Joe Paid $900K By Burisma For His Services

No wonder the Democrats are refusing to allow Republicans witnesses and subpoena power in their little one-sided inquisition —

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/...hell-admission

https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/pres...ce/617936.html

Quote:

---

Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden received $900,000 for lobbying activities from Burisma Group, Ukraine's Verkhovna Rada member Andriy Derkach said citing investigation materials.

Derkach publicized documents which, as he said, "describe the mechanism of getting money by Biden Sr." at a press conference at Interfax-Ukraine's press center in Kyiv on Wednesday.

"This was the transfer of Burisma Group's funds for lobbying activities, as investigators believe, personally to Joe Biden through a lobbying company. Funds in the amount of $900,000 were transferred to the U.S.-based company Rosemont Seneca Partners, which according to open sources, in particular, the New York Times, is affiliated with Biden. The payment reference was payment for consultative services," Derkach said.

"Using political and economic levelers of influencing Ukrainian authorities and manipulating the issue of providing financial aid to Ukraine, Joe Biden actively assisted closing criminal cases into the activity of former Ukrainian Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, who is the founder and owner of Burisma Group," he said.

..."Biden's fifth visit to Kyiv on December 7-8, 2015 was devoted to making a decision on the resignation of [then Ukrainian Prosecutor General] Viktor Shokin over the case of Zlochevsky and Burisma. Loan guarantees worth $1 billion that the United States was to give to Ukraine was the point of pressure. Biden himself admitted exerting pressure in his speech at the Council of Foreign Relations in January 2018, calling Shokin 'son of a bitch who was fired'," Derkach said.

The timeline of events proves that the U.S. linked the Zlochevsky case to loan guarantees, he said...

---

I wonder how long it will take for the usual MSM sources to report and demand to see the documents on this development, if ever.

The liberal media will not touch this with a ten foot poll.

The “russians” seem to pop up everywhere. While some will argue they are a bunch of independent events, I am becoming more suspicious. These days I wonder how they intend to overthrow or otherwise defeat us.

Is it by abolishing the electoral college? Allowing non citizens to vote? How do you think they win?

Quote:

---

How do you think they win?

---

By aiding trump and trump like people to gain power within the US Government, and allowing the destruction of the Constitution from the inside.:redmad:

...and from Joe:

Quote:

---

I wonder how long it will take for the usual MSM sources to report and demand to see the documents on this development, if ever.

---

In fact, and according to your own link, the answer is often and going way back. These issues and possible conflicts have been reported in the rabid right's hated NYT from their beginning. This is just one of the many articles in the NYT---without question you would benefit from a subscription. :beat:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Grubb

By aiding trump and trump like people to gain power within the US Government, and allowing the destruction of the Constitution from the inside.:redmad:

---

How does that win anything? I guess I need to use a little less nuance.:shrug:

So I guess you are in the camp that says they are out to "destabilize" our country. I can't think of anything you "win" in this case unless you had some specific economic objective you were attempting to accomplish. Perhaps it is to somehow disrupt the military-industrial complex?

But back to my original concern. I think this is a long term campaign by our enemies, and I am wondering about the intermediate steps and the end game. I don't think our enemies (I will call them russians for now) actually want to occupy or even can overthrow our goverment. I don't think anyone will actually invade America. So I'm thinking economic or military, with a nod to military.

So let me ask again, how does destabilizing our government (whatever that means) help them advance on their objective? What is the next move?

I think they are attempting to destroy our economy and thus our ability to fund our military, leaving us subject to economic blackmail. A few more leftist lunatics get elected and I suppose they can do it.

Bonus question: Which do you think AOC would rather spend our tax dollars on a) our military or b) sex changes for inmates?

The destabilizing "policy" of Russia goes far beyond the US---it is a wide ranging and focused effort against a long list of countries----from former USSR countries to the USA and our (former or traditional ?)allies. In their eyes (and I agree) the more unrest and in fighting they can create in any of these targets the better it is for Russia in the long run.

Any "enemy" pushed off balance by discontent and tribalism the easier they are to defeat economically---and we are setting ourselves up for just that. For the first time in my life we seem to be cutting off our allies to the point that I have to question if we still have allies. I'm sure we are making both Russia and China very happy as we do that.

I, for one, fail to see equal value in a chubby lover boy who is nuts as an equal trade for our former relationships with Western European countries---who in a blink of an eye we seem not to give a damn about.

So you are saying the intermediate step is for them to help install isolationists in order to destroy the trade relationships we have with our allies?

Not at all.

But---on the subject of trade issues, first I will say that we needed to do something about them long ago and trump is the first one that did do something. I argue against his methods but not his intent. It was not necessary to burn so many bridges in the process---and reap the pain currently being felt in this country by some areas of the economy--in particular agriculture.

I believe we will emerge better for it but we have cast doubt on who we are in the minds of those who once trusted the US.

trump does "business" in Washington the same as he did in NYC. He fails to realize the game has changed. In NYC he could rape and pillage at will and tomorrow more suckers would show up---it doesn't always work that way in international relationships. Being the bully in the room has its downside.

I see Trump engaging and making headway against our real rival/enemy, China, while eyes are diverted to a pissant rival/enemy, Russia. Odd how people can miss that the China communist state has insinuated itself into and corrupted even one of the singular most capitalistic businesses in the world, NBA basketball, where numbnutz can make hundreds of millions selling their one skill, and reduced them to drooling idiots singing the murderous commies’ praises!

Remember, Russia is “a gas station masquerading as a country,” and we are bringing it to its knees with our fracking. China is a much bigger threat and have been robbing us blind for decades. Every single one of the Democrat contenders has vowed to shut down and ruin hydrocarbon production in this country if elected. Their leading contender tells us China is no threat and our buddies, while his son is in their pocket. Heads up, folks.

You will get no argument from me regarding the non-existent economic power of Russia--I have seen it first hand. However, waging a war of disinformation and discord is a low cost way of waging war---and that is exactly what they are doing.

I think it valuable to at least read these comments from Ambassador Yovanovitch yesterday:

Quote:

---

She expressed dismay and disappointment about her experience, and predicted serious consequences if the State Department failed to defend itself as an institution. “The harm will come not just through the inevitable and continuing resignation and loss of many of this nation’s most loyal and talented public servants,” she said.

“It also will come when those diplomats who soldier on and do their best to represent our nation face partners abroad who question whether the ambassador truly speaks for the president and can be counted upon as a reliable partner. The harm will come when private interests circumvent professional diplomats for their own gain, not the public good.”

---

I happen to value our government institutions--are they perfect--no---but they have value that needs to be not only protected but enriched. The growing ease with which we throw these institutions and people under the bus is detrimental to our own well being and that of the nation.