Here We Go: Fired Ukrainian Prosecutor Viktor Shokin FILES FEDERAL COMPLAINT Against Joe Biden

[easyt65]

it has everything to do with *was shokin investigating biden at the time he was told to be fired"?Thats not true... Please prove it with evidence...Why are ye backing a well known corrupt person...

Actually you need to catch up on your reading, too. The fact that the prosecutor has already stated an investigation was underway and he was going to call Hunter Biden to answer questions soon was posted in another forum with links.

According to Dems and snowflakes, withholding lethal aid from a valuable ally is Impeachable.
- President Obama is the only one who did that

According to Dems and snowflakes, withholding money from a PM unless he does what is demanded of him is bribery / extortion
- Biden is the only one who has confessed to that

Democrats have accused Trump of this but have no crime, no evidence, no witness, and no videotaped confession from Trump as Biden provided.

The refusal to accept reality has grown into a disease more brain-destroying than the Coronavirus....

If only it were really terminal we could rid ourselves of a lot of self-inflicted stupid people.

 

[MacTheKnife]

You mean like you avoid actually addressing the facts?

Speaking of avoiding facts. The facts have been addressed numerous times....by those who can handle them. Others, lime you either avoid them or keep asking for them over and over, refusing to accept them every time.

The facts have been addressed multiple times.

The fact is that Joe Biden openly pressured the Ukraine to fire Shokin as part of official American foreign policy- with the support the IMF, the EU and Ukrainian watchdog groups.
The fact is that you Trumpkins have yet to find any evidence to support any of your claims of corruption by Joe Biden- yet you continue to claim he is guilty.
The fact is that Trump made a secret call to the government of Ukraine asking them to investigate his political rival- not corruption, not anyone else- just two people named Biden.
The fact is that Trump had his personal attorney secretly pressuring the government of Ukraine to make a public announcement of an investigation into the Bidens.
The fact is that Trump never made a formal written request for Ukraine to investigate the Biden's or Burisma.

Yeah the facts have been addressed several times. You Trumpskies just ignore the facts and continue parroting Trump's smear campaign.

A secret call????? bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa there were about 50 people listening in on that call and Trump knew it.


If Trump had any sinister motive do you think he would have committed it in front of such an audience?

Also boyo...the President is the one who sets official foreign policy.

Donald Trump, the president of the United States, behaved as any innocent man would, behave having been framed by fabricated propaganda prepared by foreign intelligence agents and paid for by his political enemies.

He behaved as any innocent man might when prosecutors hounding him were enabled and appointed by his political enemies. He behaved as any innocent man might when he realized that his prosecutors included the chief counsel of the Clinton Family Foundation and Barack Obama's deputy assistant attorney general and that the chief witness against him was represented by Hillary Clinton's longstandin

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/04/what_trump_is_guilty_of.html

 

[easyt65]

It is truly telling as well that in a thread that has nothing to do with President Trump all snowflakes want to do is hijack the thread and accuse / blame Trump.

The thread topic, again, is how the former Ukraine Prosecutor has filed a complaint against former President Biden, who bragged on videotape about how he extorted the previous Ukraine PM into firing the Ukraine PM.


'B....b....but TRUMP....'

Pathetic snowflakes....anything to deflect from the their admittedly criminal 2020 hopeful...



.

 

[easyt65]

You really got him now.....version 1026

...useless comment 1Mil+....poor snowflake....

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Joe Biden made the remarks during a meeting of foreign policy specialists. Biden said he, “Threatened Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in March 2016 that the Obama administration would pull $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, sending the former Soviet republic toward insolvency, if it didn’t immediately fire Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.” Biden suggested during his talk that Barack Obama was in on the threat.

Joe Biden and Democrats have then gone out on an international smear campaign to destroy Viktor Shokin’s education.

On Tuesday fired Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin filed an official complaint against Joe Biden for interference in Ukraine’s legal proceedings.

French news Les Crisis reported:

Today we present you this exclusive document: the complaint of former Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin against Joe Biden for interference in the legal proceedings of Ukraine – which incidentally cites our UkraineGate investigation …

And Biden was kind enough to give the following videotaped confession of extorting the former Ukraine PM into firing Shokin, which will be more than enough evidence to prove Shokin's case against Biden.....







Thanks, Joe!




BREAKING: Fired Ukrainian Prosecutor Viktor Shokin FILES FEDERAL COMPLAINT Against Joe Biden

You really got him now.....version 1026

 

[dudmuck]

Shokin is obviously a Russian asset trying to influence the 2020 election.

