Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yep. If you want to discuss whether the Biden’s decisions were wise or the optics good, we can have a whole different discussion. However, based on what we already know, Joe Biden could not possibly have been acting corruptly when he sought to remove Shokin because he was acting at the State Department’s behest.
That's the Biden spin on it. Just like how Trump said he wanted to investigate Biden because of the premise that the commander in chief needs to investigate this. However, Democrats claimed it was for his personal benefit. How's that different than what Joe Biden did? Under an 'official' umbrella do something that personally helps him [his family?]
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge
Not okay does not equal criminal corruption. Hunter Biden didn't commit any crimes. Neither did his father. Why is this so difficult to understand?
See above - Trump got IMPEACHED for a similar situation.
As far as the crime aspect is concerned, there hasn't been a serious investigation in the Biden's regarding Hunter so we can't comment if that's true.
That's the Biden spin on it. Just like how Trump said he wanted to investigate Biden because of the premise that the commander in chief needs to investigate this. However, Democrats claimed it was for his personal benefit. How's that different than what Joe Biden did? Under an 'official' umbrella do something that personally helps him [his family?].
It’s everyone involved who says it was not for personal benefit. The State Department, the DoJ, the IMG, the EU, the Wolrs Bank, Republican Senators. It was reported in the media at the time that removing Shokin was everyone’s official anti-corruption policy.
It’s everyone involved who says it was not for personal benefit. The State Department, the DoJ, the IMG, the EU, the Wolrs Bank, Republican Senators. It was reported in the media at the time that removing Shokin was everyone’s official anti-corruption policy.
The whole argument is that Biden blackmailed EU to remove Shokin because he was either corrupt himself or was not doing enough to investigate the corruption of Burisma and it's leadership. OK, that might be the case. If that were the case-Ukraine, under the same urging of these same foreign pressures...would have put someone in place that had a history of fighting corruption. That was above suspicion of corruption himself, and that would in fact actually investigate and route out corruption in Burisma and other areas in Ukraine.
Instead they put in place a political flunkie. One that had been convicted and served prison time for corruption. One that failed to investigate Burisma and never put a single person in prison. One in fact that was fired for utter incompetence (see the wiki link I posted earlier). So a person at least as corrupt, or willing to overlook corruption as Shokin was his replacement.
So what does that mean? Ukraine got a billion dollars of US taxpayer money as a result of caving to blackmail from Joe Biden to remove Shokin. No question about that-we have Joe on tape bragging about it. Ukraine replaces Shokin with someone even worse. Now-before the leftists come out with "Biden doesn't control who Ukraine appoints...."-BS. He did exactly that concerning Shokin's removal and had by extension had the same power to influence his replacement.
Lots of things are not proven-but one thing that IS sure is that Shokin was NOT removed in order to put someone honest and capable in place to route out corruption in Ukraine.
The whole argument is that Biden blackmailed EU to remove Shokin because he was either corrupt himself or was not doing enough to investigate the corruption of Burisma and it's leadership. OK, that might be the case. If that were the case-Ukraine, under the same urging of these same foreign pressures...would have put someone in place that had a history of fighting corruption. That was above suspicion of corruption himself, and that would in fact actually investigate and route out corruption in Burisma and other areas in Ukraine.
Instead they put in place a political flunkie. One that had been convicted and served prison time for corruption. One that failed to investigate Burisma and never put a single person in prison. One in fact that was fired for utter incompetence (see the wiki link I posted earlier). So a person at least as corrupt, or willing to overlook corruption as Shokin was his replacement.
So what does that mean? Ukraine got a billion dollars of US taxpayer money as a result of caving to blackmail from Joe Biden to remove Shokin. No question about that-we have Joe on tape bragging about it. Ukraine replaces Shokin with someone even worse. Now-before the leftists come out with "Biden doesn't control who Ukraine appoints...."-BS. He did exactly that concerning Shokin's removal and had by extension had the same power to influence his replacement.
Lots of things are not proven-but one thing that IS sure is that Shokin was NOT removed in order to put someone honest and capable in place to route out corruption in Ukraine.
The whole argument is that Biden blackmailed EU to remove Shokin because he was either corrupt himself or was not doing enough to investigate the corruption of Burisma and it's leadership. OK, that might be the case. If that were the case-Ukraine, under the same urging of these same foreign pressures...would have put someone in place that had a history of fighting corruption. That was above suspicion of corruption himself, and that would in fact actually investigate and route out corruption in Burisma and other areas in Ukraine.
Instead they put in place a political flunkie. One that had been convicted and served prison time for corruption. One that failed to investigate Burisma and never put a single person in prison. One in fact that was fired for utter incompetence (see the wiki link I posted earlier). So a person at least as corrupt, or willing to overlook corruption as Shokin was his replacement.
So what does that mean? Ukraine got a billion dollars of US taxpayer money as a result of caving to blackmail from Joe Biden to remove Shokin. No question about that-we have Joe on tape bragging about it. Ukraine replaces Shokin with someone even worse. Now-before the leftists come out with "Biden doesn't control who Ukraine appoints...."-BS. He did exactly that concerning Shokin's removal and had by extension had the same power to influence his replacement.
Lots of things are not proven-but one thing that IS sure is that Shokin was NOT removed in order to put someone honest and capable in place to route out corruption in Ukraine.
What you are arguing is that the US policy should have been better, not that Biden was corrupt.
its a quote from a book. not any less reliable than MSNBC...…..
Like I said, I'm not giving them the traffic. If you want to quote or cite the book, go for it. If not...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
