Hannity began his monologue by railing against the House Democrats’ impeachment probe, arguing that the whole process is designed to overthrow President Donald Trump.
The host described the inquiry as a “witch trial,” blasting House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff, who is leading the inquiry, and suggesting that the Democrat is “terrified” of the truth.
“We didn’t hear from an actual fact witness again!” Hannity shouted, before ripping into Yovanovitch.
“She knew nothing!” he said of the former ambassador.
“As Devin Nunes said, why was she even there?” he asked.
“Yes, another self-important very narcissistic diplomat snowflake who can’t take minor, tiny, baby criticism,” Hannity said of Yovanovitch.
Hannity apparently believes that Yovanovitch is a “snowflake” for being intimidated by Trump’s tweets.
During the hearing, the president attacked the ambassador, questioning her credentials and her career. In a series of Twitter messages, Trump argued that “everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad,” claiming that he has the right to select his own ambassadors.
Schiff interrupted the hearing to reveal to Yovanovitch that Trump is attacking her and then asked whether she feels intimidated. The ambassador said that she found the attacks to be “very intimidating.”
Although Hannity apparently does not consider Trump’s attacks on Yovanovitch to be problematic, Ken Starr, who headed the investigation into former President Bill Clinton, does.
Starr, who appeared on Hannity’s show, suggested that it is wrong to attack a public servant.
“You don’t attack a public servant in the middle of her testimony. Period. Full stop,” he told Hannity.
The host pushed back against Starr’s argument, however.
“What is the attack? Tell me what the attack is!” he asked.
“Have we become a nation of total snowflakes? This is the most innocuous thing in the world. ‘Oh, my precious feelings were hurt!'”
According to some legal experts, the president committed an impeachable offense when he attacked Yovanovitch, given that his tweets can be interpreted as witness intimidation.
Harvard Law School professor John Coates, for instance, argued on Friday that Trump acted like a mobster, lashing out at a witness and intimidating her as she testified before the American public, therefore tampering with the probe.
As The Hill reported, Trump claims to have done nothing wrong by attacking the former ambassador. The president claims that he has a right to “free speech,” and that his tweets were not intimidating in the slightest.