I love it. Some good news for a change.

Shokin was the Ukrainian prosecutor Biden had them fire to protect his son's cash cow job at Burisma.

complete nonsense,
“Shokin was fired because he attacked the reformers within the prosecutor general’s office,” Kaleniuk said, “reformers who tried to investigate corrupt prosecutors.”

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You really got him now.....version 1026

...useless comment 1Mil+....poor snowflake....

another bookmarked thread so I can bring it up in 6 months and laugh in your face again.

 

[CowboyTed]

You mean like you avoid actually addressing the facts?

Speaking of avoiding facts. The facts have been addressed numerous times....by those who can handle them. Others, lime you either avoid them or keep asking for them over and over, refusing to accept them every time.

could you post the facts with actual evidence...

Gateway Pundit is your wank mag not a serious site..

Bwuhahahahsahhh, my 2nd favorite desperate snowflake tactic - attempting to discredit the source when they have nothing to oppose what is being reported.

I love the smell of snowflake desperation...

Are you saying Gateway Pundit is credible?
The Gateway Pundit - Media Bias/Fact Check

Will the spate of lawsuits against fringe media stop the flow of conspiracy theories?

You see you don't see through the fog of these sites... They rely on you being too interested in your wanking that you realise that you are the one getting fucked...

 

[yidnar]

Joe Biden made the remarks during a meeting of foreign policy specialists. Biden said he, “Threatened Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in March 2016 that the Obama administration would pull $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, sending the former Soviet republic toward insolvency, if it didn’t immediately fire Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.” Biden suggested during his talk that Barack Obama was in on the threat.

Joe Biden and Democrats have then gone out on an international smear campaign to destroy Viktor Shokin’s education.

On Tuesday fired Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin filed an official complaint against Joe Biden for interference in Ukraine’s legal proceedings.

French news Les Crisis reported:

Today we present you this exclusive document: the complaint of former Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin against Joe Biden for interference in the legal proceedings of Ukraine – which incidentally cites our UkraineGate investigation …

And Biden was kind enough to give the following videotaped confession of extorting the former Ukraine PM into firing Shokin, which will be more than enough evidence to prove Shokin's case against Biden.....







Thanks, Joe!




BREAKING: Fired Ukrainian Prosecutor Viktor Shokin FILES FEDERAL COMPLAINT Against Joe Biden

Donald Trump still faces dozens of ongoing lawsuits, investigations after his impeachment trial
Great, so you feel having complaints against you filed is disqualifying? Or does that only apply to Democrats?

It means if Biden becomes president, we impeach him.

if we hold Biden to the incredibly low standard the left is holding against Trump he will be carted off to prison within minutes of taking the oath of office ...democrats are scum!

 

[forkup]

It is truly telling as well that in a thread that has nothing to do with President Trump all snowflakes want to do is hijack the thread and accuse / blame Trump.

The thread topic, again, is how the former Ukraine Prosecutor has filed a complaint against former President Biden, who bragged on videotape about how he extorted the previous Ukraine PM into firing the Ukraine PM.


'B....b....but TRUMP....'

Pathetic snowflakes....anything to deflect from the their admittedly criminal 2020 hopeful...



.

I fully addressed the premise of the OP.

 

[MacTheKnife]

You mean like you avoid actually addressing the facts?

Speaking of avoiding facts. The facts have been addressed numerous times....by those who can handle them. Others, lime you either avoid them or keep asking for them over and over, refusing to accept them every time.

could you post the facts with actual evidence...

Gateway Pundit is your wank mag not a serious site..

Bwuhahahahsahhh, my 2nd favorite desperate snowflake tactic - attempting to discredit the source when they have nothing to oppose what is being reported.

I love the smell of snowflake desperation...

Are you saying Gateway Pundit is credible?
The Gateway Pundit - Media Bias/Fact Check

Will the spate of lawsuits against fringe media stop the flow of conspiracy theories?

You see you don't see through the fog of these sites... They rely on you being too interested in your wanking that you realise that you are the one getting fucked...

The gateway pundit is more credible than the NYTimes...and btw media fact check is a biased liberal source....get real.

Search | Media Matters for America
headlines-and-tweets-2019

so many libtards want to believe the fake news whilst rejecting the truth....and so it goes.

The Gateway Pundit - Where Hope Finally Made a Comeback

 

[iceberg]

Joe Biden made the remarks during a meeting of foreign policy specialists. Biden said he, “Threatened Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in March 2016 that the Obama administration would pull $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, sending the former Soviet republic toward insolvency, if it didn’t immediately fire Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.” Biden suggested during his talk that Barack Obama was in on the threat.

