3 ms·

Here’s the video of Joe saying exactly that: https://youtu.be/UXA--dj2-CY https://youtu.be/UXA--dj2-CY Here’s one example from today; > Prosecutor General Vi

by zaroth 7y ago

Here’s the video of Joe saying exactly that: https://youtu.be/UXA--dj2-CY https://youtu.be/UXA--dj2-CY Here’s one example from today; > Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin [the fired Ukrainian Prosecutor] testified that when he was fired in March 2016, he was told the reason was that Biden was unhappy about the Burisma investigation. [1] > “The truth is that I was forced out because I was leading a wide-ranging corruption probe into Burisma Holdings, a natural gas firm active in Ukraine and Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, was a member of the Board of Directors,” Shokin testified... [2] [1] - https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/463307-solomon-these-once-secret-memos-cast-doubt-on-joe-bidens-ukraine-story https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/463307-solomon-these-on... [2] - https://www.scribd.com/document/427618359/Shokin-Statement https://www.scribd.com/document/427618359/Shokin-Statement

maxerickson 7y ago
Okay, all that's left is establishing that Biden was setting US policy contrary to the views of the rest of the administration (because that's what it would take for his role in it to be improper). It doesn't make Hunter Biden look very good to be selling his name to foreign entities like that, for sure.
- AnimalMuppet 7y ago
  Your position is that Biden, on tape, bragged about getting the investigation cancelled, but he was exaggerating how big his role was, because it was the Obama administration policy to get it cancelled? I find that laughable. It sounds like you're looking for any rationale, no matter how far-fetched, to make Biden not have done what he clearly said he did. Mind you, I'm a "both/and" kind of guy here. If it was improper for Biden to use the threat of withholding US aid to get the investigation cancelled, it is also improper for Trump to use the threat of withholding US aid to get the investigation restarted. What I need to see, though, is something on Trump that's closer to what Biden said. Biden outright said he did it. Trump... if you read the transcript through "Trump is a horrible person" glasses, of course he's implying that he'll withhold US aid if Ukraine doesn't do what he wants. If you don't read it that way, though, if you don't assume that's the subtext, it's less clear that he's actually threatening.
  - maxerickson 7y ago
    He was describing an action he took as the Vice President while in a foreign country. That really doesn't establish his role in setting the policy, as one purpose of the trip would be to deliver the message. There can certainly be evidence that he argued strongly for the policy, that he delivered the message says very little.
    - AnimalMuppet 7y ago
      Even if everything were as you say (which I don't believe), it still would speak volumes that nobody saw a problem either with the message being delivered, or with Biden being the one to deliver it. Surely someone in the Obama administration understood the concept of "conflict of interest"... didn't they?

by zaroth 7y ago

maxerickson 7y ago

Okay, all that's left is establishing that Biden was setting US policy contrary to the views of the rest of the administration (because that's what it would take for his role in it to be improper). It doesn't make Hunter Biden look very good to be selling his name to foreign entities like that, for sure.

AnimalMuppet 7y ago
Your position is that Biden, on tape, bragged about getting the investigation cancelled, but he was exaggerating how big his role was, because it was the Obama administration policy to get it cancelled? I find that laughable. It sounds like you're looking for any rationale, no matter how far-fetched, to make Biden not have done what he clearly said he did. Mind you, I'm a "both/and" kind of guy here. If it was improper for Biden to use the threat of withholding US aid to get the investigation cancelled, it is also improper for Trump to use the threat of withholding US aid to get the investigation restarted. What I need to see, though, is something on Trump that's closer to what Biden said. Biden outright said he did it. Trump... if you read the transcript through "Trump is a horrible person" glasses, of course he's implying that he'll withhold US aid if Ukraine doesn't do what he wants. If you don't read it that way, though, if you don't assume that's the subtext, it's less clear that he's actually threatening.
- maxerickson 7y ago
  He was describing an action he took as the Vice President while in a foreign country. That really doesn't establish his role in setting the policy, as one purpose of the trip would be to deliver the message. There can certainly be evidence that he argued strongly for the policy, that he delivered the message says very little.
  - AnimalMuppet 7y ago
    Even if everything were as you say (which I don't believe), it still would speak volumes that nobody saw a problem either with the message being delivered, or with Biden being the one to deliver it. Surely someone in the Obama administration understood the concept of "conflict of interest"... didn't they?