Can someone explain the Biden Ukraine scandal?

originally posted by: ambassado12
a reply to: Theyy

This is from the Justice Department not Q. U can deny all u want but Barr has reopened the case and it's public knowledge.

When this one doesn't work out for yah, maybe they can re open BENGHAZI

LOL!

a reply to: Sookiechacha

He actually wants the Dems to impeach him, he sent a letter to peloisi to tell her to hold a vote or else he will not respond to subpoenas. This is done purposely so that when it goes to the Sentate the Republicans will expose the Democrats and subpoena Biden etc. It's pretty obvious what he is doing. Trump is playing multi level ahead of you and the media.

But you know what, Peloisi knows this and she will not hold a vote. She wants it in the limbo. That's what a smart person would do. It's only logical.

a reply to: Theyy

Beghazi investigation was done in the senate. They can't indict or prosecute only refer to the Justice Department which democrats control. So you are comparing apples to oranges.

However, this investigation is not in the House or Senate, this is in the Justice Department, so enjoy the show because it's going to be entirely different than you think.

If anyone wants to know whats happening, regarding Ukraine, watch the Glen Beck video. I don't care to much for him, but he does make some tasty chicken!

originally posted by: Edumakated

An Ukrainian attorney general was investigating corruption involving Burisma and Hunter Biden.

Joe Biden threatened to withhold aide unless President of Ukraine at the time fired the AG who was investigating the corruption.

But according to multiple people, including the Deputy Prosecutor, the investigation into Burisma had been "Shelved" for quite sometime before Biden (along with the IMF, EU, US administration and many US Republicans) were demanding the ouster of the Prosecutor.

The Prosecutor was actually ousted for NOT investigating Burisma and many other corruption scandals.

And Burisma wasn't even the direct target of that investigation that was shelved, it's Oligarch owner was.

And there is no explanation of any way in which Hunter Biden might have been implicated in wrong-doing apart from being one of MANY people appointed to the board.

I think at this stage, if conservatives want facts to be known they should begin with facts rather than falsehoods.

See these articles from the time:
www.atlanticcouncil.org...
blogs.reuters.com...
www.aljazeera.com...
www.ukrweekly.com...

a reply to: ambassado12

Ok. I will listen to what armchair's experts like yourself have to say

I just hope you realize jingles like 'Drain the Swamp' is not something Donnie came up with himself and means absolutely nothing.

Back to the OP's topic, while unethical Biden did nothing illegal here. No one has shown any evidence to the contrary.

Unfortunately most replies on here ignored the OP's request and have made this thread tough to find anything of pertinent to the topic at hand.

originally posted by: Theyy

originally posted by: ambassado12
a reply to: Theyy

This is from the Justice Department not Q. U can deny all u want but Barr has reopened the case and it's public knowledge.

When this one doesn't work out for yah, maybe they can re open BENGHAZI

LOL!

like the Mueller Dossier, and all those investigations??

we got Trump THIS time I PROMISE

swing and a miss

thats what 4 or 5 strozks at bat?

the Right gets a turn now T-baller.

originally posted by: toolgal462
a reply to: links234

Oh really Einstein? Please tell us why Biden threatened to withhold 1 billion from Ukraine if the prosecutor wasn't fired????

If, as you say, Burisma wasn't being investigated?

Stop the lying already, you just flat out lied and the story wouldn't even make sense with all the details you leave out.

Extorris explained it pretty well in their post: www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: Edumakated

An Ukrainian attorney general was investigating corruption involving Burisma and Hunter Biden.

Joe Biden threatened to withhold aide unless President of Ukraine at the time fired the AG who was investigating the corruption.

But according to multiple people, including the Deputy Prosecutor, the investigation into Burisma had been "Shelved" for quite sometime before Biden (along with the IMF, EU, US administration and many US Republicans) were demanding the ouster of the Prosecutor.

The Prosecutor was actually ousted for NOT investigating Burisma and many other corruption scandals.

And Burisma wasn't even the direct target of that investigation that was shelved, it's Oligarch owner was.

