- Nov 14, 2011
- 121,523
- 68,178
- 2,635
His son wasn't being investigated.
Burisma Holdings wasn't being investigated.
Mykola Zlochevsky wasn't being investigated.
So what did Joe Biden gain for his son?
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Trump Leveraging Ukraine Military Aid For Dirt On Joe Biden
- Thread starter Daryl Hunt
- Start date
His son wasn't being investigated.
Burisma Holdings wasn't being investigated.
Mykola Zlochevsky wasn't being investigated.
So what did Joe Biden gain for his son?
Dick Foster
Platinum Member
Not being prosecuted, dumbass. What was he even doing there in the first place? Especially since he was in no way qualified.His son wasn't being investigated.And his son's involvement had nothing at all to do with it? Yeah right, and the tooth fairy puts the electricity in the wall socket to charge my electric car. You're even dumber than I thought.It seems as though you've been lied too and left holding the bag and looking stupid yet again. I'd think youd get tired of it after a while and somehow learn to know better and not to trust those who're taking advantage of you over and over and over again. Your IQ must be lower than normal.Wrong.There is no so called dirt on Joe. Joe went on the air and bragged about his misdeeds. Get a friggin clue you morons. Its no one's fault but your own that you've hitched your waggon to yet anither hopless loser.
If my IQ is low, it is still double that of yours. You are the one being taken advantage of. The fact here is that Biden was not bragging about blackmailing a prosecutor for an investigation he wasn't doing. And the fact he wasn't is why the G7, EU, IMF and the US government was pressing the Ukrainian government to fire him.
Burisma Holdings wasn't being investigated.
Mykola Zlochevsky wasn't being investigated.
So what did Joe Biden gain for his son?
Do you have to have every last little detail spelled out or do you ever understand anything at all?
You are indeed a mindless drooling moron. I'm already convinced so you can stop trying to convince me further.
- Nov 14, 2011
- 121,523
- 68,178
- 2,635
He likely got the job because his father was the VP. It was certainly a conflict of interest but then, that's not a crime.Not being prosecuted, dumbass. What was he even doing there in the first place? Especially since he was in no way qualified.His son wasn't being investigated.And his son's involvement had nothing at all to do with it? Yeah right, and the tooth fairy puts the electricity in the wall socket to charge my electric car. You're even dumber than I thought.It seems as though you've been lied too and left holding the bag and looking stupid yet again. I'd think youd get tired of it after a while and somehow learn to know better and not to trust those who're taking advantage of you over and over and over again. Your IQ must be lower than normal.Wrong.
If my IQ is low, it is still double that of yours. You are the one being taken advantage of. The fact here is that Biden was not bragging about blackmailing a prosecutor for an investigation he wasn't doing. And the fact he wasn't is why the G7, EU, IMF and the US government was pressing the Ukrainian government to fire him.
Burisma Holdings wasn't being investigated.
Mykola Zlochevsky wasn't being investigated.
So what did Joe Biden gain for his son?
Do you have to have every last little detail spelled out or do you ever understand anything at all?
You are indeed a mindless drooling moron. I'm already convinced so you can stop trying to convince me further.
Still, he was not being investigated nor was he at risk of losing his job.
So again I ask since you didn't actually answer.... what did Joe Biden gain for his son?
Dick Foster
Platinum Member
Dumbass, his son was part of the company being investigated. It would save a lot of time if you'd learn to read and comprend without being spoonfed everything bit by bit. It would save even more time if you'd just STFU about shit you don't understand.He likely got the job because his father was the VP. It was certainly a conflict of interest but then, that's not a crime.Not being prosecuted, dumbass. What was he even doing there in the first place? Especially since he was in no way qualified.His son wasn't being investigated.And his son's involvement had nothing at all to do with it? Yeah right, and the tooth fairy puts the electricity in the wall socket to charge my electric car. You're even dumber than I thought.It seems as though you've been lied too and left holding the bag and looking stupid yet again. I'd think youd get tired of it after a while and somehow learn to know better and not to trust those who're taking advantage of you over and over and over again. Your IQ must be lower than normal.
