Hunter Biden’s Ukraine gas firm pressed Obama administration to end corruption allegations

Hunter Biden’s Ukraine gas firm pressed Obama administration to end corruption allegations, memos show | John Solomon Reports

Hunter Biden’s name, in fact, was specifically invoked by the Burisma representative as a reason the State Department should help, according to a series of email exchanges among U.S. officials trying to arrange the meeting. The subject line for the email exchanges read simply “Burisma.”

“Per our conversation, Karen Tramontano of Blue Star Strategies requested a meeting to discuss with U/S Novelli USG remarks alleging Burisma (Ukrainian energy company) of corruption,” a Feb. 24, 2016, email between State officials read. “She noted that two high profile U.S. citizens are affiliated with the company (including Hunter Biden as a board member).

Click to expand...

But the records do indicate that Hunter Biden’s fellow American board member at Burisma, Devon Archer, secured a meeting on March 2, 2016 with Secretary of State John Kerry. In addition to serving on the Burisma board, Archer and Hunter Biden were partners at an American firm known as Rosemont Seneca.

“Devon Archer coming to see S today at 3pm – need someone to meet/greet him at C Street,” an email from Kerry’s office manager reads. “S” is a shorthand frequently used in State emails to describe the Secretary of State. The memos don’t state the reason for the meeting.

Tramontano, a lawyer for Hunter Biden, Archer and Joe Biden’s campaign did not return messages seeking comment on Monday.

In an interview with ABC News last month, Hunter Biden said he believed he had done “nothing wrong at all” while working with Burisma but “was it poor judgment to be in the middle of something that is…a swamp in — in — in many ways? Yeah.”

Whatever the subject of the Archer-Kerry meeting, its existence is certain to spark interest. That’s because Secretary Kerry’s stepson, Christopher Heinz, had been a business partner with both Archer and Hunter Biden at the Rosemont Seneca investment firm in the United States.

Click to expand...

A few weeks after this plea by Bursima to the US state department, Ukraine spiked the investigation and fired Shokin.

It seems like the friends and relatives of a lot of Democrats just happened to be deeply involved in Bursima in one fashion or another... and they all had access to the Administration.

Everyone knows that when a foreign company hires the US VP's son that they are no longer corrupt.

Solomon's bombshell last night was damning for the Bidens, and members of the Obama administration especially the State Department. And isn't it rather ironic that from the whistleblower to the ambassador to Ukraine and Lt Col Vindman in which two have given testimony in Schiff's kangaroo court are all holdovers from the Obama administration that all worked on all things Ukraine and were very much a part of all policies during the Obama years. And the way it is stacking up those policies were corrupt.

jmotivator said:

Hunter Biden’s Ukraine gas firm pressed Obama administration to end corruption allegations, memos show | John Solomon Reports







A few weeks after this plea by Bursima to the US state department, Ukraine spiked the investigation and fired Shokin.

It seems like the friends and relatives of a lot of Democrats just happened to be deeply involved in Bursima in one fashion or another... and they all had access to the Administration.

Click to expand...

I just posted the original email to Obama's State Dept. on another thread.
And you don't have to imagine that the words mean something other than what's written or read anyone's mind in order to understand.

jmotivator said:

Hunter Biden’s Ukraine gas firm pressed Obama administration to end corruption allegations, memos show | John Solomon Reports







A few weeks after this plea by Bursima to the US state department, Ukraine spiked the investigation and fired Shokin.

It seems like the friends and relatives of a lot of Democrats just happened to be deeply involved in Bursima in one fashion or another... and they all had access to the Administration.

Click to expand...

That's not true. The investigation was in a drawer, like it had been for a couple of years. There was no investigation to spike, and Shokin had a history of NOT prosecuting Burisma and the owner, which is one reason why the UK was on board with firing his corrupt rear end.

JasperL said:

That's not true. The investigation was in a drawer, like it had been for a couple of years. There was no investigation to spike, and Shokin had a history of NOT prosecuting Burisma and the owner, which is one reason why the UK was on board with firing his corrupt rear end.