And there is no explanation of any way in which Hunter Biden might have been implicated in wrong-doing apart from being one of MANY people appointed to the board.

I think at this stage, if conservatives want facts to be known they should begin with facts rather than falsehoods.

See these articles from the time:
www.atlanticcouncil.org...
blogs.reuters.com...
www.aljazeera.com...
www.ukrweekly.com...

Clearly Shokin’s lying. It isn't like Giuliani was on tv waiving around a signed affidavit that Shokin admits to all that is in this NY Post article.

Shokin must be lying, right?

nypost.com...

originally posted by: BrennanHuff22

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: Edumakated

An Ukrainian attorney general was investigating corruption involving Burisma and Hunter Biden.

Joe Biden threatened to withhold aide unless President of Ukraine at the time fired the AG who was investigating the corruption.

But according to multiple people, including the Deputy Prosecutor, the investigation into Burisma had been "Shelved" for quite sometime before Biden (along with the IMF, EU, US administration and many US Republicans) were demanding the ouster of the Prosecutor.

The Prosecutor was actually ousted for NOT investigating Burisma and many other corruption scandals.

And Burisma wasn't even the direct target of that investigation that was shelved, it's Oligarch owner was.

And there is no explanation of any way in which Hunter Biden might have been implicated in wrong-doing apart from being one of MANY people appointed to the board.

I think at this stage, if conservatives want facts to be known they should begin with facts rather than falsehoods.

See these articles from the time:
www.atlanticcouncil.org...
blogs.reuters.com...
www.aljazeera.com...
www.ukrweekly.com...

Clearly Shokin’s lying. It isn't like Giuliani was on tv waiving around a signed affidavit that Shokin admits to all that is in this NY Post article.

Shokin must be lying, right?

nypost.com...

I don't know if he is lying, but he has lied before and recently which just affirms the man is corrupt.
Shokin claimed that the former US ambassador gave him a do-no-prosecute list, only to a couple months later admit that it was he himself who wrote the list and gave it to her for approval and she rebuffed him telling him that was not OK.

That said, in this case, you must first ask if Rudy Giuliani is lying, since you are basing the claim of what the untrustworthy Shokin said on Rudy's notes and Rudy himself seems Manic, Confused, Belligerent and wildly inconsistent if not outright dishonest and self-contradictory in what he has claimed.

So you have the statement of a known liar and disgraced official (Shoken) as recounted in the notes of an arguably crazy person (Rudy).

They are both welcome to testify under oath if they want to clear things up, but I don't think either is eager to that for obvious reasons.

a reply to: links234

Correct.

It is not a mystery. just researching news from a few years back shows the world calling for Shoken's ouster, including demonstrations on the street.

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: BrennanHuff22

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: Edumakated

An Ukrainian attorney general was investigating corruption involving Burisma and Hunter Biden.

Joe Biden threatened to withhold aide unless President of Ukraine at the time fired the AG who was investigating the corruption.

But according to multiple people, including the Deputy Prosecutor, the investigation into Burisma had been "Shelved" for quite sometime before Biden (along with the IMF, EU, US administration and many US Republicans) were demanding the ouster of the Prosecutor.

The Prosecutor was actually ousted for NOT investigating Burisma and many other corruption scandals.

And Burisma wasn't even the direct target of that investigation that was shelved, it's Oligarch owner was.

And there is no explanation of any way in which Hunter Biden might have been implicated in wrong-doing apart from being one of MANY people appointed to the board.

I think at this stage, if conservatives want facts to be known they should begin with facts rather than falsehoods.

See these articles from the time:
www.atlanticcouncil.org...
blogs.reuters.com...
www.aljazeera.com...
www.ukrweekly.com...

Clearly Shokin’s lying. It isn't like Giuliani was on tv waiving around a signed affidavit that Shokin admits to all that is in this NY Post article.

Shokin must be lying, right?

nypost.com...

I don't know if he is lying, but he has lied before and recently which just affirms the man is corrupt.
Shokin claimed that the former US ambassador gave him a do-no-prosecute list, only to a couple months later admit that it was he himself who wrote the list and gave it to her for approval and she rebuffed him telling him that was not OK.