If my IQ is low, it is still double that of yours. You are the one being taken advantage of. The fact here is that Biden was not bragging about blackmailing a prosecutor for an investigation he wasn't doing. And the fact he wasn't is why the G7, EU, IMF and the US government was pressing the Ukrainian government to fire him.
Burisma Holdings wasn't being investigated.
Mykola Zlochevsky wasn't being investigated.
So what did Joe Biden gain for his son?
Do you have to have every last little detail spelled out or do you ever understand anything at all?
You are indeed a mindless drooling moron. I'm already convinced so you can stop trying to convince me further.
Still, he was not being investigated nor was he at risk of losing his job.
So again I ask since you didn't actually answer.... what did Joe Biden gain for his son?
LOL dumb fuck yes it was above your comprehensionI figured that reading material would be too difficult for you to comprehend.why do I have to tell people about the Constitution who took an oath to protect and defend it?Tell that to Congress which twice in history has drawn up articles of impeachment on abuse of power. Both times passing in committee and once being voted on by the full House.Impeachable OffensesHow many times do you need to be informed that it's an impeachable offense, not a specific law?Cite the law!
SECTION 4. The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Looks like they know something you don't....
What are “high crimes and misdemeanors”? On first hearing this phrase, many people probably think that it is just an 18th century way of saying “felonies and misdemeanors.” Felonies are major crimes and misdemeanors are lesser crimes. If this interpretation were correct, “high crimes and misdemeanors” would simply mean any crime. But this interpretation is mistaken.
[...]
After the Constitutional Convention, the Constitution had to be ratified by the states. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of essays, known as the Federalist Papers, urging support of the Constitution. In Federalist No. 65, Hamilton explained impeachment. He defined impeachable offenses as “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”
more...
... but thanks for tryin'. Be sure to grab your participation trophy on your way out.
Yes, just like Obama.Trump attempted USE (read coerce) a foreign government into helping him get elected.
If that isn't an impeachable high misdemeanor...
That's what tin pot third world dictators do...
Let's get real: Democrats were first to enlist Ukraine in US elections
Comprehend this.I figured that reading material would be too difficult for you to comprehend.why do I have to tell people about the Constitution who took an oath to protect and defend it?Tell that to Congress which twice in history has drawn up articles of impeachment on abuse of power. Both times passing in committee and once being voted on by the full House.Impeachable OffensesHow many times do you need to be informed that it's an impeachable offense, not a specific law?Cite the law!
SECTION 4. The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Looks like they know something you don't....
What are “high crimes and misdemeanors”? On first hearing this phrase, many people probably think that it is just an 18th century way of saying “felonies and misdemeanors.” Felonies are major crimes and misdemeanors are lesser crimes. If this interpretation were correct, “high crimes and misdemeanors” would simply mean any crime. But this interpretation is mistaken.
[...]
After the Constitutional Convention, the Constitution had to be ratified by the states. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of essays, known as the Federalist Papers, urging support of the Constitution. In Federalist No. 65, Hamilton explained impeachment. He defined impeachable offenses as “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”
more...
... but thanks for tryin'. Be sure to grab your participation trophy on your way out.
Let's get real: Democrats were first to enlist Ukraine in US elections
- Nov 14, 2011
- 121,523
- 68,178
- 2,635
Imbecile, you should learn to be more respectful to the people who educate you. Burisma Holdings was not under investigation when Biden got Shokin fired...Dumbass, his son was part of the company being investigated. It would save a lot of time if you'd learn to read and comprend without being spoonfed everything bit by bit. It would save even more time if you'd just STFU about shit you don't understand.He likely got the job because his father was the VP. It was certainly a conflict of interest but then, that's not a crime.Not being prosecuted, dumbass. What was he even doing there in the first place? Especially since he was in no way qualified.His son wasn't being investigated.And his son's involvement had nothing at all to do with it? Yeah right, and the tooth fairy puts the electricity in the wall socket to charge my electric car. You're even dumber than I thought.If my IQ is low, it is still double that of yours. You are the one being taken advantage of. The fact here is that Biden was not bragging about blackmailing a prosecutor for an investigation he wasn't doing. And the fact he wasn't is why the G7, EU, IMF and the US government was pressing the Ukrainian government to fire him.
