JOE BIDEN OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE To Protect His Son During UKRAINIAN INVESTIGATION - Just Facts Daily

Author: Public-Choice

Posts

Total: 81
#31
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@Shila
You continue to cite Shokin's replacement. Assuming he is more credible than Shokin is begging the question. The nazi officials which replaced previous judges also had radically different opinions and people also claimed that the previous officials were corrupt or useless.

It's a "he said she said" situation if you look at testimony alone. You need to look at contextual evidence to go further.
#32
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Public-Choice
Did you not see the link to the emails?
I did see the link. That’s likely less reliable than Just Facts.com.

Do you expect me to read all those emails looking for some smoking gun? Why don’t you pull the incriminating emails out and make your case assuming you can prove these emails are verified by a competent authority.

#33
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Public-Choice
Your assumptions about Just Facts misportraying the facts is extremely misleading.
The owner of Just Facts is a Christian wack job with an agenda. He’s his own editor. This is NOT a legitimate source of facts. 

#34
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
I did see the link. That’s likely less reliable than Just Facts.com.

Do you expect me to read all those emails looking for some smoking gun? Why don’t you pull the incriminating emails out and make your case assuming you can prove these emails are verified by a competent authority.
If you want a tl;dr. The smoking gun was not actually a smoking gun at all.

The emails were Hunter Biden talking about something, that JF interpreted and argued actually meant something different, and obviously was referring to Joe Biden putting pressure on the president to fire the prosecutor, even though:

- The emails only talked about getting people to say nice things about said oligarch to encourage the prosecutor to drop the investigation.
- No mention of firing the prosecutor
- No mention of Hunter doing any of the work (was other people)


Topic's author
#35
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 1,065
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
The owner of Just Facts is a Christian wack job with an agenda
Can you prove he is a "wack job" or is a religion with 3+ billion adherents all just automatically written off as "wack jobs" to you?

Because it seems more apparent to me that you're the wack job for performing a character assassination in place of actually engaging with the facts from the article.

If all outspoken religious adherents counted as wackjobs then Stephen Hawking, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, and many other brilliant scholars in their field would not be allowed to state anything in their field and share their knowledge because they are "atheist wack jobs."

I swear the more I talk to liberals the more they are just very strong adherents of the genetic fallacy and appeal to authority. There is very little intellectual honesty at all in the greater left-wing movement.

At least Ramshutu engaged with the article and provided a reasoned response for it. I may not agree with him, but if he can prove the passports and diamonds were his and Ukraine actually charged him of crimes in an investigation then I will obviously be wrong about Shokin.

Don't let thought-stopping do all the work for you, IWantRooseveltAgain, think logically, not emotionally.
#36
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@Ramshutu
So from my understanding of this article; the argument is that there are some emails in which Burisma engages Hunters company to apparently lobby for them in order to get the investigation dropped. This is not new information.
Oh it is to @Double_R who claimed there was not investigation at this point in time (November 2015) and indeed that Shokin's seizure of the oligarch's assets was revenge against Joe Biden for getting him fired.

This confirms that not only was there a threat of investigation but that Hunter Biden knew there was and was being tasked with shielding the oligarch. This is of course the reason for the bribe, oligarchs aren't compulsive gift-givers after all.

Only someone in the throws of partisan delusion would suggest that since they knew better than to say "fire Shokin" in an email that they were not willing to see Shokin fired if he refused to drop the investigation. Even if you had that kind of faith before the quid pro quo, you would need to be beyond reason to continue to believe it after the quid pro quo.

The emails don't establish the quid pro quo, Joe Biden bragged about it.
#37
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Oh it is to @Double_R who claimed there was not investigation at this point in time (November 2015) and indeed that Shokin's seizure of the oligarch's assets was revenge against Joe Biden for getting him fired.
We’re not sure whether there was an investigation at the time: and it’s hard to claim shokin arranged a seizures as revenge for something that hadn’t happened yet.

We’ve known about this email for well over a year - it’s not new.

This confirms that not only was there a threat of investigation but that Hunter Biden knew there was and was being tasked with shielding the oligarch. This is of course the reason for the bribe, oligarchs aren't compulsive gift-givers after all.
Given that there was a major push by western powers for Ukraine to investigate - and this oligarch had been mentioned; the threat wasn’t an unknown - and is likely why blue star was being engaged in the first place; rather than any actual investigation.

Only someone in the throws of partisan delusion would suggest that since they knew better than to say "fire Shokin" in an email that they were not willing to see Shokin fired if he refused to drop the investigation. Even if you had that kind of faith before the quid pro quo, you would need to be beyond reason to continue to believe it after the quid pro quo.

The emails don't establish the quid pro quo, Joe Biden bragged about it.
Ooof. The last time I saw projection this strong - it ended up killing luke skywalker.

What the emails say; is that Burisma was hiring blue star, with the assistance of Hunter Biden, to help them with PR and lobbying in the Ukrainian government to end any investigations that may be going on into an oligarch - corresponding to a time where there is a major push by western powers to investigate corruption.

The way this was read; is that Hunter himself was doing the lobbying, rather than blue star, and instead of lobbying officials to make a positive case about the oligarch, they managed to convince the Vice President to do what anyone can see he probably would have done anyway, and what all other western powers were also doing (threatening support for doing more to combat corruption), and cheered when, 5 months later the prosecutor resigned -
After impounding a bunch of the oligarchs stuff; it didn’t eradicate the push for anti-corruption prosecutions, just changed the guy in charge of investigating them. 

This elaborate scheme was shared in email, involving another trusted company, as some master plan - despite Hunter Biden still being on the Burisma board at the time - rendering the whole thing this some weird pointless roundabout way of talking to your board member to exercise his dads connections.

To be honest - it somewhat seems the existence of this email in the first place, engaging an outside lobbying firm at all in the first place to exercise the connections a member of your own board - seems to demonstrate the opposite of what’s suggested.

To make any of that make sense requires a lot of squinting, and ignoring all the ostensible problems.

On the other hand; imagine for a moment, you’re a f*ck up, and the only real skill you have is that your dad is big in politics.  You decide that the best way of you making a lot of money, is by trading off your dads name; and some of the people you know in the circles you’ve been in.

