the only thing not being reported by this opinion piece is the full truth. Biden jr. being on that board has been widely reported. The corruption probe began 2 yrs before he was even on that board
Others have rightly pointed out that, in reality, Biden was not simply relaying the message pushed by the Obama administration, but that his position was supported by Ukrainian anti-corruption activists, European allies, and even groups like the International Monetary Foundation (IMF). As Tom Malinowski, former assistant secretary of state under Obama, recalled this week, “All of us working on Ukraine wanted this prosecutor gone, because he was NOT prosecuting corruption. So did the Europeans. So did the IMF. This didn't come from Joe Biden—he just delivered our message.”
https://www.wsj.com/articles/bidens...rlapped-with-sons-work-in-country-11569189782
Mr. Biden had called for the ouster of Mr. Shokin because he and others thought that the prosecutor wasn’t aggressive enough.
The owner of Burisma, Mykola Zlochevsky, has been under the scrutiny of prosecutors. A minister of natural resources until 2012, Mr. Zlochevsky was accused of improperly granting gas extraction licenses to firms affiliated with him, and at times was investigated for alleged abuse of power, illegal enrichment and money laundering. Mr. Zlochevsky was never convicted of any crimes and denied any wrongdoing. His lawyer also denied that Mr. Zlochevsky ever benefited from his position in government.
Mr. Shokin had dragged his feet on those investigations, Western diplomats said, and effectively squashed one in London by failing to cooperate with U.K. authorities, who had frozen $23.5 million of Mr. Zlochevsky’s assets. In a speech in 2015, the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, called the Ukrainian prosecutor “an obstacle” to anticorruption efforts, and mentioned the U.K. case, which he said led to the escape of illicit assets.
But Ukraine’s government was slow to fire Mr. Shokin, despite warnings from the International Monetary Fund and others that Western aid to the country would be cut off if it didn’t act. Mr. Biden, in one of his trips to Ukraine in 2016, pressured the government, telling them the U.S. would withhold $1 billion in loan guarantees. At an event at the Council on Foreign Relations two years later, Mr. Biden said he told Ukraine officials: “If the prosecutor is not fired you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.”
Mr. Shokin denied any misconduct, and said he was fired illegally. In an interview with a Ukrainian news service, he blamed his dismissal on Ukrainian “grant-eaters”—nonprofit groups seeking to curry favor with the West.
That much is clear, as is evidenced by this thread. Which i why we ask for lawmen appointed by Trump to recuse themselves from his investigations, to the chagrin of his ballwashers.
Others have rightly pointed out that, in reality, Biden was not simply relaying the message pushed by the Obama administration, but that his position was supported by Ukrainian anti-corruption activists, European allies, and even groups like the International Monetary Foundation (IMF). As Tom Malinowski, former assistant secretary of state under Obama, recalled this week, “All of us working on Ukraine wanted this prosecutor gone, because he was NOT prosecuting corruption. So did the Europeans. So did the IMF. This didn't come from Joe Biden—he just delivered our message.”
https://www.wsj.com/articles/bidens...rlapped-with-sons-work-in-country-11569189782
Mr. Biden had called for the ouster of Mr. Shokin because he and others thought that the prosecutor wasn’t aggressive enough.
The owner of Burisma, Mykola Zlochevsky, has been under the scrutiny of prosecutors. A minister of natural resources until 2012, Mr. Zlochevsky was accused of improperly granting gas extraction licenses to firms affiliated with him, and at times was investigated for alleged abuse of power, illegal enrichment and money laundering. Mr. Zlochevsky was never convicted of any crimes and denied any wrongdoing. His lawyer also denied that Mr. Zlochevsky ever benefited from his position in government.
Mr. Shokin had dragged his feet on those investigations, Western diplomats said, and effectively squashed one in London by failing to cooperate with U.K. authorities, who had frozen $23.5 million of Mr. Zlochevsky’s assets. In a speech in 2015, the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, called the Ukrainian prosecutor “an obstacle” to anticorruption efforts, and mentioned the U.K. case, which he said led to the escape of illicit assets.
But Ukraine’s government was slow to fire Mr. Shokin, despite warnings from the International Monetary Fund and others that Western aid to the country would be cut off if it didn’t act. Mr. Biden, in one of his trips to Ukraine in 2016, pressured the government, telling them the U.S. would withhold $1 billion in loan guarantees. At an event at the Council on Foreign Relations two years later, Mr. Biden said he told Ukraine officials: “If the prosecutor is not fired you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.”
Mr. Shokin denied any misconduct, and said he was fired illegally. In an interview with a Ukrainian news service, he blamed his dismissal on Ukrainian “grant-eaters”—nonprofit groups seeking to curry favor with the West.
Biden has said that Obama was kept fully informed. Regardless, because of Biden's son's close relationship to a Ukraine company, it would have been prudent for Biden to step aside as the administration's envoy to Ukraine.
That much is clear, as is evidenced by this thread. Which i why we ask for lawmen appointed by Trump to recuse themselves from his investigations, to the chagrin of his ballwashers.
Last edited: