Trump Amb. to EU Sondland reverses himself on Ukraine quid pro quo

If Trump is really against corruption then why didn't he say anything about the 4 investigations that were dropped against Paul Manifort?

Paul Manifort the guy who started the rumor that it was Ukraine that interfered in the election.

Why do the investigations dropping against him coincide with the sale of Javelin missiles?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: More1ThanAny1

Shokin’s sworn statement says that he was investigating Burisma. As I understand it the investigation when it happened regarding dealings during 2010-2012. Do you have other information?

He also says that Hunter Biden as associated with Burisma. And we know that is true.

What Shokin does not swear to is that he was investigating Hunter Biden, which is what many here keep trying to claim.

Then Shokin talks about his assumptions, which are ... assumptions.

It’s funny how memory works isn’t it?

Shokin says proshenko said Biden was pressuring him, and shokin needed to drop the investigation into burisma.

These arent assumptions, he is saying he was told to resign because he wouldnt drop the investigation into burisma, and biden was threatening to withhold a biollion in subsidies.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Biden wasn’t making any important decisions. I’m not sure how you think it was unethical for him to do his job as Vice President.

The Prosecutor General Shokin was removed for a host of questionable and corrupt acts. He was not removed for investigating Burisma during a period 2010-2012 when Hunter Biden wasn’t on the BOARD until 2014.

It’s not a billion dollars. It was actually more like three billion IN LOAN GUARANTEES, in other words, we CO SIGNED with the Ukraine.

Your comment about American corporations is pretty vague and general, but, okay. Burisma is a Cyprus-based corporation if I recall.

I am very aware that you and others believe that Biden was somehow compromised by Hunter’s job. Again, BIden was not making the decisions, Obama was. More than that, there were multiple international concerns directed at assisting Ukraine ESPECIALLY as a geopolitical move to counter Russian influence ... that had NOTHING to do with Burisma.

Making the entire situation in Ukraine about Biden is just ... nonsensical in my opinion.

I’m not sure what more I can contribute to the conversation.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
Paul Manifort the guy who started the rumor that it was Ukraine that interfered in the election.

...and all it cost the US was a billion dollars!

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Which is no different from When Hillary Clinton asked for China to turn to foreign government investigations of them to "aid his campaign." Of her rivals no?

originally posted by: Grimpachi
If Trump is really against corruption then why didn't he say anything about the 4 investigations that were dropped against Paul Manifort?

Paul Manifort the guy who started the rumor that it was Ukraine that interfered in the election.

Why do the investigations dropping against him coincide with the sale of Javelin missiles?

Ukraine did interfere in the 2016 election, and they publicly admitted it during the election.

Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election. And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found.

A Ukrainian-American operative who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington in an effort to expose ties between Trump, top campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia, according to people with direct knowledge of the situation.

The Ukrainian efforts had an impact in the race, helping to force Manafort’s resignation and advancing the narrative that Trump’s campaign was deeply connected to Ukraine’s foe to the east, Russia. But they were far less concerted or centrally directed than Russia’s alleged hacking and dissemination of Democratic emails.

www.politico.com...

Strange how the media and democrats dont care about foriegn election interfernce all of the sudden when it went to benefit hillary.

a reply to: Grambler

Why do you believe Shokin?

Why do you believe these documents that Solomon has placed on SCRIBD are authentic?

a reply to: Extorris

WHAT legal risk was Biden Jr. in?

You do know Biden Jr was quickly pushed into Ukraine After the regime change in Kiev? of course putting American officials to work for gas/oil companies is not suspicious at all?

a reply to: Grimpachi

Hasn’t poor Manafort been through enough?

#eyeroll

a reply to: Gryphon66

You assert Biden had not authority.

As has been siad

1. That irrelvant. Coveriung up for his VP's son could also be of personal interest to obama.

2. Biden himself bragged he was the one who made the decisoon, and Obama backed him. I know your argument hinges on claiming Biden is a liar, but can you provide proof bidens claim here is a lie, or is it just your gut feeling?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

Why do you believe Shokin?

Why do you believe these documents that Solomon has placed on SCRIBD are authentic?

I have no reason to believe that solomon forged actual court documents that would easily be proven forgeries, as they even include signatures. I havent even heard one person claim that. Please provide anyone making the allegation these court documents are fake.

Secondly, I dont neccessarily believe shokin. He may be liying for all i know.

Again, I never said Biden or hunter are guilty. I siad there is plenty of evidence, including shokins testimony, to warrant an investigation.

If trump got a prosecutor fired, and that prosecutor testified in court it was because he wouldnt drop an investigation into trumps sons company, i guarnetee you the dems and media would demand that be investigated.

Yet here, its the exact opposite.

a reply to: Grambler

It’s not irrelevant. You keep saying that; it’s not true.

You still haven’t given even one shred of evidence for alleged crimes by Hunter Biden. What was Obama “covering up”?

Biden brags a lot. Do you believe him? If not, why is he speaking Gospel truth now in your opinion?

Unless, it’s a partisan issue for you ... then all this makes very clear sense.

Trump isn’t guilty, Obama is. Biden is guilty of something, mostly having the last name Biden.

Hillary, Comey, ETC. ETC. ETC. Pretty obvious what your concern is.

a reply to: Grambler

You have no proof of the documents’ veracity. I asked you a question you answered with an opinion. My opinion is that anyone could have fabricated those documents and that Solomon, who by the way has a financial interest here, is the only source and there has been no corroboration.