That said, in this case, you must first ask if Rudy Giuliani is lying, since you are basing the claim of what the untrustworthy Shokin said on Rudy's notes and Rudy himself seems Manic, Confused, Belligerent and wildly inconsistent if not outright dishonest and self-contradictory in what he has claimed.

So you have the statement of a know liar and disgraced official (Shoken) as recounted in the notes of an arguably crazy person (Rudy).

They are both welcome to testify under oath if they want to clear things up, but I don't think either is eager to that for obvious reasons.

Can you post the article where claims shokin claimed that?

This hill article/video says that Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko(he is the one being interviewed) received the "list" from Ambassador Yovanovitch.

Are you saying Shokin created the "list" and then game it to the US Ambassador?

I suppose everyone could be lying, but the question would be why?

thehill.com...

originally posted by: BrennanHuff22

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: BrennanHuff22

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: Edumakated

An Ukrainian attorney general was investigating corruption involving Burisma and Hunter Biden.

Joe Biden threatened to withhold aide unless President of Ukraine at the time fired the AG who was investigating the corruption.

But according to multiple people, including the Deputy Prosecutor, the investigation into Burisma had been "Shelved" for quite sometime before Biden (along with the IMF, EU, US administration and many US Republicans) were demanding the ouster of the Prosecutor.

The Prosecutor was actually ousted for NOT investigating Burisma and many other corruption scandals.

And Burisma wasn't even the direct target of that investigation that was shelved, it's Oligarch owner was.

And there is no explanation of any way in which Hunter Biden might have been implicated in wrong-doing apart from being one of MANY people appointed to the board.

I think at this stage, if conservatives want facts to be known they should begin with facts rather than falsehoods.

See these articles from the time:
www.atlanticcouncil.org...
blogs.reuters.com...
www.aljazeera.com...
www.ukrweekly.com...

Clearly Shokin’s lying. It isn't like Giuliani was on tv waiving around a signed affidavit that Shokin admits to all that is in this NY Post article.

Shokin must be lying, right?

nypost.com...

I don't know if he is lying, but he has lied before and recently which just affirms the man is corrupt.
Shokin claimed that the former US ambassador gave him a do-no-prosecute list, only to a couple months later admit that it was he himself who wrote the list and gave it to her for approval and she rebuffed him telling him that was not OK.

That said, in this case, you must first ask if Rudy Giuliani is lying, since you are basing the claim of what the untrustworthy Shokin said on Rudy's notes and Rudy himself seems Manic, Confused, Belligerent and wildly inconsistent if not outright dishonest and self-contradictory in what he has claimed.

So you have the statement of a know liar and disgraced official (Shoken) as recounted in the notes of an arguably crazy person (Rudy).

They are both welcome to testify under oath if they want to clear things up, but I don't think either is eager to that for obvious reasons.

Can you post the article where claims shokin claimed that?

This hill article/video says that Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko(he is the one being interviewed) received the "list" from Ambassador Yovanovitch.

Are you saying Shokin created the "list" and then game it to the US Ambassador?

I suppose everyone could be lying, but the question would be why?

thehill.com...

When still prosecutor general earlier this year, he claimed that US ambassador Marie Yovanovitch had given him a list of people not to prosecute. Although he later admitted there had been no such list,

www.telegraph.co.uk...

In an interview published by the Hill in late March, Lutsenko said that the then-U.S. ambassador to Ukraine handed him a list of names of officials and instructed him not to prosecute them. The claims created so much pressure around the ambassador that she was removed from her post early, according to the whistleblower complaint published on Thursday.

In March, the State Department denied the claims against Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch and, in a statement given at the time to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, said it was intended to “tarnish” her reputation.

The next month, Lutsenko walked back his claim about the ambassador in an interview with the Ukrainian media.

foreignpolicy.com...

The State Department called Mr. Lutsenko’s claim about a do-not-prosecute list “an outright fabrication,” and in May Mr. Lutsenko walked back his allegations about the Bidens, stating that there was no evidence they had done anything wrong.

www.nytimes.com...

