Learn profile image78
                  Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  Ignorant responses to my posts. Do they ever end? I don't think political opinions are what determines who gets to be with JC but it's nice to see you think you made the cut. roll

                  1. Tim Truzy info4u profile image96
                    Tim Truzy info4uposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    Now, LTl,, did you ever learn that you build intelligent exchanges by establishing something both parties can agree on? You blew it, cat.
                    If you knew your Bible, you would know a person can be certain when he or she are Heaven bound.
                    How's that treatment of the poor thing going for you extreme right folk? He said, there are always more poor on Earth than rich and they should be cared for. Oh, yeah, let the savior of Israel handle that.
                    Jesus was probably a Communist in your view.
                    With great power comes great responsibility, ltl. That includes restraint. Maybe you should read about our Founding Fathers.
                    Requesting someone to dig up dirt on opponents while withholding funds is mafioso tactics. Those poor people of the European nation fighting to remain independent should not suffer because Trump wants to stop J.B. If this is ignorant, then do-si-do with a meow. I bet you think I'm 3/5 of a person anyway. (lol). Did you get it, feline?

  5. profile image0
    Adnan088posted 4 months ago
  6. PhoenixV profile image60
    PhoenixVposted 4 months ago

    So anyway, them Bidens sure get sweet deals in the Ukraine. From DC to Russia. Thats one big lucrative swamp.

    Thanks President Trump.

    1. Randy Godwin profile image91
      Randy Godwinposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      How about a few links proving your claim, Pho. What did Joe get?

  7. PhoenixV profile image60
    PhoenixVposted 4 months ago

    I wonder if Hunter Biden got paid $ 50,000.00  a month in American Dollars or Russian Rubles. If Rubles or Ukrainian hryvnia paper currency it would literally take trains or semi truck trailers to haul that amount of paper, ima thinking.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://maven.io/company/pages/privacy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)