Ambassador Vovanovitch Admits Obama's Admin Knew About Hunter's Corruption

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: shawmanfromny

It is insignificant to everyone except ardent Trump supporters. You guys are really starting to appear desperate.

Where’s the DOJ investigation of the Bidens? Surely if Mr. Trump were concerned enough about possible crimes of two American citizens that he tried to get a foreign power to investigate them, surely the DOJ has been working on this for what, two years?

What’s the results of that investigation? Because making ridiculous money is not a crime.

... and neither is being Biden’s son.

Dumb Dumb, Trump is being IMPEACHED because of the fact he was digging. So yeah, keep asking about the invesigations into the Bidens, and where they are. They're in the Intelligence Committee buddy, they turned Bidens wrong doing into Trumps impeachment.

It's as simple as doing the math, 1+1=3 duh...

Go figure.

Furthermore, it is a crime contrary to your believe. Under the 5th Code of Federal Regulations, Section 2653.702 Use of public office for private gain

An employee shall not use his public office for his own private gain, for the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity, including nonprofit organizations of which the employee is an officer or member, and persons with whom the employee has or seeks employment or business relations. The specific prohibitions set forth in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section apply this general standard, but are not intended to be exclusive or to limit the application of this section.

Did she say they were more concerned about Biden and his son then the actual Ukrainian energy company?

And that concern went where?

One thing that has bothered me in all this... If Biden and son were not dirty over there then why would Trump even go after him there. It is not like Trump was buying a fake dossier or something, he wants to know who did what in 2016 and Biden were right there along with his son who made like 5 million for breathing.

a reply to: Xtrozero

You don't know why Trump would want a president of a foreign nation to announce on CNN that one of his of political rivals is being investigated?

You can't think of any reason he might want that? Really?

If Trump simply wanted an investigation done it would have been pretty simple to delegate that through the DOJ and his ambassadors using proper channels. Why did he insist the Zalenski go on CNN and announce it?

originally posted by: Grimpachi

If Trump simply wanted an investigation done it would have been pretty simple to delegate that through the DOJ and his ambassadors using proper channels. Why did he insist the Zalenski go on CNN and announce it?

It is funny how on one hand the left says Trump can not draw a line between two point, but for some reason now they say he is s a political genius with 4D chess when it comes trying to undermine Biden.

The real thing here is that Trump verbally vomits anything that comes into his head. He also holds a grudge against anyone he sees that has done him wrong, forever. He has a serious issue with the whole 2016 election and Ukraine is right there and so is Biden and his son. There is no political posturing from Trump on this, he wants to take anyone involved in the 2016 bull crap down. If Biden was not running nothing would have changed in Trump doing the same damn thing...

Where Trump is perfectly in his right to do so is investigate all of this or at least try to get Ukraine to do it. It is well within his right and one could argue we should see where Ukraine fits into all of this.

originally posted by: shawmanfromny

If Obama and his administration were concerned over Biden's role at Burisma, why wouldn't Trump be as well? Why would Burisma Holdings lobby for the Obama administration to drop the probe investigating these corruption allegations?

Ukraine's Burisma lobbied Obama administration to drop corruption probe on Hunter Biden:

Why would Sleepy Joe insist to this day that he and his son "didn't do a single thing wrong?"

It's interesting reading what Lutsenko (the current prosecutor general of Ukraine) has to say about it.