Burisma Holdings wasn't being investigated.
Mykola Zlochevsky wasn't being investigated.
So what did Joe Biden gain for his son?
Do you have to have every last little detail spelled out or do you ever understand anything at all?
You are indeed a mindless drooling moron. I'm already convinced so you can stop trying to convince me further.
Still, he was not being investigated nor was he at risk of losing his job.
So again I ask since you didn't actually answer.... what did Joe Biden gain for his son?
WSJ News Exclusive | Trump Repeatedly Pressed Ukraine President to Investigate Biden’s Son
Mr. Giuliani has suggested Mr. Biden’s motivation was to protect his son, a lawyer who has been involved in several investment and consulting firms, although Mr. Shokin had already completed his investigation of Burisma Group before he left office
Mr. Giuliani has suggested Mr. Biden’s motivation was to protect his son, a lawyer who has been involved in several investment and consulting firms, although Mr. Shokin had already completed his investigation of Burisma Group before he left office
.... so once again I ask... what did Joe Biden gain for his son?
Trump to release transcript of Ukraine call tomorrow - but will it be REAL?
- Nov 14, 2011
- 121,523
- 68,178
- 2,635
LOLOLLOL dumb fuck yes it was above your comprehensionI figured that reading material would be too difficult for you to comprehend.why do I have to tell people about the Constitution who took an oath to protect and defend it?Tell that to Congress which twice in history has drawn up articles of impeachment on abuse of power. Both times passing in committee and once being voted on by the full House.Impeachable OffensesHow many times do you need to be informed that it's an impeachable offense, not a specific law?
SECTION 4. The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Looks like they know something you don't....
What are “high crimes and misdemeanors”? On first hearing this phrase, many people probably think that it is just an 18th century way of saying “felonies and misdemeanors.” Felonies are major crimes and misdemeanors are lesser crimes. If this interpretation were correct, “high crimes and misdemeanors” would simply mean any crime. But this interpretation is mistaken.
[...]
After the Constitutional Convention, the Constitution had to be ratified by the states. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of essays, known as the Federalist Papers, urging support of the Constitution. In Federalist No. 65, Hamilton explained impeachment. He defined impeachable offenses as “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”
more...
... but thanks for tryin'. Be sure to grab your participation trophy on your way out.
PussyBitch be like, I know you are but what am I?
Speaker Pelosi to announce FORMAL IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY.
- Nov 14, 2011
- 121,523
- 68,178
- 2,635
Nice opinion piece. Too bad the author couldn't comprehend what he read.Comprehend this.I figured that reading material would be too difficult for you to comprehend.why do I have to tell people about the Constitution who took an oath to protect and defend it?Tell that to Congress which twice in history has drawn up articles of impeachment on abuse of power. Both times passing in committee and once being voted on by the full House.Impeachable OffensesHow many times do you need to be informed that it's an impeachable offense, not a specific law?
SECTION 4. The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Looks like they know something you don't....
What are “high crimes and misdemeanors”? On first hearing this phrase, many people probably think that it is just an 18th century way of saying “felonies and misdemeanors.” Felonies are major crimes and misdemeanors are lesser crimes. If this interpretation were correct, “high crimes and misdemeanors” would simply mean any crime. But this interpretation is mistaken.
[...]
After the Constitutional Convention, the Constitution had to be ratified by the states. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of essays, known as the Federalist Papers, urging support of the Constitution. In Federalist No. 65, Hamilton explained impeachment. He defined impeachable offenses as “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”
more...
... but thanks for tryin'. Be sure to grab your participation trophy on your way out.
Let's get real: Democrats were first to enlist Ukraine in US elections
John Solomon writes...
The political pressure continued. Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in crucial U.S. aid to Kiev if Poroshenko did not fire the country’s chief prosecutor. Ukraine would have been bankrupted without the aid, so Poroshenko obliged on March 29, 2016, and fired Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.
At the time, Biden was aware that Shokin’s office was investigating Burisma, the firm employing Hunter Biden, after a December 2015 New York Times article.