Joe Biden and Democrats have then gone out on an international smear campaign to destroy Viktor Shokin’s education.

On Tuesday fired Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin filed an official complaint against Joe Biden for interference in Ukraine’s legal proceedings.

French news Les Crisis reported:

Today we present you this exclusive document: the complaint of former Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin against Joe Biden for interference in the legal proceedings of Ukraine – which incidentally cites our UkraineGate investigation …

And Biden was kind enough to give the following videotaped confession of extorting the former Ukraine PM into firing Shokin, which will be more than enough evidence to prove Shokin's case against Biden.....







Thanks, Joe!




BREAKING: Fired Ukrainian Prosecutor Viktor Shokin FILES FEDERAL COMPLAINT Against Joe Biden

Donald Trump still faces dozens of ongoing lawsuits, investigations after his impeachment trial
Great, so you feel having complaints against you filed is disqualifying? Or does that only apply to Democrats?

sideshow bob makes an appearance. this has nothing to do with complaints being filed.

it has everything to do with *was shokin investigating biden at the time he was told to be fired"?

if so - you can't get more (excuse me while i borrow the dems favorite term) quid pro quo than that.

so - does quid pro quo only apply to trump or are you also willing to apply it to biden if it fits?

back to you.

Nope, it applies to everybody. If you can in any way prove that that quid pro quo had corrupt intent it is by itself impeachable.

Most things in life are a quid pro quo. If I go to a store and buy something I give money in exchange for goods for instance. On the other hand, if I tell you to rob a store or I'll kill your wife that has corrupt intent. To put it simply. For you to try to draw an equivalency here you need to be able to assert that the motive for Shokins firing was corrupt.

So let's do this. What was the intent of the firing that was corrupt and be specific please. What do you figure the person Biden stood to gain from this firing? Did he have the means to assert pressure and the opportunity to do so? Method, motive and opportunity.

Not gonna rehash.

But it is worth Trump looking into. Anything else is speculation.

It seems a theme among the right actually that when asked to be specific they fail always to do so. And no it's not speculation at all. Things like what, when, and how something happened are in the public realm, and with what is available in the public realm it is clear that accusing Joe Biden of corrupt intent makes objectively no sense.

Nepotism isn't corrupt, luckily for Trump I would say. It might be unethical but there is a difference.

Yea. The left would never do that.

Like when I ask what Mueller found to make collusion real...

... I get "it's in the report"

Or what specific evidence shows Trump's intent to warrant impeachment, I get "read the testimony"

So to be clear... Fuck off.

 

[forkup]

Donald Trump still faces dozens of ongoing lawsuits, investigations after his impeachment trial
Great, so you feel having complaints against you filed is disqualifying? Or does that only apply to Democrats?

sideshow bob makes an appearance. this has nothing to do with complaints being filed.

it has everything to do with *was shokin investigating biden at the time he was told to be fired"?

if so - you can't get more (excuse me while i borrow the dems favorite term) quid pro quo than that.

so - does quid pro quo only apply to trump or are you also willing to apply it to biden if it fits?

back to you.

Nope, it applies to everybody. If you can in any way prove that that quid pro quo had corrupt intent it is by itself impeachable.

Most things in life are a quid pro quo. If I go to a store and buy something I give money in exchange for goods for instance. On the other hand, if I tell you to rob a store or I'll kill your wife that has corrupt intent. To put it simply. For you to try to draw an equivalency here you need to be able to assert that the motive for Shokins firing was corrupt.

So let's do this. What was the intent of the firing that was corrupt and be specific please. What do you figure the person Biden stood to gain from this firing? Did he have the means to assert pressure and the opportunity to do so? Method, motive and opportunity.

Not gonna rehash.

But it is worth Trump looking into. Anything else is speculation.

It seems a theme among the right actually that when asked to be specific they fail always to do so. And no it's not speculation at all. Things like what, when, and how something happened are in the public realm, and with what is available in the public realm it is clear that accusing Joe Biden of corrupt intent makes objectively no sense.

Nepotism isn't corrupt, luckily for Trump I would say. It might be unethical but there is a difference.

Yea. The left would never do that.

Like when I ask what Mueller found to make collusion real...

... I get "it's in the report"

Or what specific evidence shows Trump's intent to warrant impeachment, I get "read the testimony"

So to be clear... Fuck off.