Using google translate to translate this from Russian:

Then he asked about the affairs of [owner of the Burisma Group holding] Nikolai Zlochevsky and Paul Manafort. I told what everyone knows in Ukraine. What is the " case of Zlochevsky reference
The GPU and NABU investigated 5 cases involving Zlochevsky. They concerned the purchase of the Kherson oil transshipment, obtaining special permits for gas production, sharing profits with Ukrgasvydobuvannya, and money laundering.
"Even under [Prosecutor General Viktor] Shokin was handed over to the NABU, where it was successfully closed, and the GPU left a splinter - money laundering and tax evasion. Money laundering failed then to prove. But tax evasion was proved, and Zlochevsky paid [a budget] a record amount of 180 million hryvnia. The Burisma Group was so scared that it removed the system of working with fictitious firms and paid significantly more taxes.

thebabel.net... burisma-plenkah-rozenblata-i-istochnikah-korrupcii-bolshoe-intervyu


The supposed "anticorruption" group set up by Biden called NABU, had prosecuting priority on "class A" government officials. Which means the locals were actually forbidden to prosecute them, and were required to turn them over to NABU.

Elsewhere in the article he explains that NABU has tried 200 cases, and never gotten a single conviction yet. While his office, which is only allowed to go after "class B" and below officials, had tried about 6000 cases, and won a little over 2000 of them.

So NABU basically said "OK. We'll take it from here!!!" and then promptly shut the case down.

They only allowed the locals to go after the money laundering and tax evasion. But of the two things they were allowed to go after, they got a conviction on one.

Trump opening the investigation into Biden isn't actually politically oriented, there are lots of Democrats that are trying out for that part. I do not personally think that Democratic voters would have voted Biden in anyway. Trump did not attack the Democratic party, the Democratic party attacked itself. Biden technically did not do anything illegal, maybe immoral or improper, but that happens all the time in politics. I think we need to make a law against that so we get some good honest people in as politicians.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: shawmanfromny

It is insignificant to everyone except ardent Trump supporters. You guys are really starting to appear desperate.

Where’s the DOJ investigation of the Bidens? Surely if Mr. Trump were concerned enough about possible crimes of two American citizens that he tried to get a foreign power to investigate them, surely the DOJ has been working on this for what, two years?

What’s the results of that investigation? Because making ridiculous money is not a crime.

... and neither is being Biden’s son.

May a AR 15 wielding neighbor save you if your fascist left leaders manage to get any real power ! RBG will pass away from old age and treachery ! Then Trump will appoint his 3rd judge and the progressives war will be doomed to the history books of failures

a reply to: rickymouse

Trump opening the investigation into Biden isn't actually politically oriented, there are lots of Democrats that are trying out for that part.

I would agree with you if an investigation was all he aimed for.

I disagree because of his insistence on making it public on CNN. You can't say it wasn't political with that.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: rickymouse

Trump opening the investigation into Biden isn't actually politically oriented, there are lots of Democrats that are trying out for that part.

I would agree with you if an investigation was all he aimed for.

I disagree because of his insistence on making it public on CNN. You can't say it wasn't political with that.

So Trump is the one who made this public? Can you source Trump going on CNN and making this public first?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Have you really not heard?

link

WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump “wanted nothing less than [Ukrainian President Volodimyr] Zelensky to go to microphone and say ‘investigations, Biden and Clinton,’” a State Department official told congressional investigators conducting an impeachment probe.

The account of George Kent, the deputy assistant secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs, was released as a transcript Thursday. It further underscored how specific the Trump administration’s alleged demands of the Ukrainian government were.

It also added to the growing body of evidence of a quid-pro-quo orchestrated by the White House, whereby military aid to Ukraine would be withheld until the Ukrainian president agreed to publicly say what Trump wanted him to.

It is hard for me to believe this is news to you since there are dozens of articles detailing it.

This wasn't a simple want to investigate corruption. This was a political hit job being orchestrated by the Whitehouse. Giuliani's business partner Palas has confirmed what Kent and others have said.

Unless Trump can give a very convincing reason that there had to be a public on mic statement made about the investigation into his political rival by a foreign president then I will call it as I see it.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Jason79
a reply to: Gryphon66

The DOJ has zero authority to launch in investigation in a foreign country.

Really?

Then the Mueller Report indictments of Papadopolis and those Russian Hackers didn't happen?