.At the time, Biden was aware that Shokin’s office was investigating Burisma, the firm employing Hunter Biden, after a December 2015 New York Times article.
Nothing in that NYT article says Ukraine's office of prosecutor general was investigating Burisma. In fact, the only mention of any investigation was by Britain, back in early 2014, which was dismissed. And what does that article say about that British investigation...
But after Ukrainian prosecutors refused to provide documents needed in the investigation, a British court in January ordered the Serious Fraud Office to unfreeze the assets. The refusal by the Ukrainian prosecutor general’s office to cooperate was the target of a stinging attack by the American ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey R. Pyatt, who called out Burisma’s owner by name in a speech in September.
“In the case of former Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, the U.K. authorities had seized $23 million in illicit assets that belonged to the Ukrainian people,” Mr. Pyatt said. Officials at the prosecutor general’s office, he added, were asked by the United Kingdom “to send documents supporting the seizure. Instead they sent letters to Zlochevsky’s attorneys attesting that there was no case against him. As a result, the money was freed by the U.K. court, and shortly thereafter the money was moved to Cyprus.”
“In the case of former Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, the U.K. authorities had seized $23 million in illicit assets that belonged to the Ukrainian people,” Mr. Pyatt said. Officials at the prosecutor general’s office, he added, were asked by the United Kingdom “to send documents supporting the seizure. Instead they sent letters to Zlochevsky’s attorneys attesting that there was no case against him. As a result, the money was freed by the U.K. court, and shortly thereafter the money was moved to Cyprus.”
.... so now we see the NYT article shows Ukraine's prosecutor general was denying the was even an investigation. So who knows where John Solomon, the author of that that op/ed, got his information that Biden knew the prosecutor general's office had an open investigation into Burisma?
See now why you shouldn't be getting your news from opinion pieces?
You're a all-natural pussy bitchLOLOLLOL dumb fuck yes it was above your comprehensionI figured that reading material would be too difficult for you to comprehend.why do I have to tell people about the Constitution who took an oath to protect and defend it?Tell that to Congress which twice in history has drawn up articles of impeachment on abuse of power. Both times passing in committee and once being voted on by the full House.Impeachable Offenses
SECTION 4. The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Looks like they know something you don't....
What are “high crimes and misdemeanors”? On first hearing this phrase, many people probably think that it is just an 18th century way of saying “felonies and misdemeanors.” Felonies are major crimes and misdemeanors are lesser crimes. If this interpretation were correct, “high crimes and misdemeanors” would simply mean any crime. But this interpretation is mistaken.
[...]
After the Constitutional Convention, the Constitution had to be ratified by the states. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of essays, known as the Federalist Papers, urging support of the Constitution. In Federalist No. 65, Hamilton explained impeachment. He defined impeachable offenses as “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”
more...
... but thanks for tryin'. Be sure to grab your participation trophy on your way out.
PussyBitch be like, I know you are but what am I?
volume two of Mueller team was also an opinion piece witch huntNice opinion piece. Too bad the author couldn't comprehend what he read.Comprehend this.I figured that reading material would be too difficult for you to comprehend.why do I have to tell people about the Constitution who took an oath to protect and defend it?Tell that to Congress which twice in history has drawn up articles of impeachment on abuse of power. Both times passing in committee and once being voted on by the full House.Impeachable Offenses
SECTION 4. The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Looks like they know something you don't....
What are “high crimes and misdemeanors”? On first hearing this phrase, many people probably think that it is just an 18th century way of saying “felonies and misdemeanors.” Felonies are major crimes and misdemeanors are lesser crimes. If this interpretation were correct, “high crimes and misdemeanors” would simply mean any crime. But this interpretation is mistaken.
[...]
After the Constitutional Convention, the Constitution had to be ratified by the states. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of essays, known as the Federalist Papers, urging support of the Constitution. In Federalist No. 65, Hamilton explained impeachment. He defined impeachable offenses as “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”
more...
... but thanks for tryin'. Be sure to grab your participation trophy on your way out.
Let's get real: Democrats were first to enlist Ukraine in US elections
John Solomon writes...