I cant find the Ukranian interview - it was Ukranian News outlet, where he admitted he wrote the list and tried to get her approval and she rebuffed him, but it is out there.

Either way he is not a source the right wing should lean on for there conspiracy

Former Ukrainian prosecutor says Giuliani repeatedly pushed him to investigate the Bidens
www.businessinsider.com...

But government officials and Ukrainian anticorruption advocates counter that Shokin had hampered the investigation into Burisma long before Biden even stepped into the picture, according to The Wall Street Journal.

In other words, the available evidence suggests Biden was doing the opposite of what Trump and Giuliani are implying: He was trying to oust a prosecutor who was slow-walking corruption investigations. Moreover, the investigation into Burisma was largely dormant by the time Shokin was dismissed.

www.businessinsider.com...

IN OTHER NEWS:

We are finding out the the Chief Lawyer for the CIA made a CRIMINAL REFERRAL after Trump's call with Ukraine.

CIA's top lawyer made 'criminal referral' on complaint about Trump Ukraine call
www.nbcnews.com...

AND OTHER WHISTLE BLOWERS ARE COMING FORWARD

2nd Official Is Weighing Whether to Blow the Whistle on Trump’s Ukraine Dealings
www.nytimes.com...

All of this just confirms what everyone already knows.

Trump extorted a Foreign Country, at cost to their own and our national security, to demand they interfere in our elections on his behalf.

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: BrennanHuff22

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: BrennanHuff22

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: Edumakated

An Ukrainian attorney general was investigating corruption involving Burisma and Hunter Biden.

Joe Biden threatened to withhold aide unless President of Ukraine at the time fired the AG who was investigating the corruption.

But according to multiple people, including the Deputy Prosecutor, the investigation into Burisma had been "Shelved" for quite sometime before Biden (along with the IMF, EU, US administration and many US Republicans) were demanding the ouster of the Prosecutor.

The Prosecutor was actually ousted for NOT investigating Burisma and many other corruption scandals.

And Burisma wasn't even the direct target of that investigation that was shelved, it's Oligarch owner was.

And there is no explanation of any way in which Hunter Biden might have been implicated in wrong-doing apart from being one of MANY people appointed to the board.

I think at this stage, if conservatives want facts to be known they should begin with facts rather than falsehoods.

See these articles from the time:
www.atlanticcouncil.org...
blogs.reuters.com...
www.aljazeera.com...
www.ukrweekly.com...

Clearly Shokin’s lying. It isn't like Giuliani was on tv waiving around a signed affidavit that Shokin admits to all that is in this NY Post article.

Shokin must be lying, right?

nypost.com...

I don't know if he is lying, but he has lied before and recently which just affirms the man is corrupt.
Shokin claimed that the former US ambassador gave him a do-no-prosecute list, only to a couple months later admit that it was he himself who wrote the list and gave it to her for approval and she rebuffed him telling him that was not OK.

That said, in this case, you must first ask if Rudy Giuliani is lying, since you are basing the claim of what the untrustworthy Shokin said on Rudy's notes and Rudy himself seems Manic, Confused, Belligerent and wildly inconsistent if not outright dishonest and self-contradictory in what he has claimed.

So you have the statement of a know liar and disgraced official (Shoken) as recounted in the notes of an arguably crazy person (Rudy).

They are both welcome to testify under oath if they want to clear things up, but I don't think either is eager to that for obvious reasons.

Can you post the article where claims shokin claimed that?

This hill article/video says that Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko(he is the one being interviewed) received the "list" from Ambassador Yovanovitch.

Are you saying Shokin created the "list" and then game it to the US Ambassador?

I suppose everyone could be lying, but the question would be why?

thehill.com...

When still prosecutor general earlier this year, he claimed that US ambassador Marie Yovanovitch had given him a list of people not to prosecute. Although he later admitted there had been no such list,

www.telegraph.co.uk...

In an interview published by the Hill in late March, Lutsenko said that the then-U.S. ambassador to Ukraine handed him a list of names of officials and instructed him not to prosecute them. The claims created so much pressure around the ambassador that she was removed from her post early, according to the whistleblower complaint published on Thursday.