You can’t actually get your dad to do anything at all - hence why the people you work for having to end up paying bribes; or hire lobbying firms. All of a sudden, all of that stuff makes complete sense.


Now given that Just Facts is omitting all these key facts - and presenting this email (which was known for a while) as new - it’s self evident that this is a biased article intended to oversell this narrative. Much like every time this is mentioned by anyone on the right.
#38
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,989
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
America is in a sad state when it is relying on a corrupt foreign nation to keep American corruption in check.


Topic's author
#39
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 1,065
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@Greyparrot
America is in a sad state
I think America peaked in 1791, when we ratified the Bill of Rights, with some minor inklings of returning to the founding ideals in the 1910s, 2000s, and 2017-2019. Note, I am not saying we actually returned to them, But I am saying we actually achieved significant direction toward achieving the goals we set out in 1776 and 1789 in those particular years.

Throughout most of American history, we have been oppressing, attacking, and stealing from our own citizens, rigging elections, having show trials and corrupt prosecutions, and we even had internment camps during WWII and now have them again in 2022 for the j6 rioters.

I want to believe America was a great nation, but, on the whole, I think it is our ideals at our founding that makes us great. The road to achieving them is, honestly, quite appalling. And our government was corrupt for as far back as can be remembered. Right back to the 1798 Alien and Sedition Acts, the first speech control and government determination of terrorism this country ever had. From then on, the government basically had the legal power to call anyone they wanted a terrorist. This was never really repealed, and although the government used it sparingly, only the newspapers were able to get away with not being prosecuted (funny how that works. The marketing departments for the politicians got a free pass while everyone else suffered).
#40
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,989
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Public-Choice
What accidentally made America great was the initial inability to tax the citizens which led to the accidental ownership of the land amongst the collected people instead of the state as the state sold off parcels of land to pay down the debts.

People from all over the world came to America to take advantage of this accident. Nowhere in the world could you ever expect to own property like you could in America.

That all ended when the State granted itself the authority to seize back property from people for any reason. Now America is no better than any other country and nothing special.
#41
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@Ramshutu
@Double_R
Oh it is to @Double_R who claimed there was not investigation at this point in time (November 2015) and indeed that Shokin's seizure of the oligarch's assets was revenge against Joe Biden for getting him fired.
We’re not sure whether there was an investigation at the time: and it’s hard to claim shokin arranged a seizures as revenge for something that hadn’t happened yet.

We’ve known about this email for well over a year - it’s not new.
The seizures occurred after the quid pro quo. You claim to have read the emails but you're not sure whether there is the investigation or threat of investigation? That's not honest.

"We" you may have known for over a year, but not everyone has which is why I'm tagging Double_R

This confirms that not only was there a threat of investigation but that Hunter Biden knew there was and was being tasked with shielding the oligarch. This is of course the reason for the bribe, oligarchs aren't compulsive gift-givers after all.
Given that there was a major push by western powers for Ukraine to investigate - and this oligarch had been mentioned; the threat wasn’t an unknown - and is likely why blue star was being engaged in the first place; rather than any actual investigation.
Hunter & friends were being engaged to bring US federal power to bear, private companies that aren't fronts for political corruption don't offer things like "high-ranking US officials in Ukraine (US Ambassador)".

How in the world could a private company deliver US foreign policy as a service? Oh wait, Hunter is the son of the "policy leader" for Ukraine. Whether or not there was a paper trail for an investigation is utterly irrelevant. The threat existed, Hunter was offering to remove it through US foreign policy,  Hunter was not in direct control of US foreign policy, therefore Hunter was an agent for his father who was selling US foreign policy.

Quintessential public corruption.

Now you can have a conspiracy that was never carried out, and if all that happened was some sweet nothings were whispered this probably wouldn't have been discovered; but the fact is Shokin was quid pro quoed out of office seals the deal (if you are sane).

Conspiracy to "neutralize John Doe" + related persons admitting that they shot John Doe = conspiracy to commit murder. You're acting like a desperate defense lawyer hoping that because the notes on the criminal fucking conspiracy didn't use the word "kill" or "murder" that the jury will ignore it.


Ooof. The last time I saw projection this strong - it ended up killing luke skywalker.
I am not one to rashly declare a person hopeless, but if someone can't connect the dots here it really is hopeless.


they managed to convince the Vice President to do what anyone can see he probably would have done anyway
"managed to convince" are you daft? You think Hunter spun the globe threw a dart and decided to head off to that country because they might have so desperately wanted his company's charms?

He was SENT there because the US military industrial complex had tentacles all over the country and there was money to be made through a protection racket.

He was SENT there because Joe Biden was or was becoming the de facto "Big Guy" in the US executive branch when it comes to Ukraine.

"probably would have done anyway", BULL SHIT! A president was impeached for doing what he did, they called it illegal I believe. Ukraine is not like other countries, there is plenty of public corruption in central Africa but no visits from US vice presidents there to quid pro quo appointed officials out. Why? They would tell him to get lost.

It is only the leverage of the money, the planted officials, the CIA interest that makes Ukraine vulnerable and that is where the Joe's mighty sense of "justice" manifested.


This elaborate scheme was shared in email, involving another trusted company, as some master plan - despite Hunter Biden still being on the Burisma board at the time - rendering the whole thing this some weird pointless roundabout way of talking to your board member to exercise his dads connections.
They're called shell companies and it's how one tries to avoid being flagged (even more than usual).


You can’t actually get your dad to do anything at all
Except for the fact that your dad did something...
#42
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
The seizures occurred after the quid pro quo. You claim to have read the emails but you're not sure whether there is the investigation or threat of investigation? That's not honest.
I said it’s unclear as to whether at the time of the emails there was an actual specific. investigation - which we don’t. As opposed to simply rumblings about corruption and a push to open them.

The point being - is that a multitude of groups were pressuring more to be done about corruption - and explicitly viewed shokin as a barrier; before and after Bluestar were engaged. He was not gone until april - multiple months after Biden’s pressure.

Hunter & friends were being engaged to bring US federal power to bear, private companies that aren't fronts for political corruption don't offer things like "high-ranking US officials in Ukraine (US Ambassador)".

How in the world could a private company deliver US foreign policy as a service? Oh wait, Hunter is the son of the "policy leader" for Ukraine. Whether or not there was a paper trail for an investigation is utterly irrelevant. The threat existed, Hunter was offering to remove it through US foreign policy,  Hunter was not in direct control of US foreign policy, therefore Hunter was an agent for his father who was selling US foreign policy.