Just a note, those indictments both of American Citizens and Russian Nationals were all for crimes under US Law and activities/victim within the United States.

Russia obviously did not launch an investigation.

The DOJ could not charge Russia for interfering in British Elections.

The US DOJ can ask for cooperation in gathering evidence, witnesses or even have a witness or suspect extradited to face trial in the USA for crimes committed under US law, but the USA has no authority to launch investigations in other countries, which by definition would be into crimes committed under a foreign countries laws.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: rickymouse

Trump opening the investigation into Biden isn't actually politically oriented, there are lots of Democrats that are trying out for that part.

I would agree with you if an investigation was all he aimed for.

I disagree because of his insistence on making it public on CNN. You can't say it wasn't political with that.

Trump only made a statement to CNN after the Democrats started to come after him about doing it. He was on the offense. Trump isn't dumb enough to advertise that he requested the Ukranians to investigate when it may have been found eventually that Biden did not really make a difference.

Actually, now that this is coming into the publics eye because of the whistleblower, the government of Ukraine may investigate it more and find evidence of wrongdoing by the Bidens, I think they would have blown off Trump's concerns before the whistleblower blew this all up. Now, things might fall into place and Biden may be found involved. When forced to choose sides, the Ukranian governments leaders will probably choose the truth and do an intense investigation that cannot be bought out, especially since the ambassador that Trump fired said that Ukraine is the most crooked government. The Ukraine will definitely run a good investigation which will lead to some people getting in trouble in the Democrat lineup over there, whether anything will be done here I do not know. I suspect that Biden will drop out, some officials will resign to save from being fired, and I think that Trump's lawyer may be in a little trouble too, but he has lots of dirt on lots of people. He will not get a day in jail.

You aren't analyzing the evidence correctly or are applying it inappropriately.

a reply to: rickymouse

Trump only made a statement to CNN after the Democrats started to come after him about doing it.

I wasn't talking about Trump's statement. Look at the post above to Occam.

I was referring to Trump pressuring Ukraine president to go on CNN and announce investigations into the Bidens.

Like I said in another thread if the entire issue was based on Trump pushing to investigate Burisma then I would say it is total BS and the Dems are crazy.

If it was also shown that he withheld congressionally approved funds to pressure Ukraine to investigate then I would be a little concerned but not by much.

If it was shown that the Trump administration didn't notify Congress of holding funds with good reason I would be even more concerned.

If it was shown that the Trump administration also wanted Zalenski to publicly announce there was an investigation into Burisma I would be questioning the motives of the Trump administration.

If it was shown the Trump administration was insistent that Zelenski publicly go on microphone and say ‘investigations, Biden, and Clinton’ then I would be sure that Trump was abusing the power of his office for political gain.


At the very least all those things would need to be substantiated for me to think he was deserving of impeachment.

I do not agree with Trump emphasizing Biden senior in the investigation. But that investigation needed to get kickstarted again so Ukraine, the USA and other countries money could be recouped. If the Ukraine had the money back from that, they would not need our military support money for a few years. It is important to pressure the leader of Ukraine to go after that money. There will be way more Ukrainian big shots who will be in trouble than Americans if that investigation is finished and the money is sucked out of the hands of those who stole it.

It will save America two payments if that money is gotten back, the Ukraine will not benefit, cause the usa is going to deduct it from future payments...so making them do it is very important to do. The money should never have even been given to them until they showed they were trying to find it. If the local health department has a discrepency of a couple hundred bucks they get penalized, our agencies have to account for everything basically, but if we give the money to another country no record keeping or proof is needed to show what they use it on. A lot of humanitarian aid is actually used for military buildup in some countries, look at what Iran did with their money.