In March, the State Department denied the claims against Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch and, in a statement given at the time to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, said it was intended to “tarnish” her reputation.

The next month, Lutsenko walked back his claim about the ambassador in an interview with the Ukrainian media.

foreignpolicy.com...

The State Department called Mr. Lutsenko’s claim about a do-not-prosecute list “an outright fabrication,” and in May Mr. Lutsenko walked back his allegations about the Bidens, stating that there was no evidence they had done anything wrong.

www.nytimes.com...

I cant find the Ukranian interview - it was Ukranian News outlet, where he admitted he wrote the list and tried to get her approval and she rebuffed him, but it is out there.

Either way he is not a source the right wing should lean on for there conspiracy

Former Ukrainian prosecutor says Giuliani repeatedly pushed him to investigate the Bidens
www.businessinsider.com...

The NYT article you cited that states, "The State Department called Mr. Lutsenko’s claim about a do-not-prosecute list “an outright fabrication,” and in May Mr. Lutsenko walked back his allegations about the Bidens, stating that there was no evidence they had done anything wrong." Links to this NYT article below, where Lutsenko says this:

“I do not want Ukraine to again be the subject of U.S. presidential elections,” Lutsenko said in an interview Tuesday in his office in Kiev. “Hunter Biden did not violate any Ukrainian laws -- at least as of now, we do not see any wrongdoing. A company can pay however much it wants to its board.” He said if there is a tax problem, it’s not in Ukraine."

No where in the article used for reference does he give a quote exonerating JOE Biden.

www.bloomberg.com...

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: Edumakated

An Ukrainian attorney general was investigating corruption involving Burisma and Hunter Biden.

Joe Biden threatened to withhold aide unless President of Ukraine at the time fired the AG who was investigating the corruption.

But according to multiple people, including the Deputy Prosecutor, the investigation into Burisma had been "Shelved" for quite sometime before Biden (along with the IMF, EU, US administration and many US Republicans) were demanding the ouster of the Prosecutor.

Shokin was asked to wind it down and close it, but refused.

It might have been stalled, like waiting on evidence or something. Real court cases don't go like on "Law and Order" TV show - over in 30 minutes.

The Prosecutor was actually ousted for NOT investigating Burisma and many other corruption scandals.

One of the reasons was he wasn't investigating members of the previous administration under Yanukovych.
He disagreed as to the merit and/or likelihood of getting any convictions.

And Burisma wasn't even the direct target of that investigation that was shelved, it's Oligarch owner was.

And you see a difference?

Please elaborate.

And there is no explanation of any way in which Hunter Biden might have been implicated in wrong-doing apart from being one of MANY people appointed to the board.

Hunter himself was probably innocent. But Burisma would have been pressuring him to call in a favor from his dad on their behalf. (That's why a company like that hires politically connected losers to sit on its board.)

If his dad doesn't intervene, Hunter gets the axe. No more 50k per month.

I think at this stage, if conservatives want facts to be known they should begin with facts rather than falsehoods.

See these articles from the time:
www.atlanticcouncil.org...

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: BrennanHuff22

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: BrennanHuff22

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: Edumakated

An Ukrainian attorney general was investigating corruption involving Burisma and Hunter Biden.

Joe Biden threatened to withhold aide unless President of Ukraine at the time fired the AG who was investigating the corruption.

See these articles from the time:
www.atlanticcouncil.org...
blogs.reuters.com...
www.aljazeera.com...
www.ukrweekly.com...

Clearly Shokin’s lying. It isn't like Giuliani was on tv waiving around a signed affidavit that Shokin admits to all that is in this NY Post article.

Shokin must be lying, right?

nypost.com...

I don't know if he is lying, but he has lied before and recently which just affirms the man is corrupt.
Shokin claimed that the former US ambassador gave him a do-no-prosecute list, only to a couple months later admit that it was he himself who wrote the list and gave it to her for approval and she rebuffed him telling him that was not OK.

That said, in this case, you must first ask if Rudy Giuliani is lying, since you are basing the claim of what the untrustworthy Shokin said on Rudy's notes and Rudy himself seems Manic, Confused, Belligerent and wildly inconsistent if not outright dishonest and self-contradictory in what he has claimed.