Collusion was real. In his report, Mueller found contacts between the Trump campaign and the Russians. What he couldn't find was enough evidence to conclude that that collusion rose to the level of criminal conspiracy which is his job.

a] statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts.” In fact, Mueller also wrote that the “investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts.”

Mueller found that Trump campaign members Donald Trump Jr., Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner met with Russian nationals in Trump Tower in New York June 2016 for the purpose of receiving disparaging information about Clinton as part of “Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump,” according to an email message arranging the meeting. This meeting did not amount to a criminal offense, in part, because Mueller was unable to establish “willfulness,” that is, that the participants knew that their conduct was illegal. Mueller was also unable to conclude that the information was a “thing of value” that exceeded $25,000, the requirement for campaign finance to be a felony, as opposed to a civil violation of law.

These 11 Mueller Report Myths Just Won’t Die

I have posted in this thread. Highlights from several witnesses that establishes Trump's intent. Most notably Sondlands' and Holmes' on page 2 if you care to look. Just because you refuse to accept it as such doesn't mean it wasn't provided. This is what I was talking about. I'm someone who nearly always answers questions asked by the people I talk to. I don't evade or ignore it. This makes me an extreme minority in this place. When I ask someone like you a question though what I get is some reasoning why you don't answer. That is also a fact.

 

[iceberg]

sideshow bob makes an appearance. this has nothing to do with complaints being filed.

it has everything to do with *was shokin investigating biden at the time he was told to be fired"?

if so - you can't get more (excuse me while i borrow the dems favorite term) quid pro quo than that.

so - does quid pro quo only apply to trump or are you also willing to apply it to biden if it fits?

back to you.

Nope, it applies to everybody. If you can in any way prove that that quid pro quo had corrupt intent it is by itself impeachable.

Most things in life are a quid pro quo. If I go to a store and buy something I give money in exchange for goods for instance. On the other hand, if I tell you to rob a store or I'll kill your wife that has corrupt intent. To put it simply. For you to try to draw an equivalency here you need to be able to assert that the motive for Shokins firing was corrupt.

So let's do this. What was the intent of the firing that was corrupt and be specific please. What do you figure the person Biden stood to gain from this firing? Did he have the means to assert pressure and the opportunity to do so? Method, motive and opportunity.

Not gonna rehash.

But it is worth Trump looking into. Anything else is speculation.

It seems a theme among the right actually that when asked to be specific they fail always to do so. And no it's not speculation at all. Things like what, when, and how something happened are in the public realm, and with what is available in the public realm it is clear that accusing Joe Biden of corrupt intent makes objectively no sense.

Nepotism isn't corrupt, luckily for Trump I would say. It might be unethical but there is a difference.

Yea. The left would never do that.

Like when I ask what Mueller found to make collusion real...

... I get "it's in the report"

Or what specific evidence shows Trump's intent to warrant impeachment, I get "read the testimony"

So to be clear... Fuck off.

Collusion was real. In his report, Mueller found contacts between the Trump campaign and the Russians. What he couldn't find was enough evidence to conclude that that collusion rose to the level of criminal conspiracy which is his job.

a] statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts.” In fact, Mueller also wrote that the “investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts.”

Mueller found that Trump campaign members Donald Trump Jr., Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner met with Russian nationals in Trump Tower in New York June 2016 for the purpose of receiving disparaging information about Clinton as part of “Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump,” according to an email message arranging the meeting. This meeting did not amount to a criminal offense, in part, because Mueller was unable to establish “willfulness,” that is, that the participants knew that their conduct was illegal. Mueller was also unable to conclude that the information was a “thing of value” that exceeded $25,000, the requirement for campaign finance to be a felony, as opposed to a civil violation of law.

These 11 Mueller Report Myths Just Won’t Die

I have posted in this thread. Highlights from several witnesses that establishes Trump's intent. Most notably Sondlands' and Holmes' on page 2 if you care to look. Just because you refuse to accept it as such doesn't mean it wasn't provided. This is what I was talking about. I'm someone who nearly always answers questions asked by the people I talk to. I don't evade or ignore it. This makes me an extreme minority in this place. When I ask someone like you a question though what I get is some reasoning why you don't answer. That is also a fact.

You are an idiot.

fact.

 

[forkup]

Nope, it applies to everybody. If you can in any way prove that that quid pro quo had corrupt intent it is by itself impeachable.

Most things in life are a quid pro quo. If I go to a store and buy something I give money in exchange for goods for instance. On the other hand, if I tell you to rob a store or I'll kill your wife that has corrupt intent. To put it simply. For you to try to draw an equivalency here you need to be able to assert that the motive for Shokins firing was corrupt.