Click to expand...

From the story:

Just three weeks before Burisma's overture to State, Ukrainian authorities raided the home of the oligarch who owned the gas firm and employed Hunter Biden, a signal the long-running corruption probe was escalating in the middle of the U.S. presidential election.

Click to expand...

Your narrative is false. Care to rephrase?

JasperL said:

That's not true. The investigation was in a drawer, like it had been for a couple of years. There was no investigation to spike, and Shokin had a history of NOT prosecuting Burisma and the owner, which is one reason why the UK was on board with firing his corrupt rear end.

Click to expand...

Biden's threat to withhold funding unless the investigation was spiked was in December 2015 and the investigation was then shelved, two months later Bursima contacted the State Department requesting help getting investigation closed, dropping Hunter Biden's name in the request, and a few weeks later Shokin was fired and the investigation was closed.

Compare that to what you think you are reading between the lines in the Whistleblower complaint... AND consider that the Whistleblower worked with Biden when he suddenly got worried about Trump's interest in the Biden-Bursima connection.

Face it, like biting on the Russian propaganda campaign in the Steele Dossier, once again you have thrown in with the actual corrupt party in a manufactured scandal.

bubbabgone said:

I just posted the original email to Obama's State Dept. on another thread.
And you don't have to imagine that the words mean something other than what's written or read anyone's mind in order to understand.

Click to expand...

I saw an interesting take on this manufactured scandal... essentially the thought was that this narrative was built by the whistleblower and the parade of Democrat informants to gather whistleblower protection before the Russia investigation report is released. The theory is that the assumed whistleblower will also be named as a leak source to the media of Trump/Russia collusion lies since he worked for Brennan.

You also have to love how oblivious the media is. The Washington post printed a glowing defense of Vindman saying that he came forward when he became worried that Trump's discussions with the Ukrainian president might "undermine US foreign policy" ... let that nonsense sink in.

jmotivator said:

Biden's threat to withhold funding unless the investigation was spiked was in December 2015 and the investigation was then shelved, two months later Bursima contacted the State Department requesting help getting investigation closed, dropping Hunter Biden's name in the request, and a few weeks later Shokin was fired and the investigation was closed.

Compare that to what you think you are reading between the lines in the Whistleblower complaint... AND consider that the Whistleblower worked with Biden when he suddenly got worried about Trump's interest in the Biden-Bursima connection.

Face it, like biting on the Russian propaganda campaign in the Steele Dossier, once again you have thrown in with the actual corrupt party in a manufactured scandal.

Click to expand...

The threat was to withhold funding unless a corrupt prosecutor was fired. Quit lying.

OpportunityCost said:

From the story:

Your narrative is false. Care to rephrase?

Click to expand...

I don't read stuff from John Solomon. He's a hack and he's willing to push lies to serve whatever agenda he's serving, and I don't know what that is. There's a reason why The Hill first demoted him from 'news' to 'opinion' then fired him and he's self publishing his crap now. If you read the ambassador's transcript you know he's the one who pushed the lie about her having a 'do not prosecute' list, among other stuff he's published that's crap. So he gets no click from me.

But taking the facts as alleged, there's no evidence when Biden called for his firing that Shokin was actively investigating Burisma or the owner. That call happened in December 2015, and Shokin's reported seizure of assets was months later after roughly the entire western community, Ukraine's lifeline, had targeted Shokin as a corrupt protector of the thugs.

Is the story that Biden anticipated Shokin, after his job was threatened, would then reopen the case against Burisma, which is why Biden threatened him, to prompt that investigation into his son's firm? Sounds kind of dumb to me.

jmotivator said:

Biden's threat to withhold funding unless the investigation was spiked was in December 2015 and the investigation was then shelved,

Click to expand...

I'll stop you there, because it's false.

Here's some ACTUAL reporting by Bloomberg, for example:

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

In a December 2014 letter, U.S. officials warned Ukrainian prosecutors of negative consequences for Ukraine over its failure to assist the U.K., which had seized Zlochevsky’s assets, according to the documents.

