Nope, your turn. What are you saying should be investigated?
By whom?
Why?
Step up.
I haven't said anything about it. I'm still trying to figure out what it appears like to you, since you said it has bad optics.
Nope, your turn. What are you saying should be investigated?
By whom?
Why?
Step up.
And you never will. Good talk.
Troglodyte Chump just doesn't know!
Today's neutered sperm shielder.
To argue a criminal investigation should take place, it would be nice if you guys could step up and say what laws you say were broken during Biden's hiring and/or tenure at Burisma that would actually involve Biden.
If you're talking about a press investigation, that's already happened several times over. Wanna guess what they found?
No, you don't. You're gonna stay down.
Do you admit the Bidens are likely corrupt for starters?
Don't answer if you're too neutered and have already STEPPED DOWN.
I cannot know until you tell me why it looks bad. If you know why it looks bad, then you know the answer already.
Conclusion:
This seems pretty cut and dry. If the optics are bad there's a reason. If someone is willing to acknowledge the 1st and then balk at specifying the 2nd, the optics are bad on that as well.
Pavlov the forum fiddle
So investigate what?
DMC can't think of one thing to investigate.
Therefore he can't demand an investigation.
DMC stays down.
investigate the optics!
Pretty cut and dry.
So no crimes...
just accusations that the bidens MIGHT be as corrupt as the trump criminal spawn
i got no problem with the bidens being investigated along with the trump crime family
Ukraine says he committed no crime.
The US says he committed no crime.
Not even any su ion from either.
What is there to investigate?
This is the kind of that makes DMC furious.
But Schweizer's book makes it look bad!
IMF, NATO, and the EU wanted the prosecutor Biden asked to be removed gone because of corruption standards for entry into either body and stipulations for aid:
https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/10/30...clinton-trump/Biden’s brand of tough love became more pronounced as the old ways of Ukrainian politics resumed. Despite a series of measures to increase government transparency and salvage the country’s teetering economy, Kiev began to slow — and in some cases completely halt — carrying out anti-corruption reforms.
Public dissatisfaction was growing in late 2015 with Poroshenko’s choice for general prosecutor: Viktor Shokin, a veteran of Ukrainian politics and a close associate of the president. Shokin fumbled the corruption case of a former Yanukovych crony and let him flee the country.
The position of general prosecutor, who is appointed by the president, enjoys outsized importance in Ukraine and is often used to exert pressure on rivals and cut deals for political and commercial gains. The Maidan revolution was supposed to bring an end to this type of horse-trading, but Shokin served as a reminder that little had changed. He reinforced that perception by hindering an investigation into two high-ranking state prosecutors arrested on corruption charges and after Economy Minister Aivaras Abromavicius cited him by name before quitting in protest over the delayed reforms.
Dismayed by Poroshenko’s backtracking, the White House withheld $1 billion in loan guarantees until Shokin was fired. Biden delivered that message directly to Poroshenko over the phone.
“‘Petro, you’re not getting your billion dollars,’” Biden recalled telling the president in an interview with the Atlantic. “‘It’s OK, you can keep the [prosecutor] general. Just understand—we’re not paying if you do.’”
Poroshenko eventually sacked Shokin. But the Ukrainian leader’s reputation in Washington — and in Ukraine — soured as a result, and his approval ratings have hovered close to a dismal 10 percent ever since.
“It’s hard to root out corruption in your system if the equivalent of the attorney general is not only corrupt but has a bunch of corrupt cronies in other positions and is actively thwarting investigations of oligarchs and government officials,” the senior U.S. administration official said. “Removing Shokin was a necessary — if not wholly sufficient — factor in continuing Ukraine on the reform path.”
And FP is hardly a liberal rag.
Last edited by FuzzyLumpkins; 10-21-2019 at 12:47 AM.
In December 2015, Biden gave an impassioned address to the Rada, the parliament, to condemn the scourge of corruption and demand reform of the prosecutor general’s office.
“The parliament exploded in applause,” Boryslav Bereza, who was present, recalled this week. “Even those who were corrupt as , they were electrified and sincere in their applause.”
Biden “was like the big brother coming to tell the little brother what to do — a recommendation that you can’t ignore,” Bereza said.
The vice president had planned to announce $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees for Ukraine. But en route to Kyiv on Air Force Two, Biden changed his mind.
Poroshenko was dragging his feet building the ins utions needed to take on corruption, aides said. Biden and his staff rewrote the speech, removing the loan guarantees.
In Kyiv, Biden privately informed Poroshenko of the decision and the demand: Fire Shokin, or you lose the loan guarantees.
“Poroshenko was clearly disappointed,” said Colin Kahl, Biden’s national security advisor at the time.
In an interview, Poroshenko recalled “heated” but cordial discussions with Biden.
He said the loan guarantees were contingent on meeting International Monetary Fund benchmarks, including replacing the prosecutor general. Biden was not alone in his demands, Poroshenko said.
“Pressure on us came from everywhere: the activists, political forces, embassies, international organizations,” he said, adding that the names of Hunter Biden and Burisma never came up.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/sto...under-scrutiny
EU diplomats working on Ukraine at the time have, however, told the FT that they were looking for ways to persuade Kiev to remove Mr Shokin well before Mr Biden entered the picture. The push for Mr Shokin’s removal was part of an international effort to bolster Ukraine’s ins utions following Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the armed conflict in the eastern part of the country.
“All of us were really pushing [former Ukrainian president Petro] Poroshenko that he needs to do something, because the prosecutor was not following any of the corruption issues. He was really bad news,” said an EU diplomat involved in the discussions. “It was Biden who finally came in [and triggered it]. Biden was the most vocal, as the US usually is. But we were all literally complaining about the prosecutor.”
https://www.ft.com/content/e1454ace-...3-db5a370481bc
All that and you say the optics are bad.
Yep.
What do you want to be investigated?
Step up.
Whatever you think looks bad.
It's got nothing to do with me. What do YOU think should be investigated, by whom and why? Step up.
agreed 100%
only reason im ok with investigating- is to show the difference between standing up for the rule of law
when you know you have followed the law - there is no fear of any investigation
but you never see trumpers openly calling for transparency, taxes released, trump testifying under oath,etc
As far as I can tell, it's all been investigated already. Had someone like Schweizer or
Slmn found something that was actually bad, we'd already know about it.
yup
the question that matters is;
”what exactly $$$ - did trump get from putin and/or erdogan for pulling our troops out overnight without any consultation with any usa officials, experts, military commanders, congress - anyone- and betraying our ally?”
yeah- they won’t care about real corruption
I still believe one or more foreign governments has kompromat on Dennison, but at this point I would believe he's so stupid that he would betray the Kurds and ruin what was left of the US reputation in the region just to get Erdogan off the phone.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)