(11-21-2019 04:08 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(11-21-2019 02:34 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  You can disagree with the policy regarding Ukraine, but the US clearly had one and Shokin's inaction as prosecutor and subsequent removal had effects on US policy.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trumps-big...alls-apart

Why is a request to investigate such corruption involving relatives of high ranking US officials SOLELY an attack on one's political rivals?

It's solely an attack on one's political rivals when it's only their potential corruption that you are interested in fighting.

pfft.

The article you quote... which is clearly a political piece... alludes to my questions, but still doesn't answer them. I suspect because it doesn't like the answers. It starts off by defining (incorrectly) what the other side is saying so that they can argue with that false premise... and then act as if they've answered the question because they answered their own preferred version of the question.

Ukraine isn't the most corrupt place in the world, some of which are in our own hemisphere. You're essentially admitting that the world was interfering with internal politics... and then using their resistance to that interference as justification for the interference. How convenient. The article itself even alludes to Barisma AT THE SAME TIME IT WAS HIRING BIDEN and the government that appointed and wouldn't remove him without some significant pressure from abroad as being the problem.

This whole 'that made it more rather than less likely that corruption was uncovered' game is stupid.... because the moment Trump suggested that there be an investigation into possible corruption, he gets impeached. The best defense is a good offense. Ukraine, who clearly didn't want to investigate this in the first place otherwise they would have removed him without the pressure... is now protected from US pressure of having to do so SPECIFICALLY because Hunter Biden is on the board.

No, I don't think the Biden's thought it through at the time, but it IS pretty convenient that they've come our swinging because Trump (according to the left, I'm accepting their premise) wanted to investigate a highly connected US citizen doing questionable business with an extremely powerful and connected company in an extremely corrupt country.

Why didn't Hunter just pressure the board to cooperate with the British investigation?

The author is a relatively recent Rice alumnus who has an expertise on Eastern European affairs.

"I'm a writer, analyst, and investigative journalist on topics ranging from kleptocracy and grand corruption to developments in the post-Soviet space and Western relations therein. I received my Master's degree in Russia, Eurasia and Eastern Europe Studies from Columbia University's Harriman Institute, and my pieces and analyses have appeared in outlets like Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, The Atlantic, The New Republic, POLITICO Magazine, Washington Post, Sports Illustrated, Just Security, Bellingcat, ThinkProgress, Quartz, The American Interest, Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, openDemocracy, Guardian, National Review, World Politics Review, Al Jazeera, Slate, The Daily Beast, Roads & Kingdoms, Talking Points Memo, EurasiaNet, Houston Chronicle, Jamestown, Moscow Times, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and Business Insider, among a host of other outlets. "

http://www.caseymichel.com/