Those funds, $23.5 million, were unblocked in 2015 when a British court determined there wasn’t enough evidence to justify the continued freeze, in part because Ukrainian prosecutors [Shokin was lead] had failed to provide the necessary information.
...
Shokin became prosecutor general in February 2015. Over the next year, the U.S. and the International Monetary Fund criticized officials for not doing enough to fight corruption in Ukraine.

Shokin took no action to pursue cases against Zlochevsky throughout 2015,

Click to expand...

Here's the U.S. ambassador on Sept 24, 2015 calling out Shokin's failure to prosecute Zlochevsky (Burisma's owner).

"//https://m.facebook.com/usdos.ukraine/posts/10153248488506936"

Note that I had to butcher the IRL so it didn't post a WALL of text of the whole speech, but the link starts at https:

It's weird how the U.S., and UK and IMF and others wanted Shokin fired, and said so in public remarks for NOT investigating Burisma and Zlochevsky, then just two months later, Biden wants him fired to stop an investigation that didn't exist and that the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine had called Shokin out in public for NOT DOING.

This kind of crap is why no one should read Solomon. If he was interested in the truth, he'd at least have to confront and explain these obvious contradictions, but he's a hack pushing someone unknown's agenda, and is willing to promote liars and thugs to do it, like Shokin and others.

jmotivator said:

I saw an interesting take on this manufactured scandal... essentially the thought was that this narrative was built by the whistleblower and the parade of Democrat informants to gather whistleblower protection before the Russia investigation report is released. The theory is that the assumed whistleblower will also be named as a leak source to the media of Trump/Russia collusion lies since he worked for Brennan.

You also have to love how oblivious the media is. The Washington post printed a glowing defense of Vindman saying that he came forward when he became worried that Trump's discussions with the Ukrainian president might "undermine US foreign policy" ... let that nonsense sink in.

Click to expand...

I know, right.
If a President didn't make decisions hostile to the preferred foreign policy of those not currently in power there wouldn't be a problem.
Now expand that concept to matters not involving foreign policy and you have the reasons for a lot of what's going on.
The Resistance can be found well outside of those who were elected.

JasperL said:

That's not true. The investigation was in a drawer, like it had been for a couple of years. There was no investigation to spike, and Shokin had a history of NOT prosecuting Burisma and the owner, which is one reason why the UK was on board with firing his corrupt rear end.

Click to expand...

Y'all lies are getting exposed.

JasperL said:

I'll stop you there, because it's false.

Here's some ACTUAL reporting by Bloomberg, for example:

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?



Here's the U.S. ambassador on Sept 24, 2015 calling out Shokin's failure to prosecute Zlochevsky (Burisma's owner).

"//https://m.facebook.com/usdos.ukraine/posts/10153248488506936"

Note that I had to butcher the IRL so it didn't post a WALL of text of the whole speech, but the link starts at https:

It's weird how the U.S., and UK and IMF and others wanted Shokin fired, and said so in public remarks for NOT investigating Burisma and Zlochevsky, then just two months later, Biden wants him fired to stop an investigation that didn't exist and that the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine had called Shokin out in public for NOT DOING.

This kind of crap is why no one should read Solomon. If he was interested in the truth, he'd at least have to confront and explain these obvious contradictions, but he's a hack pushing someone unknown's agenda, and is willing to promote liars and thugs to do it, like Shokin and others.

Click to expand...

Nothing in that stated that they wanted BURSIMA investigated. And regardless, Bursima had a channel to the State Department in 2016 regardless or what the US Ukraine ambassador said in a Facebook post in 2015, and soon after there name drop, Shokin was fired. Tell me, how did Biden's choice for that position do in their investigation of Bursima? :roll:

jmotivator said:

I saw an interesting take on this manufactured scandal... essentially the thought was that this narrative was built by the whistleblower and the parade of Democrat informants to gather whistleblower protection before the Russia investigation report is released. The theory is that the assumed whistleblower will also be named as a leak source to the media of Trump/Russia collusion lies since he worked for Brennan.