Quintessential public corruption.

Now you can have a conspiracy that was never carried out, and if all that happened was some sweet nothings were whispered this probably wouldn't have been discovered; but the fact is Shokin was quid pro quoed out of office seals the deal (if you are sane).

Conspiracy to "neutralize John Doe" + related persons admitting that they shot John Doe = conspiracy to commit murder. You're acting like a desperate defense lawyer hoping that because the notes on the criminal fucking conspiracy didn't use the word "kill" or "murder" that the jury will ignore it.
As I said - all we know is that a.) Hunter was on the board. b.) Burisma engaged a lobbying firm, c.) everyone was putting pressure on shokin.

Everything else is inferred by you. There are multiple potential explanations, the simplest, with fewest issues, that explains the most is the one I put forward.

I am not one to rashly declare a person hopeless, but if someone can't connect the dots here it really is hopeless.
There are like 4 dots - and you’re trying to convince me it’s a picture of the Mona Lisa.

"managed to convince" are you daft? You think Hunter spun the globe threw a dart and decided to head off to that country because they might have so desperately wanted his company's charms?

He was SENT there because the US military industrial complex had tentacles all over the country and there was money to be made through a protection racket.

He was SENT there because Joe Biden was or was becoming the de facto "Big Guy" in the US executive branch when it comes to Ukraine.
Or - get this - Hunter is a f*ckup trying to trade on his name. 

"probably would have done anyway", BULL SHIT! A president was impeached for doing what he did, they called it illegal I believe. Ukraine is not like other countries, there is plenty of public corruption in central Africa but no visits from US vice presidents there to quid pro quo appointed officials out. Why? They would tell him to get lost.
Trump was impeached for leveraging an ally for his own personal political gain.

You keep implying that this was some weird move by Biden.

The world bank, IMF, EU, and the countries own citizens were applying pressure to have Shokin removed - or no longe standing in the way of corruption. The evidence clearly indicates that Shokin was indeed standing in the way of prosecutions and corrupt. Every one of them were happy that he was removed; and there hasn’t really been any suggestion by anyone - including the Republican investigation - that this pressure was applied in a way that was against US stated interests at the time.

It is only the leverage of the money, the planted officials, the CIA interest that makes Ukraine vulnerable and that is where the Joe's mighty sense of "justice" manifested.
huh?

They're called shell companies and it's how one tries to avoid being flagged (even more than usual).
Blue star isn’t a shell company, and isn’t he already being paid for a “legitimate job” being on the Burisma board?


Of course - what you did here is flat out ignored most of the issues in your argument, that I pointed out.

Let’s reiterate.

If Burisma wanted Hunter to leverage his father to get a prosecutor fired, he’s already on the board, he can do that directly as part of the board. There are a literally a billion ways they can make legitimate payments.  

There’s literally 0 reason Burisma would use Hunter to then hire a separate lobbying firm to engage in actual lobbying of other US government officials, if he could just pick up the phone and call his dad - given that wtf were they even paying him for on the board of Burisma?

Why would they go to the risk of having a prosecutor fired when there is a huge worldwide clamour to investigate corruption and the replacement could well be way worse;  and the current prosecutor has been helpful by not investigating past bribes or what happened yet in the SFO investigation.

What makes much more sense is Hunter Biden is a f*ck up who tries to trade on the people he knows and that his dads the Vice President; despite being paid vast sums by Burisma, he had so little ability to actually effect policy that they needed bribes, and then to engage a lobbying firm and being in multiple new people into this Machiavellian plot; talk about it in email, and then despite it being all super illegal, various relationships with individuals known publicly, and that actions are being scrutinized by multiple countries, one’s own opposition and state department - you then do something that so obviously against the national interests that helps your son in front of everyone and brag about it - it makes no sense.

The only way this narrative makes sense, is if you assume a bunch of stuff is true, and ignore all the ways it doesn’t work…









#43
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Public-Choice
Are you surprised? Rules of the game:

  1. Never snitch
  2. Stay loyal to fam
  3. Not much else
Welcome to the real world.

Before laws, before society, before anything, this is raw human nature and the morality in most.

It is up to us to battle our inner urges to put family above the bigger community but few will do so.

#44
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@Ramshutu
The point being - is that a multitude of groups were pressuring more to be done about corruption - and explicitly viewed shokin as a barrier; before and after Bluestar were engaged. He was not gone until april - multiple months after Biden’s pressure.
This is fascinating, comparing your statements to Double_R, you both concocted different (wildly unlikely) theories to explain the evidence in such a way that the obvious Biden corruption is just a bit less corrupt.

Double_R never once suggested that Biden's threat was not the prime mover behind the firing, indeed that fact was central to his explanation of the movement against burisma.

He claimed there was no threat against burisma and therefore Joe had no personal reason to protect burisma. You claim that burisma was doomed from the start and Shokin wasn't fired because of Biden. Which would mean you disagree with Biden's brag, and you consider the flurry of phone calls right before the firing a coincidence, and you consider Poreschenko's party turning on Shokin to be an inevitability that just happened to come shortly after the anti-Shokin campaign from the US executive branch.


c.) everyone was putting pressure on shokin.
Everyone = US deepstate, a few EU people, and Shokin's local pro-EU opposition. = Not enough without threat courtesy of the big guy.


Or - get this - Hunter is a f*ckup trying to trade on his name. 
His name means nothing if it doesn't influence US foreign policy. Your theory requires "us" to believe that Hunter is selling something he doesn't have, people who have proven themselves quite capable of assessing relative risks and probabilities have bought that something, and for unrelated reasons they got that something as a gift.

That is absurd. Money changed hands, illicit services changed hands.

It is even more absurd when you have evidence in other cases of some of the people interested in bribing Joe Biden insisting on meeting him first, to make sure Hunter wasn't a lone scammer. Only after such a meeting, and the assurances provided, were they content to deal with Hunter and his associates.

Trump was impeached for leveraging an ally for his own personal political gain.
Spin, the act was the same; the only difference is your opinion on Trump's motives, motives which a fair person would consider justified since the corruption was real.

