Got it....everybody is corrupt except for Shokin. Got it.
McCarthy's statement on Biden
- Thread starter middleview
- Start date
What proof do you have that 100 members of the RADA were corrupt?
How about the evidence that removing Shokin was US government policy?
(SBU) Unity and Reforms: With local elections in the rear-view mirror and an economy that while still in difficulty, seems to have moved back from the precipice, the time is ripe for President Poroshenko to reanimate his reform agenda. You should recommend that he give a state of the nation speech to the Rada in which he reenergizes that effort and rolls out new proposed reforms. There is wide agreement that anti-corruption must be at the top of this list, and that reforms must include an overhaul of the Prosecutor General’s Office including removal of Prosecutor General Shokin, who is widely regarded as an obstacle to fighting corruption, if not a source of the problem.
VPBidenTPUkraineMeetingShokin.pdf (justthenews.com)
Under the new regime, Shokin became prosecutor general in early 2015. But he failed “to indict any major figures from the Yanukovych administration for corruption,” according to testimony that John E. Herbst, a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine under President George W. Bush, gave in March 2016 to a subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
“Ukraine has had a long line of prosecutors whose function has not been
to enforce the law, but to perform the political function of selectively prosecuting political enemies and to hold out the threat of prosecution in order to secure political loyalty and compliance. Shokin was precisely that kind of prosecutor,” Keith Darden, an associate professor at American University’s School of International Service, told us in an email for a story last year. “He would open cases as a way of holding the threat of prosecution over a business, but he did not actually prosecute cases.”
Trump Revives False Narrative on Biden and Ukraine - FactCheck.org
Last edited:
Raoul_Luke
I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
So yes, we have already established that Biden was trying to get rid of Shokin in late 2015, as Shokin was already by then pursuing Zlochevsky, and Hunter was on the Board to run interference. I don't know why you think that helps your argument here. We know that during late 2015 and early 2016, Shokin was receiving praise from the EU and Obama State Department for his efforts to combat corruption. Restating your claim that Biden was calling for his ouster in 2015 is as specious now as it was the last 12 times you have tried to use it to "prove" your case.
Citing neocon has beens doesn't really help either. In your link, Herbst admits his desire to see the US get more heavily involved in Ukraine's "crises." He is a war mongering Bushie douche bag. No one should believe anything he says. Nor should we take seriously associate professor Darden, a lefty academic running interference for the Bidens by providing "fact check" services using the same specious arguments you have laid out here.
The bottom line here is Shokin started putting pressure on Ziochevsky, who, according to Archer, turned to Hunter Biden for assistance getting the pressure off his back. About the same time, Joe starts voicing criticism of Shokin. A couple months later, Shokin confiscated Ziochevsky's assets and within a month or so, Shokin is outed at Joe Biden's insistence. None of this looks suspicious to you (because you are a hack).
Last edited:
Bugsy McGurk
President
Instead of obsessing over the pro-oligarch Ukrainians you love so, you should spend your time learning about Trump’s relentless corruption here, including his co-opting of our nation’s DOJ.
ALL evidence that you've posted fails to actually shore up your opinions. The statements from organizations that you say praise Shokin don't even mention Shokin.
So far you've seen statements from Legarde, the letter from our congressmen and a policy paper handed to Biden from the state department that all are quite specific about getting rid of Shokin. In addition there is the story of mass demonstrations against corruption in the streets of Ukraine.
Ukrainian Protesters Demand Dismissal Of Prosecutor-General
Shokin’s deputy, Vitaliy Kasko, resigned last month, accusing Shokin and his office of being a "hotbed of corruption."Shokin's office dismissed the claim as a publicity stunt.
U.S. and European diplomats have publicly called for Shokin's dismissal, and a top U.S. State Department official whose area of responsibility includes Ukraine earlier this month publicly called for him to go.
Protesters Demand Dismissal Of Ukrainian Prosecutor
Dozens of activists gathered in central Kyiv have demanded an immediate dismissal of Ukraine's embattled Prosecutor-General Viktor Shokin.
www.rferl.org
Raoul_Luke
I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
As for the demonstration, 200 Soros paid astroturfers hardly qualify as "mass demonstrations,ALL evidence that you've posted fails to actually shore up your opinions. The statements from organizations that you say praise Shokin don't even mention Shokin.
So far you've seen statements from Legarde, the letter from our congressmen and a policy paper handed to Biden from the state department that all are quite specific about getting rid of Shokin. In addition there is the story of mass demonstrations against corruption in the streets of Ukraine.