You also have to love how oblivious the media is. The Washington post printed a glowing defense of Vindman saying that he came forward when he became worried that Trump's discussions with the Ukrainian president might "undermine US foreign policy" ... let that nonsense sink in.

Click to expand...

The sad part, is that the TDS'ers will fall for that ****...lol.

jmotivator said:

Nothing in that stated that they wanted BURSIMA investigated. And regardless, Bursima had a channel to the State Department in 2016 regardless or what the US Ukraine ambassador said in a Facebook post in 2015, and soon after there name drop, Shokin was fired. Tell me, how did Biden's choice for that position do in their investigation of Bursima? :roll:

Click to expand...

The speech by the Ambassador specifically names Zlochevsky and Shokin's failure to cooperate with the UK inquiry. If you don't want to read it, I can't make you but you don't get to pretend that it's not in the speech. If you want I'll cite the entire thing.

And the pressure to fire Shokin had been constant for MONTHS by the time the legislature there finally got around to it. You're attributing cause and effect to the lobbying efforts, and ignoring a very, very, very public campaign by the UK, U.S. State, our Ambassador, IMF, reformers in Ukraine and others to get rid of Shokin.

Again, this is why no one should every click on a John Solomon link, because this kind of half truth is his strategy. If you want to assert it was the lobbyist who got Shokin removed, you at least have to ACKNOWLEDGE all the rest that went on for months before that having nothing to do with the lobbyist.

apdst said:

The sad part, is that the TDS'ers will fall for that ****...lol.

Click to expand...

Every single time.

JasperL said:

The speech by the Ambassador specifically names Zlochevsky and Shokin's failure to cooperate with the UK inquiry. If you don't want to read it, I can't make you but you don't get to pretend that it's not in the speech. If you want I'll cite the entire thing.

Click to expand...

I did read it. In fact he has stated incorrectly what transpired. Here is a Ukraine story that goes into greater detail. Essentially the issue with the UK was trying to prosecute Zlochevsky for corruption when he was employed as Ukraine's Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources when the Ukraine had not reached the point where they were prosecuting Zlochevsky. At that point the PGO was prosecuting the aco****ing firm used by Bursima on a $180 million fraud.

I mean, think for a second what the Democrats are feeding you as a defense: Joe Biden corruption bashing in the Ukraine with claims of quid pro quo with US funds is OK even when it directly involves his son... but Trump corruption bashing in the Ukraine with no clear demand of quid pro quo with US funding is bad because it might involve Joe Biden? If the root of Trump's crime is a possible quid pro quo using US funds then the obvious root of Trump's interest in the Biden case is the clear boasting by Joe Biden of a quid pro quo deal using US funds.

And the pressure to fire Shokin had been constant for MONTHS by the time the legislature there finally got around to it. You're attributing cause and effect to the lobbying efforts, and ignoring a very, very, very public campaign by the UK, U.S. State, our Ambassador, IMF, reformers in Ukraine and others to get rid of Shokin.

Click to expand...

Well sure, by Biden's own words he had been threaten Ukraine with withholding funding for at least three months before they fired him.

I'll ask again: Since you seem to want to accept Biden's claim that he cleaned up the PGO with his threat to withhold funding, and getting his preferred prosecutor in the position, how did that Bursima case turn out? :roll:

You can't have it both ways. You want to claim Biden had, what, justification (?) for railing against Shokin for sitting on the Bursima case when, in the end, Joe's guy dropped the Bursima case? And through ALL of this ongoing years of corruption there is Hunter Biden working for Bursima.

Again, this is why no one should every click on a John Solomon link, because this kind of half truth is his strategy. If you want to assert it was the lobbyist who got Shokin removed, you at least have to ACKNOWLEDGE all the rest that went on for months before that having nothing to do with the lobbyist.

Click to expand...

Actually, you are the one dealing in half truths. You are trying to erase half of the story by hand waving and presenting one facebook post by the US ambassador to Ukraine as if it undoes what Biden admitted to doing.

jmotivator said:

I did read it. In fact he has stated incorrectly what transpired. Here is a Ukraine story that goes into greater detail. Essentially the issue with the UK was trying to prosecute Zlochevsky for corruption when he was employed as Ukraine's Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources when the Ukraine had not reached the point where they were prosecuting Zlochevsky. At that point the PGO was prosecuting the aco****ing firm used by Bursima on a $180 million fraud.