The political pressure continued. Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in crucial U.S. aid to Kiev if Poroshenko did not fire the country’s chief prosecutor. Ukraine would have been bankrupted without the aid, so Poroshenko obliged on March 29, 2016, and fired Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin..
At the time, Biden was aware that Shokin’s office was investigating Burisma, the firm employing Hunter Biden, after a December 2015 New York Times article.
Nothing in that NYT article says Ukraine's office of prosecutor general was investigating Burisma. In fact, the only mention of any investigation was by Britain, back in early 2014, which was dismissed. And what does that article say about that British investigation...
But after Ukrainian prosecutors refused to provide documents needed in the investigation, a British court in January ordered the Serious Fraud Office to unfreeze the assets. The refusal by the Ukrainian prosecutor general’s office to cooperate was the target of a stinging attack by the American ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey R. Pyatt, who called out Burisma’s owner by name in a speech in September.
“In the case of former Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, the U.K. authorities had seized $23 million in illicit assets that belonged to the Ukrainian people,” Mr. Pyatt said. Officials at the prosecutor general’s office, he added, were asked by the United Kingdom “to send documents supporting the seizure. Instead they sent letters to Zlochevsky’s attorneys attesting that there was no case against him. As a result, the money was freed by the U.K. court, and shortly thereafter the money was moved to Cyprus.”
.... so now we see the NYT article shows Ukraine's prosecutor general was denying the was even an investigation. So who knows where John Solomon, the author of that that op/ed, got his information that Biden knew the prosecutor general's office had an open investigation into Burisma?
See now why you shouldn't be getting your news from opinion pieces?
- Nov 14, 2011
- 121,523
- 68,178
- 2,635
volume two of Mueller team was also an opinion piece witch huntNice opinion piece. Too bad the author couldn't comprehend what he read.Comprehend this.I figured that reading material would be too difficult for you to comprehend.why do I have to tell people about the Constitution who took an oath to protect and defend it?Tell that to Congress which twice in history has drawn up articles of impeachment on abuse of power. Both times passing in committee and once being voted on by the full House.
Looks like they know something you don't....
What are “high crimes and misdemeanors”? On first hearing this phrase, many people probably think that it is just an 18th century way of saying “felonies and misdemeanors.” Felonies are major crimes and misdemeanors are lesser crimes. If this interpretation were correct, “high crimes and misdemeanors” would simply mean any crime. But this interpretation is mistaken.
[...]
After the Constitutional Convention, the Constitution had to be ratified by the states. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of essays, known as the Federalist Papers, urging support of the Constitution. In Federalist No. 65, Hamilton explained impeachment. He defined impeachable offenses as “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”
more...
... but thanks for tryin'. Be sure to grab your participation trophy on your way out.
Let's get real: Democrats were first to enlist Ukraine in US elections
John Solomon writes...
The political pressure continued. Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in crucial U.S. aid to Kiev if Poroshenko did not fire the country’s chief prosecutor. Ukraine would have been bankrupted without the aid, so Poroshenko obliged on March 29, 2016, and fired Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin..
At the time, Biden was aware that Shokin’s office was investigating Burisma, the firm employing Hunter Biden, after a December 2015 New York Times article.
Nothing in that NYT article says Ukraine's office of prosecutor general was investigating Burisma. In fact, the only mention of any investigation was by Britain, back in early 2014, which was dismissed. And what does that article say about that British investigation...
But after Ukrainian prosecutors refused to provide documents needed in the investigation, a British court in January ordered the Serious Fraud Office to unfreeze the assets. The refusal by the Ukrainian prosecutor general’s office to cooperate was the target of a stinging attack by the American ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey R. Pyatt, who called out Burisma’s owner by name in a speech in September.
“In the case of former Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, the U.K. authorities had seized $23 million in illicit assets that belonged to the Ukrainian people,” Mr. Pyatt said. Officials at the prosecutor general’s office, he added, were asked by the United Kingdom “to send documents supporting the seizure. Instead they sent letters to Zlochevsky’s attorneys attesting that there was no case against him. As a result, the money was freed by the U.K. court, and shortly thereafter the money was moved to Cyprus.”