Essentially, you’re believing in Solomon because he’s in agreement with your politics.

a reply to: Gryphon66

...and here's what I have to say that blows your entire point off the board...
thefederalist.com...

At a 2018 event organized by the Council on Foreign Relations, Joe Biden — who was tasked by then-President Barack Obama to lead the U.S. government’s efforts in Ukraine — bragged about threatening to withhold a billion-dollar loan guarantee if the Ukrainian government refused to fire Shokin.

52:00 in... Biden literally credits himself with being assigned to handle negotiations with Kiev and takes credit for being the one who told the Ukraine they'd not get the money unless the prosecutor pursuing his son's employer was removed from his position and states that he had Obama's full support and backing in the threat.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Leading the efforts in Ukraine is the same as making specific decisions about loan guarantees?

Not according to Biden, who encouraged the Ukrainians to call Obama, who had made the decision.

You can tweak it anyway you want ... Biden was not President and did not set policy, that was Obama.

Also, in terms of your source:

... sources familiar with the testimony told The Federalist.

The Federalist

Don’t you usually classify unnamed sources as “fake news”?

a reply to: Gryphon66

No its nor relevant

Saying "Hey its ok for Obama to use money to possibly bury investigations into bidens son, because its bidens son and not his" is absurd. You are merely making the case Obama should be investigated as well as biden, which I agree and is a point I have made all along.


I not only outlined possible hunter crimes, I showed how Obama and biden could want an investigation into hunters company covered up becaise it would make them look bad, or because it could cost hunter a lot of money.

You defense being "Biden lied about his quid pro quo" is ridiculous. even if he leid, it should be investigated.

If trump comes out and says "I withheld congressionally voted for aid to a country until they did favors for me!" no single person in the media or democratic party would say "hey no need to investigate that, trump was lying"

Again its pretty obvious where your concern is.

You were for themueller investigation even though repubs and dems suggested firing comey.

You dont feel there needs to be an investigation into biden because others said shokin should be fired.

The entire story is trump being impeached for looking into possible corruption by biden. You never once suggested Obama should be removed for looking in to possible corruption by trump.

Im not the one trying to remove a duly elected president, thats the dmes and their media.

If you were not partiusan, and you believe trump and bidena and obama are innocent, you would be decrying that.

Instead you ignore, and say Im bad for calling that the dem and media hypocrisy out.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

You have no proof of the documents’ veracity. I asked you a question you answered with an opinion. My opinion is that anyone could have fabricated those documents and that Solomon, who by the way has a financial interest here, is the only source and there has been no corroboration.

Essentially, you’re believing in Solomon because he’s in agreement with your politics.

Im believing solomon because he linked court documents, with signatures, which no one has clainmed were forged except you.

You argument is so weak you are now demanding i prove court documents arent fake?

why stop there? Can I even prove solomon is a real person, I mean Ive never met him in person.

man you cracked the code!!!!

This is pathetic beyond belief!

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

You have no proof of the documents’ veracity. I asked you a question you answered with an opinion. My opinion is that anyone could have fabricated those documents and that Solomon, who by the way has a financial interest here, is the only source and there has been no corroboration.

Essentially, you’re believing in Solomon because he’s in agreement with your politics.

Oh I can play this fun game too!

You said on this thread congress approved the loan bguarntees.

Prove it.

Were you there when they did, or did you merely seeing documents showing that online?

How do you know the sources you saw those documents from didnt lie and forge them?

Well I guess you must just believe those msm outlets.

This has tro be one of the most stupifying claims I have ever seen on this board, and thats is saying something.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: More1ThanAny1

Shokin’s sworn statement says that he was investigating Burisma. As I understand it the investigation when it happened regarding dealings during 2010-2012. Do you have other information?

He also says that Hunter Biden was associated with Burisma. And we know that is true.

What Shokin does not swear to is that he was investigating Hunter Biden, which is what many here keep trying to claim.

I think others here may not see the big picture.

Shokin was not investigating Hunter Biden, he was investigating Burisma and also Zlochevsky for what he did while he was Minister of Ecology. Zlochevsky appointed Hunter Biden onto Burisma in 2014 after all the allegations came out between 2010-2012 for protection. Zlochevsky promised a hefty salary to Hunter as a proxy for Joe Biden's influence and protection from future allegations. Sure enough, Biden got Shokin fired after that.

This is pay to play by proxy. Pay the son, get the father. Simple as that. The "play" part was Biden's quid pro quo to get Shokin fired.

originally posted by: More1ThanAny1

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: More1ThanAny1

Shokin’s sworn statement says that he was investigating Burisma. As I understand it the investigation when it happened regarding dealings during 2010-2012. Do you have other information?

He also says that Hunter Biden was associated with Burisma. And we know that is true.

What Shokin does not swear to is that he was investigating Hunter Biden, which is what many here keep trying to claim.

I think others here may not see the big picture.

Shokin was not investigating Hunter Biden, he was investigating Burisma and also Zlochevsky for what he did while he was Minister of Ecology. Zlochevsky appointed Hunter Biden onto Burisma in 2014 after all the allegations came out between 2010-2012 for protection. Zlochevsky promised a hefty salary to Hunter as a proxy for Joe Biden's influence and protection from future allegations. Sure enough, Biden got Shokin fired after that.

This is pay to play by proxy. Pay the son, get the father. Simple as that. The "play" part was Biden's quid pro quo to get Shokin fired.

Exactly!

And in that scenario, Hunter biden needed do nothing illegal.

I cant confirm this is what happened for sure, but there is at least enough evidence for an investigation, which means trump was right to investigate.