Ukrainian Protesters Demand Dismissal Of Prosecutor-General
Shokin’s deputy, Vitaliy Kasko, resigned last month, accusing Shokin and his office of being a "hotbed of corruption."Shokin's office dismissed the claim as a publicity stunt.
U.S. and European diplomats have publicly called for Shokin's dismissal, and a top U.S. State Department official whose area of responsibility includes Ukraine earlier this month publicly called for him to go.
Protesters Demand Dismissal Of Ukrainian Prosecutor
Dozens of activists gathered in central Kyiv have demanded an immediate dismissal of Ukraine's embattled Prosecutor-General Viktor Shokin.
The memos obtained by Just the News show:
- Senior State Department officials sent a conflicting message to Shokin before he was fired, inviting his staff to Washington for a January 2016 strategy session and sent him a personal note saying they were “impressed” with his office’s work.
- U.S. officials faced pressure from Burisma emissaries in the United States to make the corruption allegations go away and feared the energy firm had made two bribery payments in Ukraine as part of an effort to get cases settled.
- A top U.S. official in Kyiv blamed Hunter Biden for undercutting U.S. anticorruption policy in Ukraine through his dealings with Burisma.
The European Commission praised Ukraine’s Prosecutor-General Viktor Shokin for his efforts to fight corruption in a December 2015 progress report published nine days after then-VP Joe Biden demanded his ouster.
Despite Biden's claim, Europeans WEREN'T trying to oust Ukraine prosecutor targeting Hunter's firm (nypost.com)
I don't know why you think you can get away with gaslighting when you are on here. I will make you own it every f*cking time.
Where is your evidence that the 200 protesters in that particular demonstration were paid by Soros (or anyone else)? That was not the only demonstration.
Where is a link to the praise of Shokin? Was that before or after the IMF threatened to put the loan of $40 billion on hold? Was the EU about to lend money to Ukraine?
You've quoted a number of right wing sources making that claim, but none seem to have copies of the memos.
Envoys pushed to oust Ukraine prosecutor before Biden | Financial Times (ft.com)
Why Poroshenko’s Support for Shokin Is Dangerous
Why Poroshenko’s Support for Shokin Is Dangerous - Atlantic Council
Then there is this....
Ukraine police close Biden probe initiated by ousted prosecutor (nbcnews.com)
Last edited:
Raoul_Luke
I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
200 "protesters" screams "fake movement." It's hardly indicative of a "popular uprising." It was "organized" by a Soros funded NGO:
Tracing a Powerful NGO indicates How Soros’s Secret Network Used Ukraine to Cover for Hillary, Hunter, and Target Donald Trump - Kreately
This exclusive except from Matt Palumbo's forthcoming book shines more light on the backdrop of the attempts to use Ukraine to oust President Trump.
kreately.in
If it wasn't the "only demonstration" where is your links to the others? I'm sure it was the same "200 protesters" being bused around the country by Soros.
I did link to the reports of encouraging communications to Shokin - you are just ignoring them. We have already established that the IMF threatened to put their $40 billion loan on hold - because of Ukrainian government corruption, not because of Shokin's per se.
You quoted a Legarde statement that looks fishy and is only reported by the Financial Times (behind a paywall). That smacks of deep state press manipulation. The EU said Ukraine (and Shokin) were making good progress. Lets face it, the facts are clear - in late 2015, Shokin started pursuing Zlochevsky, who turned to Hunter (as Archer has testified) for "help." Shortly thereafter, Joe Biden started making a fuss about Shokin, alleging "corruption.." Once Shokin actually began confiscating Zlochevsky's assets, Joe notoriously threatened to withhold US' funding unless he was fired. And so he was. That doesn't look the least bit suspicious to you. It does to people who aren't apologists for the failures (and corruption) of democratic politicians.
EatTheRich
President
Your timeline is way off. Shokin was widely accused of corruption (and his firing was sought), by the EU, by the IMF, by the UK, by Ukrainians across the political spectrum, and by Republican and Democratic leaders in the U.S., for many months before Burisma, evidently afraid of the prospect of Shokin being replaced by someone who would prosecute them, offered Hunter a job in an effort to get the U.S. to back off its efforts to have Shokin fired. When it became clear that the U.S. would not back off, Shokin then took an interest in Burisma for the first time in hope of influencing Biden to back off … which if he had done, the efforts to prosecute Burisma would have disappeared like all the other cases against those willing to play ball with Shokin.200 "protesters" screams "fake movement." It's hardly indicative of a "popular uprising." It was "organized" by a Soros funded NGO:
Tracing a Powerful NGO indicates How Soros’s Secret Network Used Ukraine to Cover for Hillary, Hunter, and Target Donald Trump - Kreately
This exclusive except from Matt Palumbo's forthcoming book shines more light on the backdrop of the attempts to use Ukraine to oust President Trump.