.... so now we see the NYT article shows Ukraine's prosecutor general was denying the was even an investigation. So who knows where John Solomon, the author of that that op/ed, got his information that Biden knew the prosecutor general's office had an open investigation into Burisma?
See now why you shouldn't be getting your news from opinion pieces?
yes you are a screwball fuck upvolume two of Mueller team was also an opinion piece witch huntNice opinion piece. Too bad the author couldn't comprehend what he read.Comprehend this.I figured that reading material would be too difficult for you to comprehend.why do I have to tell people about the Constitution who took an oath to protect and defend it?
Let's get real: Democrats were first to enlist Ukraine in US elections
John Solomon writes...
The political pressure continued. Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in crucial U.S. aid to Kiev if Poroshenko did not fire the country’s chief prosecutor. Ukraine would have been bankrupted without the aid, so Poroshenko obliged on March 29, 2016, and fired Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin..
At the time, Biden was aware that Shokin’s office was investigating Burisma, the firm employing Hunter Biden, after a December 2015 New York Times article.
Nothing in that NYT article says Ukraine's office of prosecutor general was investigating Burisma. In fact, the only mention of any investigation was by Britain, back in early 2014, which was dismissed. And what does that article say about that British investigation...
But after Ukrainian prosecutors refused to provide documents needed in the investigation, a British court in January ordered the Serious Fraud Office to unfreeze the assets. The refusal by the Ukrainian prosecutor general’s office to cooperate was the target of a stinging attack by the American ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey R. Pyatt, who called out Burisma’s owner by name in a speech in September.
“In the case of former Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, the U.K. authorities had seized $23 million in illicit assets that belonged to the Ukrainian people,” Mr. Pyatt said. Officials at the prosecutor general’s office, he added, were asked by the United Kingdom “to send documents supporting the seizure. Instead they sent letters to Zlochevsky’s attorneys attesting that there was no case against him. As a result, the money was freed by the U.K. court, and shortly thereafter the money was moved to Cyprus.”
.... so now we see the NYT article shows Ukraine's prosecutor general was denying the was even an investigation. So who knows where John Solomon, the author of that that op/ed, got his information that Biden knew the prosecutor general's office had an open investigation into Burisma?
See now why you shouldn't be getting your news from opinion pieces?
- Nov 14, 2011
- 121,523
- 68,178
- 2,635
yes you are a screwball fuck upvolume two of Mueller team was also an opinion piece witch huntNice opinion piece. Too bad the author couldn't comprehend what he read.Comprehend this.I figured that reading material would be too difficult for you to comprehend.
Let's get real: Democrats were first to enlist Ukraine in US elections
John Solomon writes...
The political pressure continued. Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in crucial U.S. aid to Kiev if Poroshenko did not fire the country’s chief prosecutor. Ukraine would have been bankrupted without the aid, so Poroshenko obliged on March 29, 2016, and fired Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin..
At the time, Biden was aware that Shokin’s office was investigating Burisma, the firm employing Hunter Biden, after a December 2015 New York Times article.
Nothing in that NYT article says Ukraine's office of prosecutor general was investigating Burisma. In fact, the only mention of any investigation was by Britain, back in early 2014, which was dismissed. And what does that article say about that British investigation...
But after Ukrainian prosecutors refused to provide documents needed in the investigation, a British court in January ordered the Serious Fraud Office to unfreeze the assets. The refusal by the Ukrainian prosecutor general’s office to cooperate was the target of a stinging attack by the American ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey R. Pyatt, who called out Burisma’s owner by name in a speech in September.
“In the case of former Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, the U.K. authorities had seized $23 million in illicit assets that belonged to the Ukrainian people,” Mr. Pyatt said. Officials at the prosecutor general’s office, he added, were asked by the United Kingdom “to send documents supporting the seizure. Instead they sent letters to Zlochevsky’s attorneys attesting that there was no case against him. As a result, the money was freed by the U.K. court, and shortly thereafter the money was moved to Cyprus.”
.... so now we see the NYT article shows Ukraine's prosecutor general was denying the was even an investigation. So who knows where John Solomon, the author of that that op/ed, got his information that Biden knew the prosecutor general's office had an open investigation into Burisma?