The world bank, IMF, EU, and the countries own citizens were applying pressure to have Shokin removed
I doubt there was any kind of concerted campaign from the first three; it is more likely that they saw the US executive branch whipping up a frenzy and elevated their totally normal complaints into cries for blood.

As for the citizens of Ukraine, one thing is not like the others; you see the citizens of Ukraine actually have the theoretical right to have a say in their own government. Unlike all these foreigners.

Perhaps they should have done something like vote... oh wait they were and that clearly wasn't working because they were a minority. Only when the president changed his tune did the parliament change their tune, and the president only changed after the quid pro quo.


Every one of them were happy that he was removed; and there hasn’t really been any suggestion by anyone - including the Republican investigation - that this pressure was applied in a way that was against US stated interests at the time.
What are you saying here, that there was no suggestion at the time, or that a republican investigation later did not suggest the pressure was applied against US interests?

Also you may have noticed that the executive branch stated interests at the time.

If Trump stated an interest in uncovering US corruption in Ukraine then his (purported but unproven) quid pro quo would be aligned with stated US interests.


If Burisma wanted Hunter to leverage his father to get a prosecutor fired, he’s already on the board, he can do that directly as part of the board. There are a literally a billion ways they can make legitimate payments.
Another one who misuses "literally", there are ways to pay someone without them being on the board; so why was he on the board?

Cover for the payments. The position is a 'legitimate' excuse for the payments. That's what money laundering means. They could increase his pay, but then they would need more excuses; or it could be as simple as tax reasons.

People want money for things, they don't need to see it go through their own personal account so long as they get the things they want.

There’s literally 0 reason Burisma would use Hunter to then hire a separate lobbying firm to engage in actual lobbying of other US government officials, if he could just pick up the phone and call his dad - given that wtf were they even paying him for on the board of Burisma?
You again beg the question. Why would burisma hire a separate lobbying firm when they had Hunter? They didn't, Bluestar is a shell company. It's not different from Hunter it's part of the same solution. It's just a different way to launder money. A matter of obfuscation and distribution and nothing more.

Why would they go to the risk of having a prosecutor fired when there is a huge worldwide clamour to investigate corruption and the replacement could well be way worse;  and the current prosecutor has been helpful by not investigating past bribes or what happened yet in the SFO investigation.
There wasn't a worldwide clamor, there was a few pissed off officials and a pissed off Ukrainian minority party. That was not enough to remove Shokin.

The replacement was not going to be worse for burisma because the US executive branch (i.e. Biden) was greenlighting possibilities. There is an audio recording of US officials talking about potential Ukrainian officials as if it was up to them.

If Shokin wasn't a threat there was no reason to specifically mention him as a target as they did.

As for the claim that Shokin never got back to the UK investigation it could have been incompetence, a deliberate decision to not embarrass themselves with their lack of record keeping, or perhaps Shokin was playing ball for a while; but at some point morals kicked in or he wanted higher bribes than he was worth.

What makes much more sense is Hunter Biden is a f*ck up who tries to trade on the people he knows and that his dads the Vice President; despite being paid vast sums by Burisma, he had so little ability to actually effect policy
It's amazing that Hunter knew in 2014 that his dad would coincidentally deliver what would otherwise have been a scam job, it's even more amazing that burisma paid millions of dollars for over a year with no indication of actual deliverables.

I mean in your theory Hunter has no way to actually make is father do anything, and Joe is such an upstanding guy he would never do anything anyway; so how does Hunter know who to scam? Does he look at his father's actions and go to wherever he might be exerting influence next?


Talk about it in email, and then despite it being all super illegal, various relationships with individuals known publicly, and that actions are being scrutinized by multiple countries, one’s own opposition and state department - you then do something that so obviously against the national interests that helps your son in front of everyone and brag about it - it makes no sense.
It makes perfect sense. It's masterful really, from Joe's end not Hunter's. Hunter keeps fucking up by leaving laptops places.

A.) It's not illegal for the executive branch to quid pro quo someone, even for personal gain; we found that out during the impeachment.
B.) Make your personal interests the same as the national interests so you have an excuse for your actions, then you can hide in plain sight; brag about it if you want.

It was only with the impeachment that there was any indication this kind of thing would ever be punished. It was only with the laptop, Shokin's statements, the whistleblower Bobulinski and Giuliani's work that this was uncovered.

If not for those things no one would have ever heard about Hunter being paid $$$, sharing bank accounts with his father, etc...

In reality Biden was the corruption in Ukraine, thus it was against true US interests (i.e. interests of the people) for him to do this; but what he publicized was that he was oh so concerned about corruption. That's why there are articles making claims you blindly believe. You seriously suggest that Biden was concerned that Shokin wasn't trying to investigate the company paying his son $130k/week.

With so much institutional trust, so much gullibility, there would otherwise have been nothing to worry about. Certainly nothing to worry about if Clinton had won the election as every democrat expected.

#45
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Public-Choice
One more thing, Shokin dropped a press conference where he released everything he found on Biden:

This is not a Victor Shokin press conference.  This is an Interfax.com press conference filmed in Moscow, Russia on Feb 27th of this year - 3 days after Russia launched its all out invasion of Ukraine.

The reason you can't link to this through YouTube is that it is just pure, unfiltered Russian govt. propaganda.  This is the Russian govt. telling you "facts" about Joe Biden less than 24 hours after Biden announced massive sanctions against Russia.  This is the Russian govt. telling you about what they think counts as corruption in the Ukrainian government less than 24 hours after Zelensky surprised and slaughtered a Chechnyan assassination team coming for him in Kyiv.

If you tried as hard as you possibly  could, I don't think you could come up with a more biased or  less reliable source  of information about corruption in Ukraine.
Topic's author
#46
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 1,065
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@Greyparrot
What accidentally made America great was the initial inability to tax the citizens which led to the accidental ownership of the land amongst the collected people instead of the state as the state sold off parcels of land to pay down the debts.

People from all over the world came to America to take advantage of this accident. Nowhere in the world could you ever expect to own property like you could in America.

That all ended when the State granted itself the authority to seize back property from people for any reason. Now America is no better than any other country and nothing special.
I mean. It wasn't an accident. The people who controlled the states and acted as the middle men selling the land made boatloads when they rented out most of the houses until the 1960s or 70s. They then switched to a mainly mortgage model and forced people to get a mortgage  from the bank they owned and so people continuously paid to rent the land, even though they "owned" it on paper, until they couldn't make payments. Then it was simply returned and either sold via an auction or reused for a new mortgage.