I mean, think for a second what the Democrats are feeding you as a defense: Joe Biden corruption bashing in the Ukraine with claims of quid pro quo with US funds is OK even when it directly involves his son... but Trump corruption bashing in the Ukraine with no clear demand of quid pro quo with US funding is bad because it might involve Joe Biden? If the root of Trump's crime is a possible quid pro quo using US funds then the obvious root of Trump's interest in the Biden case is the clear boasting by Joe Biden of a quid pro quo deal using US funds.



Well sure, by Biden's own words he had been threaten Ukraine with withholding funding for at least three months before they fired him.

I'll ask again: Since you seem to want to accept Biden's claim that he cleaned up the PGO with his threat to withhold funding, and getting his preferred prosecutor in the position, how did that Bursima case turn out? :roll:

You can't have it both ways. You want to claim Biden had, what, justification (?) for railing against Shokin for sitting on the Bursima case when, in the end, Joe's guy dropped the Bursima case? And through ALL of this ongoing years of corruption there is Hunter Biden working for Bursima.

Actually, you are the one dealing in half truths. You are trying to erase half of the story by hand waving and presenting one facebook post by the US ambassador to Ukraine as if it undoes what Biden admitted to doing.

Click to expand...

I'm not dealing in half truths. I've already cited actual accounts quoting from documents in the PGO that the Burisma case was deader than dead throughout 2015. There was no reason for Joe Biden to move heaven and earth to get a guy fired who, along with his predecessor, had been sitting on the Burisma case for years.

And not just Burisma - have you read about the diamond prosecutors? You should. Shokin said it was fine for his prosecutors to be caught with big stashes of diamonds. No problem. That's the guy.

Viktor Shokin: The inside story on Ukraine’s ‘very good’ prosecutor at centre of Trump scandal | The Independent

A search of the men’s apartments revealed a scene that looked like a comic heist: bags full of cash, diamonds and other precious stones. But that was not the only incriminating evidence. Documents seized at the time indicated the men appeared to have a connection to the top prosecutor in the land, Viktor Shokin.

Police found copies of Shokin’s passports, property registration certificates and even his licence to carry firearms. One of the two men, it transpired, was Shokin’s former driver who had subsequently climbed the ranks behind his boss.

For Sakvarelidze, there were clear suspicions the two men may have been carrying out the business of the chief. But his attempts to investigate were frustrated. Soon, he faced a corruption investigation himself. At loggerheads with Shokin, he was pushed out of his job within the year.

Click to expand...

Put simply, the chronology doesn’t work – the investigation into Burisma, where Hunter worked, was dormant by the time Shokin was pushed out. It would also represent a major historical anomaly. During Shokin’s 13 months in office, not one major figure was convicted. No oligarch. No politician. No ranking bureaucrat. It would appear unlikely he was in the middle of breaking the habit with the Bidens.

Click to expand...

jmotivator said:

I did read it. In fact he has stated incorrectly what transpired. Here is a Ukraine story that goes into greater detail. Essentially the issue with the UK was trying to prosecute Zlochevsky for corruption when he was employed as Ukraine's Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources when the Ukraine had not reached the point where they were prosecuting Zlochevsky. At that point the PGO was prosecuting the aco****ing firm used by Bursima on a $180 million fraud.

I mean, think for a second what the Democrats are feeding you as a defense: Joe Biden corruption bashing in the Ukraine with claims of quid pro quo with US funds is OK even when it directly involves his son... but Trump corruption bashing in the Ukraine with no clear demand of quid pro quo with US funding is bad because it might involve Joe Biden? If the root of Trump's crime is a possible quid pro quo using US funds then the obvious root of Trump's interest in the Biden case is the clear boasting by Joe Biden of a quid pro quo deal using US funds.