So you have the statement of a know liar and disgraced official (Shoken) as recounted in the notes of an arguably crazy person (Rudy).

They are both welcome to testify under oath if they want to clear things up, but I don't think either is eager to that for obvious reasons.

Can you post the article where claims shokin claimed that?

This hill article/video says that Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko(he is the one being interviewed) received the "list" from Ambassador Yovanovitch.

Are you saying Shokin created the "list" and then game it to the US Ambassador?

I suppose everyone could be lying, but the question would be why?

thehill.com...

When still prosecutor general earlier this year, he claimed that US ambassador Marie Yovanovitch had given him a list of people not to prosecute. Although he later admitted there had been no such list,

www.telegraph.co.uk...

In an interview published by the Hill in late March, Lutsenko said that the then-U.S. ambassador to Ukraine handed him a list of names of officials and instructed him not to prosecute them. The claims created so much pressure around the ambassador that she was removed from her post early, according to the whistleblower complaint published on Thursday.

In March, the State Department denied the claims against Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch and, in a statement given at the time to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, said it was intended to “tarnish” her reputation.

The next month, Lutsenko walked back his claim about the ambassador in an interview with the Ukrainian media.

foreignpolicy.com...

The State Department called Mr. Lutsenko’s claim about a do-not-prosecute list “an outright fabrication,” and in May Mr. Lutsenko walked back his allegations about the Bidens, stating that there was no evidence they had done anything wrong.

www.nytimes.com...

I cant find the Ukranian interview - it was Ukranian News outlet, where he admitted he wrote the list and tried to get her approval and she rebuffed him, but it is out there.
Either way he is not a source the right wing should lean on for there conspiracy

Former Ukrainian prosecutor says Giuliani repeatedly pushed him to investigate the Bidens
www.businessinsider.com...

You realize those articles say Lutsenko made the false claim about a do-not-prosecute list. Not Shokin.

I know the names are both Russian-sounding names. But they are, in fact, two different people.

a reply to: Extorris

That is not true. The prosecutor appointed after Shokin was ok by Biden, so obviously he is bias and corrupt. Not to mention he drives a bently.

Shokin affidavit below says Biden fired him because he was going to interview Hunter in regards to Burisma and money laundering. You should be asking the real prosecutor for the case not a different prosecutor.

www.scribd.com...

originally posted by: BrennanHuff22

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: BrennanHuff22

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: BrennanHuff22

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: Edumakated

An Ukrainian attorney general was investigating corruption involving Burisma and Hunter Biden.

Joe Biden threatened to withhold aide unless President of Ukraine at the time fired the AG who was investigating the corruption.

But according to multiple people, including the Deputy Prosecutor, the investigation into Burisma had been "Shelved" for quite sometime before Biden (along with the IMF, EU, US administration and many US Republicans) were demanding the ouster of the Prosecutor.

The Prosecutor was actually ousted for NOT investigating Burisma and many other corruption scandals.

And Burisma wasn't even the direct target of that investigation that was shelved, it's Oligarch owner was.

And there is no explanation of any way in which Hunter Biden might have been implicated in wrong-doing apart from being one of MANY people appointed to the board.

I think at this stage, if conservatives want facts to be known they should begin with facts rather than falsehoods.

See these articles from the time:
www.atlanticcouncil.org...
blogs.reuters.com...
www.aljazeera.com...
www.ukrweekly.com...

Clearly Shokin’s lying. It isn't like Giuliani was on tv waiving around a signed affidavit that Shokin admits to all that is in this NY Post article.

Shokin must be lying, right?

nypost.com...

I don't know if he is lying, but he has lied before and recently which just affirms the man is corrupt.
Shokin claimed that the former US ambassador gave him a do-no-prosecute list, only to a couple months later admit that it was he himself who wrote the list and gave it to her for approval and she rebuffed him telling him that was not OK.