Do you know why income taxes originally came out? Funny story... it was to make us pay for the billionaires' infrastructure projects and welfare projects. They created a scam where the states taxed people and then this money went to "infrastructure" spending (e.g. elites' pet projects) so they didn't have to pay a cent to build their businesses, and even MADE MONEY in the building process.

Then they opened up their newfangled business and got free publicity because they owned the newspaper the people read and they bankrolled the governing officials who told people about the businesses for them.

Movies like It's A Wonderful Life weren't fiction. That was quite literally how many cities were run. A wealthy businessman would build everything and be the banker who sold the land, be the landlords of the apartments, and more because the government never really outlawed this practice. The Sherman antitrust act was for national companies, not city companies. Besides, they purposely kept a few unowned pieces of property and a few local businesses around that weren't threats so they could legally claim they weren't monopolies.

If the elites can't monetize it, then it won't exist in government!!

Nevermind the fact that they can literally write off virtually their entire profit margins by leveraging debt and, until the 90s, could turn themselves into an LLC, give themselves a $1 salary, but since they are an LLC they basically write everything off as a business expense and not pay personal income taxes because they make $1/year. Oh, and they just make the people buying their stuff pay the business taxes they owe.
Topic's author
#47
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 1,065
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@oromagi
This press conference is from 2020. I know this because I remember reading about it back in 2020 while Trump was still in office.

It may have been reuploaded in 2022, but it certainly also is not russian government propaganda lol. Those are Ukrainian officials.

Do you ever do any cursory research before you post?

Here are three news outlets that covered the press conference. As you can see from the timestamps, they all predate the Ukraine War by about 18 months.

Zerohedge (December 30, 2020):

Lew Rockwell (December 31, 2020):

American Thinker (December 29, 2020):

You are indeed correct it is not Shokin. I was mistaken about that. But it certainly is not Russian Government propaganda. The people in the video are Ukrainian government officials.
#48
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@oromagi
If you tried as hard as you possibly  could, I don't think you could come up with a more biased or  less reliable source  of information about corruption in Ukraine.
Trust US officials, don't trust Russians. How "patriotic", remember when that was right wing?

Trust neither. Trust narratives where people's motivations explain the outcome, not the words they say.
Topic's author
#49
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 1,065
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Trust narratives where people's motivations explain the outcome, not the words they say.
While I do agree motivations matter, I think that is not the best way to weigh statements.

Why not weigh their statements against logic and the all of the fact themselves and then we can determine whether it is the truth or not?

I think that is better than just relying on motivations. 

#50
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty

--> @Shila
You continue to cite Shokin's replacement. Assuming he is more credible than Shokin is begging the question. The nazi officials which replaced previous judges also had radically different opinions and people also claimed that the previous officials were corrupt or useless.

It's a "he said she said" situation if you look at testimony alone. You need to look at contextual evidence to go further.
Trump was impeached for conspiring against Biden by trying to get Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden or just state publicly they were investigation Hunter Biden.
#51
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Public-Choice
You are indeed correct it is not Shokin. I was mistaken about that. But it certainly is not Russian Government propaganda. The people in the video are Ukrainian government officials.
It's not Victor Shokin it is Andrii Derkach.  According to the Trump administration, Derkach was a Russian spy working for Putin in the Ukrainian government for "more than a decade," wanted in the US for interference in the US election.

I assumed Derkach was in Moscow since he has been wanted for treason in Ukraine since the beginning of the invasion on Feb 24th.  Derkach's security firms gave the Russian army intelligence, opened key roadblocks, etc in the opening days of the war.  It looks like nobody knows where Derkach is hiding right now.   I don't have any reason not to believe you when you say this was from 2020 ( and just republished by the Russian government in the opening days of the war) and if so Derkach was still in parliament when he made that press conference then although wanted by the US for interference in the 2020 election.

When Senator Ron Johnson was investigating Hunter Biden in 2020 his key witness was  Andrii Telizhenko who was going to testify about Blue Star but Johnson had to cancel his testimony in embarrassment after discovering  that Telizhenko was just a plant working for Derkach, the man speaking in your video.

Be clear- you are literally just parroting information fed to you by Russian intelligence.
#52
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@Public-Choice
@Shila
Trust narratives where people's motivations explain the outcome, not the words they say.
While I do agree motivations matter, I think that is not the best way to weigh statements.

Why not weigh their statements against logic and the all of the fact themselves and then we can determine whether it is the truth or not?

I think that is better than just relying on motivations. 
Of course logic, but this is all fuzzy logic; which is to say intuition informed by logical principles.

This is not deductive, aside from a few issues like the direction of time (order of events) nothing is certain. It all comes from claims filtered through reports filtered through commentary.

This is not inductive, we have no means of evaluating the probability of these claims based on the evidence beyond what seems probable to us.

You continue to cite Shokin's replacement. Assuming he is more credible than Shokin is begging the question. The nazi officials which replaced previous judges also had radically different opinions and people also claimed that the previous officials were corrupt or useless.

It's a "he said she said" situation if you look at testimony alone. You need to look at contextual evidence to go further.
Trump was impeached for conspiring against Biden by trying to get Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden or just state publicly they were investigation Hunter Biden.
A conspiracy is illegitimate cooperation, what makes it illegitimate to ask for corruption to be investigated? The transcript reflects a request to investigate, not a request to fake an investigation.
#53
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@oromagi
According to the Trump administration
According to the deep state which Trump failed to purge....


Derkach was a Russian spy working for Putin in the Ukrainian government for "more than a decade," wanted in the US for interference in the US election.
Oh no, are you saying that once again an authority has appeared that cannot be trusted?!

Appealing to authority is so complicated, I just don't know how you pull it off.


wanted in the US for interference in the US election.
Only a MAGA semi-fascist would imply that an election can be interfered with.... *lightsaber sounds*


Be clear- you are literally just parroting information fed to you by Russian intelligence.
and you know because US intelligence told you so....
#54
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
-->@oromagi
According to the Trump administration
According to the deep state which Trump failed to purge....
According to Steve Mnuchin and Ron Johnson in 2020 but even Giuliani now admits he's a Russian Spy.  

