Trust in government

[AU9377 4,929]

15 minutes ago, jj3jordan said:

It is truly amazing how you leftists will parse hairs to rationalize literally anything.

Biden did in fact threaten to withhold money from Ukraine unless they fire the prosecutor.  

Basically the IMF, EU and others  suspected that Ukraine was full of corruption and threatened to withhold money also.

Burisma would legitimately be suspected as a participant in this corruption.

Nobody ever said this corruption from the IMF EU and others was regarding Hunter Biden's crimes against Ukraine Law.  This article uses quotes from locals who said that Hunter had not broken the law in Ukraine so he was not under investigation.  

The prosecutor in question was corrupt according to you.

Therefore he must be replaced because he potentially could have uncovered something and would not be under the influence of the Ukraine government or the US government.

Biden was worried that the alleged corrupt and uncontrollable prosecutor would discover "abnormalities" in Burisma since Hunter was on the board due to an appointment that was obviously done purely because Joe was VP and actually in charge of Ukraine policy for the US govt. It is absolutely laughable to even pretend that Hunter's appointment was ANYTHING but outright influence peddling.

The article continues with quotes stating Biden was not involved and there are no grounds to think there was wrongdoing STARTING from 2014 (when Hunter was appt).  No the corruption started before 2014, Hunter just joined in when he was appointed and was able to peddle his fathers influence around the country and assist Burisma who was paying him $83K/mo. for what? Nothing just being Hunter?  Maybe they wanted his art, movies, drugs, laptops.  Probably not. Influence with dad?  YES WE HAVE A WINNER!!

The funny part is this whole situation has forced the left to align themselves and protect a pervert, pedophile, drug addict, prostitute employer, adulterer, deadbeat dad, and absolute loser of a human being by any standard.

All for the purpose of maintaining power in politics.  Do anything to anybody at any cost to stay in power. No truth, no integrity, no good of the country, no standards, no patriotism, just power.

First, I am not a leftist.  What Hunter was doing in Ukraine had nothing to do with what Biden, the U.N., the IMF, EU and the Freedom Caucus all wanted, which was the removal of Shokin, who was a tool of the former ousted Ukrainian President that had feld to Russia.

Hunter was clearly raking in some easy money based on his name and his dad.  However, if that was illegal, Billy Carter would have died in jail and Ivanka and Jared would be wearing jump suits.

[jj3jordan 2,052]

9 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

First, I am not a leftist.  What Hunter was doing in Ukraine had nothing to do with what Biden, the U.N., the IMF, EU and the Freedom Caucus all wanted, which was the removal of Shokin, who was a tool of the former ousted Ukrainian President that had feld to Russia.

Hunter was clearly raking in some easy money based on his name and his dad.  However, if that was illegal, Billy Carter would have died in jail and Ivanka and Jared would be wearing jump suits.

So you really DON'T see a problem with a totally unqualified Hunter given an $83K/mo board position at Burisma. You think they did it because of his name and it is just easy money. NOT related to his dad being IN CHARGE of US policy toward Ukraine. You truly don't see that connection?

[AU9377 4,929]

3 hours ago, jj3jordan said:

So you really DON'T see a problem with a totally unqualified Hunter given an $83K/mo board position at Burisma. You think they did it because of his name and it is just easy money. NOT related to his dad being IN CHARGE of US policy toward Ukraine. You truly don't see that connection?

I'm certain that is why they gave him the board position.  However, that doesn't mean that it was in exchange for something from Biden.  There is zero evidence that it influenced any decision on Biden's part.  It certainly wasn't done at the direction of Biden in exchange for something else and it definitely had nothing to do with loan guarantees that the U.S. made to aid Ukraine.  I'm not claiming that it was a good look or that those type relationships should even be allowed, but that wasn't the question.

Do you realize how many former government officials sit on boards of U.S. and International companies?  They do nothing but get a check and are there for any influence they may still have.

[jj3jordan 2,052]

11 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

I'm certain that is why they gave him the board position.  However, that doesn't mean that it was in exchange for something from Biden.  There is zero evidence that it influenced any decision on Biden's part.  It certainly wasn't done at the direction of Biden in exchange for something else and it definitely had nothing to do with loan guarantees that the U.S. made to aid Ukraine.  I'm not claiming that it was a good look or that those type relationships should even be allowed, but that wasn't the question.

Do you realize how many former government officials sit on boards of U.S. and International companies?  They do nothing but get a check and are there for any influence they may still have.

LOL  Hunter Biden is hardly a government official.  Pretty sure a real one might be insulted by that. The appointment was made with the expectation of influence. That would be the only reason to do it in the first place. You or I will never know if this appt garnered favor.  You personally don’t know the extent of evidence regarding influence so your statement about “zero evidence” is uninformed at best. You have no way of knowing that. It should be obvious that his board tenure ended after Joe was no longer in position to provide influence.

[AU9377 4,929]

7 hours ago, jj3jordan said:

LOL  Hunter Biden is hardly a government official.  Pretty sure a real one might be insulted by that. The appointment was made with the expectation of influence. That would be the only reason to do it in the first place. You or I will never know if this appt garnered favor.  You personally don’t know the extent of evidence regarding influence so your statement about “zero evidence” is uninformed at best. You have no way of knowing that. It should be obvious that his board tenure ended after Joe was no longer in position to provide influence.

Granted, without password access to government records at the CIA and FBI, I am not 100%.  However, I do know that if evidence existed showing a connection and illegal activity, the Trump administration would have published that information and prosecuted him for any violations of Federal laws. That is exactly what this was about. 

Trump even told Ukranian officials that what he wanted was for them to open an investigation and that he would "handle things" after that.  He didn't care if there was evidence or not and certainly didn't care if they dropped it later or couldn't get a conviction.  What he wanted was to hurt his political rival and knock him out of the race.  His use of his office to achieve or attempt to achieve those ends is the abuse of power that he was accused of. 

That act is every bit as much of an abuse of office as the Nixon administration's knowledge of the Watergate break in and use of the FBI to wire tap the offices of the Democratic party in the early 1970s.  In both instances, an executive used the power of his office to attempt to gain political advantage.

Trump's abuse was even more shocking because it aimed at involving a foreign country in the domestic affairs of the U.S. It doesn't matter that he didn't succeed.  To claim that is like claiming a bank robber that doesn't get any money didn't commit a crime.

Edited September 22, 2021 by AU9377