That said, in this case, you must first ask if Rudy Giuliani is lying, since you are basing the claim of what the untrustworthy Shokin said on Rudy's notes and Rudy himself seems Manic, Confused, Belligerent and wildly inconsistent if not outright dishonest and self-contradictory in what he has claimed.

So you have the statement of a know liar and disgraced official (Shoken) as recounted in the notes of an arguably crazy person (Rudy).

They are both welcome to testify under oath if they want to clear things up, but I don't think either is eager to that for obvious reasons.

Can you post the article where claims shokin claimed that?

This hill article/video says that Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko(he is the one being interviewed) received the "list" from Ambassador Yovanovitch.

Are you saying Shokin created the "list" and then game it to the US Ambassador?

I suppose everyone could be lying, but the question would be why?

thehill.com...

When still prosecutor general earlier this year, he claimed that US ambassador Marie Yovanovitch had given him a list of people not to prosecute. Although he later admitted there had been no such list,

www.telegraph.co.uk...

In an interview published by the Hill in late March, Lutsenko said that the then-U.S. ambassador to Ukraine handed him a list of names of officials and instructed him not to prosecute them. The claims created so much pressure around the ambassador that she was removed from her post early, according to the whistleblower complaint published on Thursday.

In March, the State Department denied the claims against Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch and, in a statement given at the time to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, said it was intended to “tarnish” her reputation.

The next month, Lutsenko walked back his claim about the ambassador in an interview with the Ukrainian media.

foreignpolicy.com...

The State Department called Mr. Lutsenko’s claim about a do-not-prosecute list “an outright fabrication,” and in May Mr. Lutsenko walked back his allegations about the Bidens, stating that there was no evidence they had done anything wrong.

www.nytimes.com...

I cant find the Ukranian interview - it was Ukranian News outlet, where he admitted he wrote the list and tried to get her approval and she rebuffed him, but it is out there.

Either way he is not a source the right wing should lean on for there conspiracy

Former Ukrainian prosecutor says Giuliani repeatedly pushed him to investigate the Bidens
www.businessinsider.com...

The NYT article you cited that states, "The State Department called Mr. Lutsenko’s claim about a do-not-prosecute list “an outright fabrication,” and in May Mr. Lutsenko walked back his allegations about the Bidens, stating that there was no evidence they had done anything wrong." Links to this NYT article below, where Lutsenko says this:

“I do not want Ukraine to again be the subject of U.S. presidential elections,” Lutsenko said in an interview Tuesday in his office in Kiev. “Hunter Biden did not violate any Ukrainian laws -- at least as of now, we do not see any wrongdoing. A company can pay however much it wants to its board.” He said if there is a tax problem, it’s not in Ukraine."

No where in the article used for reference does he give a quote exonerating JOE Biden.

www.bloomberg.com...

Just to be sure we are on the same page here:

Lutsenko is not the guy who got fired by Biden.

Shokin is.

a reply to: redmage

Let me explain. Biden's son was put on the board of a company in a country he had no experience in and in an industry which he had no experience in. He was paid over 3 million dollars by this company. An investigation into this company for corruption/fraud was started by their version of AG and quickly halted by the Ukrainian president. The investigation continued, hindered and from 3rd party angles. Then joe biden stepped in, demanded the prosecutor be fired or the US would withhold 1 billion dollars in loan guarantees. The prosecutor was then fired.

Now, before you run off crying that "trump withheld millions, etc..." realize that is A) whataboutism, not an actual rebuttal of the crime. B) incorrect as ukraine was unaware at the time of the conversation that the funds were being withheld and they had been on hold for a month prior to the call. Ukraine wasn't aware of the hold for a month after the call. So trump was not using it as leverage. C) withholding funds so they enforce the law or assist in law enforcement is a far cry from withholding funds to stop legitimate law enforcement.

The ukrainian government has been trying to get information to the US DoJ about the bidens and the 2016 election interference they participated in, but their emissaries were being thwarted by deep staters at the state department by having their visa requests denied. Then they hired a US lawyer to come pick up the documents and hand deliver them to the DoJ. This just happened and some of those documents were given to the state department IG who then relayed them to democrats last week in the "emergency meeting" that the democrats got so whip lashed on.