If it wasn't the "only demonstration" where is your links to the others? I'm sure it was the same "200 protesters" being bused around the country by Soros.
I did link to the reports of encouraging communications to Shokin - you are just ignoring them. We have already established that the IMF threatened to put their $40 billion loan on hold - because of Ukrainian government corruption, not because of Shokin's per se.
You quoted a Legarde statement that looks fishy and is only reported by the Financial Times (behind a paywall). That smacks of deep state press manipulation. The EU said Ukraine (and Shokin) were making good progress. Lets face it, the facts are clear - in late 2015, Shokin started pursuing Zlochevsky, who turned to Hunter (as Archer has testified) for "help." Shortly thereafter, Joe Biden started making a fuss about Shokin, alleging "corruption.." Once Shokin actually began confiscating Zlochevsky's assets, Joe notoriously threatened to withhold US' funding unless he was fired. And so he was. That doesn't look the least bit suspicious to you. It does to people who aren't apologists for the failures (and corruption) of democratic politicians.
Several demonstrations and you think they were all organized by Soros?200 "protesters" screams "fake movement." It's hardly indicative of a "popular uprising." It was "organized" by a Soros funded NGO:
Tracing a Powerful NGO indicates How Soros’s Secret Network Used Ukraine to Cover for Hillary, Hunter, and Target Donald Trump - Kreately
This exclusive except from Matt Palumbo's forthcoming book shines more light on the backdrop of the attempts to use Ukraine to oust President Trump.
If it wasn't the "only demonstration" where is your links to the others? I'm sure it was the same "200 protesters" being bused around the country by Soros.
I did link to the reports of encouraging communications to Shokin - you are just ignoring them. We have already established that the IMF threatened to put their $40 billion loan on hold - because of Ukrainian government corruption, not because of Shokin's per se.
You quoted a Legarde statement that looks fishy and is only reported by the Financial Times (behind a paywall). That smacks of deep state press manipulation. The EU said Ukraine (and Shokin) were making good progress. Lets face it, the facts are clear - in late 2015, Shokin started pursuing Zlochevsky, who turned to Hunter (as Archer has testified) for "help." Shortly thereafter, Joe Biden started making a fuss about Shokin, alleging "corruption.." Once Shokin actually began confiscating Zlochevsky's assets, Joe notoriously threatened to withhold US' funding unless he was fired. And so he was. That doesn't look the least bit suspicious to you. It does to people who aren't apologists for the failures (and corruption) of democratic politicians.
So you admit that the IMF threatened a hold on $40 billion, but claim they were trying to bring down the entire government....but have nothing to show as a credible source. I gave you more than one source to show the IMF was threatening that hold due to Shokin and the prosecutor's office corruption.
You ignore the letter from a number of congressmen demanding reform.
You ignored the policy paper from the state department that was handed to Biden that specifically stated the policy was to get rid of Shokin.
You also have an convenient explanation for the confiscation of Zlochevsky's assets as if the plan was public and Biden in December 2015 knew it was about to happen and three months later it did. That is your opinion...not backed up by a credible source.
Raoul_Luke
I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
Obviously.
The Legarde statement that isn't fabricated and hidden behind a paywall doesn't mention Shokin.
Yes, I generally ignore congressional "letters." Unlike you, I don't believe anything any politician says. The fact that Biden was able to get five FIVE senators to support his vendetta against Shokin is unremarkable.
As if the Vice President can't engineer a "policy paper" from the State Department. We know that at about the same time, other state department communications were complimentary of Shokin's reform efforts.
I explained to you exactly how it went down. Shokin began pursuing Zlochevsky in 2015, Zlochevsky went to Hunter, to whom he was paying millions of dollars for a "job" for which he had zero qualifications, and shortly thereafter Joe started criticizing Shokin. Joe continued to criticize Shokin until he confiscated Zlochevsky's assets, and less than a month later Joe threatened to withhold the $1 billion unless and until Shokin was fired. Son of a bitch, he got fired...
Sickofleft
Mayor
What he does. Re-words his debunked talking points and pretends he has never heard the facts, again and again and again........
What he and the rest of the Regime is really pissed off about is that the Impeachment of Trump has been proven to be even more bullshit than some of us even thought.