The only problem I see with what Trump did was he put emphasis on Biden and his son, it should have only been his son. That company hiring Biden Jr. was normal practice in this world, it was done to gain favor with the White House. But it is commonly done by most countries going back thousands of years. At least Obama did not need to give his daughter to marry the head of another country to gain a new ally. I am sure that that kind of thing is still going on to a small extent in some areas of the world though.

a reply to: rickymouse

I am going to need a citation about this money you are talking about that would support the military for a few years and explain what it has to do with the Ukranian president going on CNN to announce investigations into the Bidens and mentioning Clinton.

originally posted by: Caractacus

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Jason79
a reply to: Gryphon66

The DOJ has zero authority to launch in investigation in a foreign country.

Really?

Then the Mueller Report indictments of Papadopolis and those Russian Hackers didn't happen?

Just a note, those indictments both of American Citizens and Russian Nationals were all for crimes under US Law and activities/victim within the United States.

Russia obviously did not launch an investigation.

The DOJ could not charge Russia for interfering in British Elections.

To be fair, the law cannot prosecute anonymous groups. The law can only prosecute actual individuals.

The US DOJ can ask for cooperation in gathering evidence, witnesses or even have a witness or suspect extradited to face trial in the USA for crimes committed under US law, but the USA has no authority to launch investigations in other countries, which by definition would be into crimes committed under a foreign countries laws.

There are several foreign services under the DOJ, such as the Interpol and Foreign Litigation offices. There is some legislation that allows Judicial authority to extend to the non-domestic : 22 U.S.C. § 611 et seq and Title 28 C.F.R. Part 5

You also have to analyze the FISA court and application of the Espionage act processes (say in the prosecution of Julian Assange?).

Although, I would argue that these things which contravene foreign sovereignty, are unconstitutional in some interpretations of of these laws.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: rickymouse

I am going to need a citation about this money you are talking about that would support the military for a few years and explain what it has to do with the Ukranian president going on CNN to announce investigations into the Bidens and mentioning Clinton.

This article mentions the missing money and I am not sure if the amount stated in the article is correct, I read one point five billion somewhere. It was even mentioned by one of the people in the Ambassador questioning last week...at 1.5 billion that disappeared. Look it up, the info about the disappearing money is all over the place, part of the thirty five billion that disappeared overall. logiclogiclogic.wordpress.com...

Look for your own citation, I could provide fifty of them and you would probably deny any are real. Or just listen closely to the ambassador questioning where a senator or lawyer mentions the missing taxpayer money. It is common knowledge.

Now if that money is recovered, it was a loan, a loan which we can alter the dispersion of since the original purpose was never completed.

a reply to: rickymouse

I know there was corruption problems with Burisma. I have no idea how much of the "LOAN" went to them and disappeared.

I asked you for a citation that explains what it has to do with the Ukranian president going on CNN to announce opening investigations into the Bidens and mentioning Clinton.

Is there any justification for Trump pressuring Ukraine president to go on CNN. I doubt you have a citation for that so I will ask if you can come up with a plausible explanation of why that would be needed that doesn't make it a political hit piece?

Do you not find it at all odd that in the transcript that corruption didn't even come up once? With all the billions missing Trump was only concerned with one business. The one business that his political rivals son works at.

a reply to: Grimpachi

A lot of the corruption was related somehow to that business, the owner had ties to some people at the top of the government and I am sure that some of the officials in the government were directly involved.

The thing is that the investigation should not have been closed, they should have persued getting the money and the bank that Burisma owned or was involved with was directly involved in some of that. It was not so much Joe Biden that was involved and I do not think that Hunter was smart enough to weasel out the money, he was hired as an insurance policy by the ones involved. He was perfect, a person who was high and drunk half the time, probably someone like I used to party with in the seventies....definitely not qualified for the position other than being the VPs son. I do not blame Joe, he was just trying to protect his son. His son admitted he should have not taken that job I guess, and says that if his dad gets elected, he will resign from the Chinese position. But his working for the Chinese is not innocent, Joe being president might give special consideration to China because of his son gaining from that job. The chinese are not dumb, they know how to play the game.