You saw the part where he literally betrayed Ukraine, right?  He actually  organized security teams to secure border gates  and bridges for the Russian tanks of Feb 24th.  

and you know because US intelligence told you so....
Well, US intelligence always called him KGB (his father openly represented KGB in Ukraine, Andrii was trained by KGB in the late '80's).  I'm saying Trump insiders now admit that PC-'s source is an active, open, traitor to his country spy for Putin.

#55
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@oromagi
According to the Trump administration
According to the deep state which Trump failed to purge....
According to Steve Mnuchin and Ron Johnson in 2020 but even Giuliani now admits he's a Russian Spy.  

You saw the part where he literally betrayed Ukraine, right?  He actually  organized security teams to secure border gates  and bridges for the Russian tanks of Feb 24th.  
I saw your claim yes.


and you know because US intelligence told you so....
Well, US intelligence always called him KGB (his father openly represented KGB in Ukraine, Andrii was trained by KGB in the late '80's).  I'm saying Trump insiders now admit that PC-'s source is an active, open, traitor to his country spy for Putin.
and did he arrange to have Hunter go to Ukraine and receive 3.3 million dollars? What an amazing spy.

Either he is a spy who is interested in exposing Biden's actual corruption or he's not a spy who is interested in exposing Biden's actual corruption. Doesn't really matter does it?
#56
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Oh it is to @Double_R who claimed there was not investigation at this point in time (November 2015) and indeed that Shokin's seizure of the oligarch's assets was revenge against Joe Biden for getting him fired.
We’ve been through this multiple times, and I have explained each time in pain staking detail that the retaliatory theory to explain Shokin’s seizure of assets was just one possible explanation I made up on the spot and through out there to demonstrate that we don’t know what this was about. You yourself admitted that because the seizure came well after Biden’s meeting with Porshenko we could not draw any definitive conclusions about what motivated it, so you were in fact agreeing with my point.

To take that and say that I claimed there was no investigation prior to the meeting and that this was in fact “revenge” against Joe Biden - despite me explaining multiple times that this is not what I argued -  isn’t just arguing in bad faith, it’s flat out lying.

The only reason this point matters is because you are using it to make your case by presenting the seizure as evidence that Shokin was in fact prosecuting corruption, so the burden is on you to show that his motivations were clear. You cannot do that, so you have to lie.

He claimed there was no threat against burisma and therefore Joe had no personal reason to protect burisma.
I never claimed this. I said there was no threat against Hunter. Big difference.

Double_R never once suggested that Biden's threat was not the prime mover behind the firing, indeed that fact was central to his explanation of the movement against burisma.
I never claimed to know what the prime mover was, I accepted for the sake of argument your premise to demonstrate that even if we grant that, your argument still fails.

Again, these are your claims.

As I have explained and as Ram has explained as well, the US was not the only entity threatening to pull funding. I even quoted for you the article explaining the 4 billion that was in jeopardy from being pulled by the EU and the IMF, far more than the amount Biden threatened. You’ve ignored all of this.
Topic's author
#57
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 1,065
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@oromagi
According to the Trump administration, Derkach was a Russian spy working for Putin in the Ukrainian government
I'll wait for real evidence. I don't trust bureaucrats who don't give reasons for why they believe things.

you are literally just parroting information fed to you by Russian intelligence.
That doesn't make it wrong or right. That Russian intelligence aligns with emails from Hinter Biden's laptop. The video also cites a phone call from 2016.

They also have two supposed witnesses who explained how they were working for Russian entities and laundering money for Russia.

The point is you can't just ignore something because of the source. US Intelligence lies just as much as Russian Intelligence or any other intelligence agency.

I assumed Derkach was in Moscow since he has been wanted for treason in Ukraine since the beginning of the invasion on Feb 24th
Well, to be fair, Ukraine's entire government is full of turncoats and spies. They are a football in a proxy war between Russia and the United States. We overtook it in 2014 with a coup, and then Russia and then us again. It goes back and forth.

But what I did notice was a lack of plainly laid out evidence for him being a Russian spy. No intelligence report could be found with no physical evidence to examine. Unlike with Shokin.

I still do believe Biden is dirty. So is Soros and the Obama Administration in Ukraine. Biden openly bragged about it. (I already cited sources on the 2014 Ukrainian coup). [1]

Here is the infamous video where Biden admits to it nonchalantly:

So the Ruskis actually spoke some truth about him in 2020, imho. That doesn't happen all the time. Psyops is full of disinformation no matter which intelligence agency engages in it.

SOURCES:
#58
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@Ramshutu
@Double_R

[Double_R] You yourself admitted that because the seizure came well after Biden’s meeting with Porshenko we could not draw any definitive conclusions about what motivated it, so you were in fact agreeing with my point.
I admitted that it might not be revenge... it could also have been an ongoing investigation. What it could not plausibly be is coincidence.


[ADOL] Oh it is to @Double_R who claimed there was not investigation at this point in time (November 2015)
[Double_R] To take that and say that I claimed there was no investigation prior to the meeting and that this was in fact “revenge” against Joe Biden - despite me explaining multiple times that this is not what I argued -  isn’t just arguing in bad faith, it’s flat out lying.
I said you claimed there was no investigation at this time. You  commit a strawman while claiming a strawman. Here is you claiming there was no investigation since 2010, which is before November 2015:


[Double_R] The investigation into Burisma was dormant at the time Biden did this, and the events that were under investigation occurred on 2010, years before Hunter joined the board so he had no personal exposure regardless.


[ADOL] He claimed there was no threat against burisma and therefore Joe had no personal reason to protect burisma.
[Double_R] I never claimed this. I said there was no threat against Hunter. Big difference.

[Double_R] The investigation into Burisma was dormant at the time Biden did this (quid pro quo), and the events that were under investigation occurred on 2010, years before Hunter joined the board so he had no personal exposure regardless.
"He" refers to Joe Biden or this sentence makes no sense. No difference whatsoever between exposure to Hunter and exposure to Joe since they were a functional unit, part of the same criminal fucking conspiracy.