So let's do this. What was the intent of the firing that was corrupt and be specific please. What do you figure the person Biden stood to gain from this firing? Did he have the means to assert pressure and the opportunity to do so? Method, motive and opportunity.

Not gonna rehash.

But it is worth Trump looking into. Anything else is speculation.

It seems a theme among the right actually that when asked to be specific they fail always to do so. And no it's not speculation at all. Things like what, when, and how something happened are in the public realm, and with what is available in the public realm it is clear that accusing Joe Biden of corrupt intent makes objectively no sense.

Nepotism isn't corrupt, luckily for Trump I would say. It might be unethical but there is a difference.

Yea. The left would never do that.

Like when I ask what Mueller found to make collusion real...

... I get "it's in the report"

Or what specific evidence shows Trump's intent to warrant impeachment, I get "read the testimony"

So to be clear... Fuck off.

Collusion was real. In his report, Mueller found contacts between the Trump campaign and the Russians. What he couldn't find was enough evidence to conclude that that collusion rose to the level of criminal conspiracy which is his job.

a] statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts.” In fact, Mueller also wrote that the “investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts.”

Mueller found that Trump campaign members Donald Trump Jr., Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner met with Russian nationals in Trump Tower in New York June 2016 for the purpose of receiving disparaging information about Clinton as part of “Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump,” according to an email message arranging the meeting. This meeting did not amount to a criminal offense, in part, because Mueller was unable to establish “willfulness,” that is, that the participants knew that their conduct was illegal. Mueller was also unable to conclude that the information was a “thing of value” that exceeded $25,000, the requirement for campaign finance to be a felony, as opposed to a civil violation of law.

These 11 Mueller Report Myths Just Won’t Die

I have posted in this thread. Highlights from several witnesses that establishes Trump's intent. Most notably Sondlands' and Holmes' on page 2 if you care to look. Just because you refuse to accept it as such doesn't mean it wasn't provided. This is what I was talking about. I'm someone who nearly always answers questions asked by the people I talk to. I don't evade or ignore it. This makes me an extreme minority in this place. When I ask someone like you a question though what I get is some reasoning why you don't answer. That is also a fact.

You are an idiot.

fact.

The last resort of those who have nothing to contribute... name-calling. See you around iceberg.

 

[iceberg]

Not gonna rehash.

But it is worth Trump looking into. Anything else is speculation.

It seems a theme among the right actually that when asked to be specific they fail always to do so. And no it's not speculation at all. Things like what, when, and how something happened are in the public realm, and with what is available in the public realm it is clear that accusing Joe Biden of corrupt intent makes objectively no sense.

Nepotism isn't corrupt, luckily for Trump I would say. It might be unethical but there is a difference.

Yea. The left would never do that.

Like when I ask what Mueller found to make collusion real...

... I get "it's in the report"

Or what specific evidence shows Trump's intent to warrant impeachment, I get "read the testimony"

So to be clear... Fuck off.

Collusion was real. In his report, Mueller found contacts between the Trump campaign and the Russians. What he couldn't find was enough evidence to conclude that that collusion rose to the level of criminal conspiracy which is his job.

a] statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts.” In fact, Mueller also wrote that the “investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts.”

Mueller found that Trump campaign members Donald Trump Jr., Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner met with Russian nationals in Trump Tower in New York June 2016 for the purpose of receiving disparaging information about Clinton as part of “Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump,” according to an email message arranging the meeting. This meeting did not amount to a criminal offense, in part, because Mueller was unable to establish “willfulness,” that is, that the participants knew that their conduct was illegal. Mueller was also unable to conclude that the information was a “thing of value” that exceeded $25,000, the requirement for campaign finance to be a felony, as opposed to a civil violation of law.

These 11 Mueller Report Myths Just Won’t Die

I have posted in this thread. Highlights from several witnesses that establishes Trump's intent. Most notably Sondlands' and Holmes' on page 2 if you care to look. Just because you refuse to accept it as such doesn't mean it wasn't provided. This is what I was talking about. I'm someone who nearly always answers questions asked by the people I talk to. I don't evade or ignore it. This makes me an extreme minority in this place. When I ask someone like you a question though what I get is some reasoning why you don't answer. That is also a fact.

You are an idiot.

fact.

The last resort of those who have nothing to contribute... name-calling. See you around iceberg.

gosh. someone who believe mueller found collusion that the democratic party ignored while they chase unicorns doesn't want to talk to me anymore.

gonna be hard to get happy after that.