Biden will be impeached for the very bribe Trump asked the Ukrainians about.
The left continues to lie about this, it is driving them crazy. Ya know, all that Russian Disinformation...
Any proof? Nah.
Raoul_Luke
I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
Proof of what, exactly? Obviously you wouldn't accept a signed confession where Joe admits getting rid of Shokin at Hunter's request. You'd just roll with "there's no proof that Hunter's millions from Zylochevsky are the reason he asked his dad to do it."
That's a pretty damn good circumstantial case. You should change your moniker to "plausibledeniability."
So what do you have? An email in 2017, when Joe was a private citizen, suggesting 10% of a partnership for Joe. Articles
of incorporation filed the next day don't mention Joe...
Any evidence Hunter asked Joe to get Shokin fired? No. Any evidence the policy of the US government to get Shokin fired? Yes. I gave you the link.
Any evidence support for pushing Shokin out was desired by US congressmen, the IMF and people in the Kyiv government? Yup. Again I've posted the evidence.
Raoul_Luke
I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
And so have I - that you are way overstating your case. The idea that the Vice President can't gin up some support from a handful of congressmen or the IMF (actually one person at the IMF and that "support" looks pretty fishy, or people in the Kyiv government - whom specifically?.
So Joe didn't take title to his "10%?" What part of "plausible deniability" do you not understand?
Archer testified that Zylochevsky went to Hunter over the sh*t he was getting from Shokin. Then Joe "coincidently" starts criticizing Shokin and, after Shokin starts confiscating Zylochevsky's assets he withholds $1 billion from the Ukraine government until Shokin is fired. "Son of a bitch, he got fired."
Hey @Boca here's a top post.
EatTheRich
President
“Son of a bitch” is an expression of dismay, in this case dismay that a prosecutor who looked the other way at Burisma and Zlochevsky (except when he went through the motions in hope of corruptly influencing Biden to reverse the U.S.’s long-standing efforts to have him fired) would likely be replaced by a politically independent prosecutor who would aggressively investigate and seek prosecution.
The top Republican leaders in Congress stated that their only goal was to make sure Obama-Biden failed. If even they wanted Shokin gone, you can bet it wasn’t because they were doing Biden a favor. The IMF is in the business of making money. They didn’t make 10-figure decisions as a favor to Biden either.
You have failed to provide any verifiable evidence at all. You post shit like "the idea that the VP can't gin up support from a handful of congressmen or the IMF"....that isn't proof of anything.
The head of the IMF was persuaded to go along with Biden's plan to get rid of Shokin?
Congressmen from both parties were trying to help Joe save Hunter Biden's boss at Burisma? Prove it.
In May 2019, Vitaly Kasko, who had been Shokin's deputy overseeing international cooperation before resigning in February 2016, provided documents to Bloomberg News claiming that under Shokin, the investigation into Burisma had been dormant
In July 2015, shortly after his appointment, reformist minority member Yehor Soboliev advanced a motion to dismiss Shokin for corruption, gaining 127 of the required 150 signatures including several members of the ruling parties.[61] Representatives of the EU and the United States pressed Poroshenko for his removal,[5] as did the World Bank and International Monetary Fund.[6]
In March 2016 the Ukrainian Parliament voted overwhelmingly to remove Shokin, a decision which was welcomed by the EU
Viktor Shokin - Wikipedia
For Sakvarelidze, there were clear suspicions the two men may have been carrying out the business of the chief. But his attempts to investigate were frustrated. Soon, he faced a corruption investigation himself. At loggerheads with Shokin, he was pushed out of his job within the year.
First among them was Yehor Soboliev, then a reformist MP of the Samopomich faction and chair of the parliamentary anti-corruption committee. In July 2015, Soboliev pressed for a vote on Shokin’s ousting. The arithmetic was always against him, as the general prosecutor was a figure of the ruling coalition. But he came surprisingly close, collecting 127 signatures from a required 150. Several members of the ruling parties broke ranks to support his move.
Viktor Shokin: The inside story on Ukraine’s ‘very good’ prosecutor at centre of Trump scandal | The Independent | The Independent
Do you have evidence that Joe was even offered 10% of the company? The email was not sent to him and there was no reason that Joe, in 2017, could not be a partner in a perfectly legal partnership. What would have been illegal would have been to hide a 10% ownership in the corporate filing.
Joe did not have the authority to put a hold on the loan guarantee....as Trump did when he actually did put a hold on a congressional appropriation..