See now why you shouldn't be getting your news from opinion pieces?
Retardyes you are a screwball fuck upvolume two of Mueller team was also an opinion piece witch huntNice opinion piece. Too bad the author couldn't comprehend what he read.
John Solomon writes...
The political pressure continued. Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in crucial U.S. aid to Kiev if Poroshenko did not fire the country’s chief prosecutor. Ukraine would have been bankrupted without the aid, so Poroshenko obliged on March 29, 2016, and fired Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin..
At the time, Biden was aware that Shokin’s office was investigating Burisma, the firm employing Hunter Biden, after a December 2015 New York Times article.
Nothing in that NYT article says Ukraine's office of prosecutor general was investigating Burisma. In fact, the only mention of any investigation was by Britain, back in early 2014, which was dismissed. And what does that article say about that British investigation...
But after Ukrainian prosecutors refused to provide documents needed in the investigation, a British court in January ordered the Serious Fraud Office to unfreeze the assets. The refusal by the Ukrainian prosecutor general’s office to cooperate was the target of a stinging attack by the American ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey R. Pyatt, who called out Burisma’s owner by name in a speech in September.
“In the case of former Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, the U.K. authorities had seized $23 million in illicit assets that belonged to the Ukrainian people,” Mr. Pyatt said. Officials at the prosecutor general’s office, he added, were asked by the United Kingdom “to send documents supporting the seizure. Instead they sent letters to Zlochevsky’s attorneys attesting that there was no case against him. As a result, the money was freed by the U.K. court, and shortly thereafter the money was moved to Cyprus.”
.... so now we see the NYT article shows Ukraine's prosecutor general was denying the was even an investigation. So who knows where John Solomon, the author of that that op/ed, got his information that Biden knew the prosecutor general's office had an open investigation into Burisma?
See now why you shouldn't be getting your news from opinion pieces?
- Nov 14, 2011
- 121,523
- 68,178
- 2,635
Retardyes you are a screwball fuck upvolume two of Mueller team was also an opinion piece witch huntNice opinion piece. Too bad the author couldn't comprehend what he read.
John Solomon writes...
The political pressure continued. Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in crucial U.S. aid to Kiev if Poroshenko did not fire the country’s chief prosecutor. Ukraine would have been bankrupted without the aid, so Poroshenko obliged on March 29, 2016, and fired Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin..
At the time, Biden was aware that Shokin’s office was investigating Burisma, the firm employing Hunter Biden, after a December 2015 New York Times article.
Nothing in that NYT article says Ukraine's office of prosecutor general was investigating Burisma. In fact, the only mention of any investigation was by Britain, back in early 2014, which was dismissed. And what does that article say about that British investigation...
But after Ukrainian prosecutors refused to provide documents needed in the investigation, a British court in January ordered the Serious Fraud Office to unfreeze the assets. The refusal by the Ukrainian prosecutor general’s office to cooperate was the target of a stinging attack by the American ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey R. Pyatt, who called out Burisma’s owner by name in a speech in September.
“In the case of former Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, the U.K. authorities had seized $23 million in illicit assets that belonged to the Ukrainian people,” Mr. Pyatt said. Officials at the prosecutor general’s office, he added, were asked by the United Kingdom “to send documents supporting the seizure. Instead they sent letters to Zlochevsky’s attorneys attesting that there was no case against him. As a result, the money was freed by the U.K. court, and shortly thereafter the money was moved to Cyprus.”
.... so now we see the NYT article shows Ukraine's prosecutor general was denying the was even an investigation. So who knows where John Solomon, the author of that that op/ed, got his information that Biden knew the prosecutor general's office had an open investigation into Burisma?
See now why you shouldn't be getting your news from opinion pieces?
you are a retard.Retardyes you are a screwball fuck upvolume two of Mueller team was also an opinion piece witch hunt
Similar threads
- Replies
- 74
- Views
- 845
- Replies
- 102
- Views
- 1K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 16
- Views
- 44
- Replies
- 6
- Views
- 24
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8087
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 471
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-