[Double_R] The only reason this point matters is because you are using it to make your case by presenting the seizure as evidence that Shokin was in fact prosecuting corruption, so the burden is on you to show that his motivations were clear.
Not generalized "prosecuting corruption" specifically a threat to Burisma, and Burisma agreed. See the emails. https://bidenlaptopemails.com/biden-emails/email.php?id=20151105-161119_64772 and only because you claimed (in post #97) that Biden feared no exposure because there was no investigation. Please, for your own dignity review your own claim before you say something like "dormant is still threatening", if it's threatening then your #97 claim still fails.


[Double_R] You cannot do that, so you have to lie.
The quotes above say I'm not lying.

[ADOL] Double_R never once suggested that Biden's threat was not the prime mover behind the firing, indeed that fact was central to his explanation of the movement against burisma.
[Double_R] I never claimed to know what the prime mover was, I accepted for the sake of argument your premise to demonstrate that even if we grant that, your argument still fails.
Well I have your quotes, but you'll claim that was just a theoretical explanation for the seizures as revenge, you'll no doubt claim that you don't actually believe it was revenge.

I think you were forced into saying that because your theory fell apart and now you're recanting because you've forgotten that you don't have an alternative theory (besides the ridiculous one that siezures had nothing to do with burisma).

Let the reader decide for themselves:


[Double_R] Your claim is that Shokin’s seizure of Zlochevsky’s assets shows that the investigation into Burisma was very much alive, but setting aside that the seizure did nothing to target Burisma, the seizure occurred almost 5 months after Biden got Shokin fired. This is far more easily explained as retaliation than an honest investigative move, especially considering that everything was dropped months later after Shokin left.
I italicized a part where you claim everything was dropped, as @Ramshutu claimed there was no improvement in burisma's conditions after the firing.

#59
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
This is fascinating, comparing your statements to Double_R, you both concocted … You claim that burisma was doomed from the start and Shokin wasn't fired because of Biden

Wtf are you talking about lol! Double R and I are not really a million miles away; unless you make stuff up about what I said:

The west wanted Ukraine to fight corruption - PGOs prosectors were found with bags of diamonds, another prosecutor resigned citing corruption, and another key prosecutor involved in the prosecution of corruption was fired. The EU, IMF, and world bank also wanted the guy gone: 

C1: Pressuring for his ouster was behaviour consistent with foreign policy, behaviour consistent with push from allies, and behaviour consistent with the known facts. No one appears to really contest that, not the EU, not Ukraine, not the IMF, not even the republicans who investigated Biden.

C2: There doesn’t appear to have been any active investigation into Burisma at the time; though I’m sure the push against corruption that Biden  himself was spearheading made them think one could be coming in the future.

Everyone = US deepstate, a few EU people, and Shokin's local pro-EU opposition. = Not enough without threat courtesy of the big guy.

This is a deflection. I am using this to support the premise that Biden’s actions were consistent with foreign policy.

His name means nothing if it doesn't influence US foreign policy.  Your theory requires "us" to believe that Hunter is selling something he doesn't have

But he didn’t influence foreign policy - see above; so this point seems self defeating.

Hunter traded off his name; and Burisma could easily have hired him thinking it would lend them credibility with external actors, or make US authorities think twice about raising questions; with the possibility of connections and influencing policy a way distant second.

What you’re doing, is ignoring all other possibilities, dressing up your rank speculation as the only answer, then ridiculing any reasonable explanations.

Spin, the act was the same; the only difference is your opinion on Trump's motives, motives which a fair person would consider justified since the corruption was real.
The acts were very different given that a) one was completely in line with US foreign policy the other wasn’t and b.) one was in line with how the government Justice system functions, and the other wasn’t c.) one must assume the motives of Biden that the pressure was specifically his sons company; where as Trump was explicit at the target.

These would be equal only if there was no push against the prosecutors from anyone else, yet he was fired by pressure from Biden - who was caught on tape saying that the prosecutor needs to go because he is unfairly investigating Burisma. 

I doubt there was any kind of concerted campaign from the first three, it is more likely..

This is how conspiratorial thinking works. Present a narrative as if true, if the narrative fails, speculate a reason why it still works...

Perhaps [the protestors] should have done something like vote... oh wait
Deflection - I am supporting C1 - by suggesting support within Ukraine for claims of corruption who were also applying pressure. Speculating about how sizeable that support was, and that they didn’t do enough, or weren’t a large enough block - is irrelevant.

If Trump stated an interest in uncovering US corruption in Ukraine then his (purported but unproven) quid pro quo would be aligned with stated US interests.

Trumps Quid pro quo was clear and explicit in the call and policy: announce an investigation into Biden, you get military funding. Secondly, Trumps interest was not “US corruption in Ukraine”generally, but Biden specifically - thirdly, even if Trump declared that Biden was a priority of the US that doesn’t make it in the US interests at the time: you’d have, say, the NSA calling it a drug deal, you’d have push back from foreign policy teams, ambassadors, and political opponents (which all happened - btw)

Cover for the payments. ..
And more speculation - the Burisma board Job was already cover for payments to do shady stuff. Right

You again beg the question. 
No - I am pointing out clear cases where the facts don’t support your position. You then construct a bunch of speculative reasons - why this could still be corruption: IE: assuming your own conclusion of corruption when viewing the facts, this is beginning the question.

Why would burisma hire a separate lobbying firm when they had Hunter? They didn't, Bluestar is a shell company
Wrf lol. Blue star is not a shell company - it’s a large international lobbying firm.

It's not different from Hunter it's part of the same solution.…

Rank speculation. Hunter was being paid directly by Burisma - allegedly paid for stuff he can get his dad to do; to get him to make Biden Sr do stuff is a phone call, right. All of this horseshit with blue star, lobbying firms, statement of work - is irrelevant and unnecessary.

You have to invoke this weird convoluted speculation to make your narrative make any sense at all.

There wasn't a worldwide clamor.

Yes there was. IMF, EU, world bank, etc. this supports C1.

The replacement was not going to be worse for burisma because the US executive branch (i.e. Biden) was greenlighting possibilities. 
So it’s gone from Biden - to everyone. Biden specially picked a new guy, either over the objections of everyone and no one said anything - or everyone else is in on it. Of course no evidence, or paper trail for any of this - it’s just you speculating your way out of a critical problem

If Shokin wasn't a threat there was no reason to specifically mention him as a target as they did.
Except that tiny matter of the  US, worldbank, imf and EU pressuring Shokin to do more against corruption…

Recall what we know.

  • Zlochevsky was tagged as a fugitive wanted for fraud
  • Zlochevsky gets a bunch of his money back.
  • Nothing was apparently happening against Burisma, no actions, or court movements.
  • A prosecutor is found with a bag of diamonds
  • US, IMF, world bank, EU puts pressure on Shokin to do more to investigate and prosecute corruption.
  • Burisma engage a lobbying firm to talk up their guy so as to prevent cases against him.
  • Kyiv court releases a court order against two properties and a car - stating “prosecutors failed to appear in court to defend the state’s interests” (https://www.kyivpost.com/article/content/reform-watch/yanukovychs-ex-ecology-minister-regains-luxurious-properties-rolls-royce-after-court-ruling-407050.html)
  • Court re-seizes property.
  • A prosecutor resigns alleging massive corruption
  • Other prosecutor within the office investing corruption is fired.

Nothing in this chain of events suggest any walls were closing in, that Shokin was a big threat - or that his removal is in the best interests of Zlochevsky - nor that engaging a lobbying firm at the time was related to any specific action being taken - nor any reason to suspect that Shokin was unsympathetic, and every reason to suggest he could be “bought”, or he would ignore prosecutors working for him could be bought and he would look the other way (because thats what happened). 

There are multiple potential explanations as to why a Lobbying firm was engaged at the specific time: to avoid being swept up in a new corruption push, to try and leverage the known corruption to have existing cases dropped. They all are simpler and more reasonable than the convoluted mess of a narrative that ignores the big picture and actions of everyone involved.

As for the claim that Shokin never got back to the UK investigation it could have been….

More rank speculation…

It's amazing that Hunter knew in 2014 that his dad would coincidentally deliver what would otherwise have been a scam job
What makes you think it wasn’t? Assuming it was a massive attempt at some convoluted corrupt scam against Ukrainian and the US, rather than Burisma hiring Biden due to more US involvement, and thinking it could help sway things (when it didn’t) is assuming your own conclusion.

it's even more amazing that burisma paid millions of dollars for over a year with no indication of actual deliverables.

And yet - there were so few actual deliverables that they needed a bribe, and needed to pay him more to engage blue star shell company to get his dad to do anything. I mean you’re claiming they’re paying him for affecting policy - but then also have to pay him again for actually affecting policy in a completely method via blue star for…. Reasons. But like I said, there are multiple reasons Biden could have been put on the board, maybe he said he could affect things but couldn’t, maybe he leant a sense of credibility. Simply assuming one of those that is preferably to the huge conspiracy you want to peddle at the beginning is very much begging the question.


I mean in your theory Hunter has no way to actually make is father do anything, and Joe is such an upstanding guy he would never do anything anyway; so how does Hunter know who to scam? Does he look at his father's actions and go to wherever he might be exerting influence next?

I covered this at the start; many potential reasons.

But look at it this way. Everything here is predicated on the suggestion that you feel Joe Biden thought this was a hill worth dying on.

You are the Vice President, who stands to earn multiple millions of dollars just by turning up and giving a few speeches per year. You can get any board post you want; you can write a book - you can be a multi-millionaire easily.

However…. Your son suggests that you go against current world and national policy, expose yourself to charges of corruption, potential criminal prosecution, and political scandal - by pushing out a prosecutor of a country that is investigating your sons company - and praying no one in the prosecutors office, foreign affairs or the rest of the government and/or world points it out and kicks off a major investigation and scandal - all for perhaps a million or so dollars.

This is what you’re suggesting happened. It makes utterly no sense.
#60
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
It makes perfect sense. It's masterful really….

Nah, it’s dumb AF. See above

In reality Biden was the corruption in Ukraine, thus it was against true US interests….

  • Nothing Biden did was inconsistent with what everyone was stating was the western policy or goals (C1)
  • Biden deciding to do it would have been utterly absurd, and makes no sense.
  • The whole approach taken - with blue star is wholly inconsistent, and makes absolutely no sense: the payment structure, need for a third party, the emails themselves make no sense.
  • There are clearly simpler and better ways of meeting expected goals than this weird convoluted conspiracy.
  • The conspiracy is inconstant with the wider collection of known facts.

What you’re doing is assuming widespread corruption; providing a speculative explanations of how those facts could be due corruption; as opposed to looking at the big fixture and trying to find the simplest and best explanation of all the facts.

This is the thinking strategy that allows people to argue the earth is flat.

The corruption narrative doesn’t make sense on its face. You have to either ignore things that don’t fit that narrative, ignore the silliness of motivations, or inject rank speculation that you have no basis to believe and cannot justify as accurate - when people or events are opposite to as suggested in your original explanation.

But by all means, what facts are inconsistent with the following explanation:

Hunter Biden is a f*ck up who trades on his fathers name, his actual policy influence is minimal, but is hired because of his name, and what that could entail; the credibility it lends, and the potential contacts the son of a VP maybe able to bring. (IE: the reason any ex politician is appointed to various boards)

Burisma wants Zlochevsky charges dropped, they offer bribes, and pressure officials; but don’t appear to impact any US policy in a way preferential to Burisma specifically. When a US/EU/IMF push to prosecute more corruption, they decide to engage a lobbyist to sell their interests in the US and Ukraine, and negotiate this via Hunter Biden - who probably knows the people involved - to preempt, or sell the position that Zlochevsky isn’t a problem and no one should investigate him as a result of this big new push. The Ukrainian prosecutor isn’t really investigate anything, is standing in the way of fighting corruption - so IMF, EU and US put pressure on them, because they don’t want to prop up an administration where top prosecutors are found with bags of diamonds, and it’s being covered up by the head prosecutor - and they want to remove the influence of Russian and Ukrainian oligarchs in the internal politics of Ukraine. Everyone agrees this clearly corrupt prosecutor must go to achieve that and all pile on financial pressure, and he gets replaced - after people reassign citing corruption and he fires corruption investigators; no one objects or things this is against policy, or is against stated goals. 

Joe Biden is aware Hunter is working for a Ukrainian company, but isn’t stupid enough to change or manipulate US policy to assist him for a measly few million at the end of his term; so merely executes US foreign policy.