Well sure, by Biden's own words he had been threaten Ukraine with withholding funding for at least three months before they fired him.

I'll ask again: Since you seem to want to accept Biden's claim that he cleaned up the PGO with his threat to withhold funding, and getting his preferred prosecutor in the position, how did that Bursima case turn out? :roll:

You can't have it both ways. You want to claim Biden had, what, justification (?) for railing against Shokin for sitting on the Bursima case when, in the end, Joe's guy dropped the Bursima case? And through ALL of this ongoing years of corruption there is Hunter Biden working for Bursima.



Actually, you are the one dealing in half truths. You are trying to erase half of the story by hand waving and presenting one facebook post by the US ambassador to Ukraine as if it undoes what Biden admitted to doing.

Click to expand...

The Ukrainian onion is unpeeling, layer by layer - and the sulfurous fumes are getting thick. Whatever one thinks of alleged Trump strong-arming to investigate Biden, there is NO DOUBT that anyone rushing to defend Biden is also on shaky ground.

You are correct. The "prima facia" strong suspicion of skull-doggery is rooted in what should be obvious to knee-jerk Biden defenders - his side's cover stories don't add up.

Tracing its history ought to be sufficient.

Biden's son, and partner join the Board of Bursima.

Bursima has a "reputation" of being corrupt. Skokin, the Prosecutor, becomes a target of several in the West, including Obama and Biden, for his failure to pursue Bursima. Just everyone knows Bursima has been "corrupt" and Skokin is protecting them, they claim. That is unacceptable and they demand a greater effort.

Biden get's Skokin fired, to please Biden and the Obama Administration.

But EVER SO ODDLY, after Biden's "good guy" is appointed, the Biden interest in Bursima wanes further, and the investigations are dropped entirely . IE in the logic of critics, it is the NEW guy protects Bursima and that is just fine with Biden.

Yep Biden is happy, his son is happy, the "corrupt" Bursima is happy.

So JasperL has to at least confess this Biden cover story is transparent nonsense. JasperL can crank the siren about the UK, bullhorn aspirations about John Solomon's motivations, and throw up all the story detail chaff to obscure screen as he like's BUT one can't get away from the contradiction. EITHER Bursima and its oligarch owner were never corrupt and Skokin should have never been fired by a threat of a "quid pro quo" OR Bursima was corrupt but Biden had another purpose in mind.

So if Bursima was corrupt, then why did Joe Biden laud the replacement who also did nothing and, effectively, did what Skokin was accused of doing - you know, the guy Biden hated? There are only two possibilities: 1) Skokin's investigation actually was threatening to Bursima and Hunter so Joe stopped it for self-serving reasons or 2) Biden was a thoughtless buffoon who was more interested in showing Obama he was a tough guy and could push around Ukraine law enforcement (via threats) than in accomplishing anything moral.

Jasper's choice, no?

JasperL said:

The speech by the Ambassador specifically names Zlochevsky and Shokin's failure to cooperate with the UK inquiry. If you don't want to read it, I can't make you but you don't get to pretend that it's not in the speech. If you want I'll cite the entire thing.

And the pressure to fire Shokin had been constant for MONTHS by the time the legislature there finally got around to it. You're attributing cause and effect to the lobbying efforts, and ignoring a very, very, very public campaign by the UK, U.S. State, our Ambassador, IMF, reformers in Ukraine and others to get rid of Shokin.

Again, this is why no one should every click on a John Solomon link, because this kind of half truth is his strategy. If you want to assert it was the lobbyist who got Shokin removed, you at least have to ACKNOWLEDGE all the rest that went on for months before that having nothing to do with the lobbyist.

Click to expand...

Gee, sounds like the same strategy all the alphabet networks have been using for decades. You still rely on them for news don't you? Sure you do.

Biden Senior's influence removed the corrupt prosecutor who was not prosecuting/investigating. If that could have any effect on a guilty Hunter, it would be to increase his exposure.

Of course, Hunter isn't guilty because he didn't do anything other than accept money from a company who wrongly thought it would buy influence, something that not any one of you Trumpists have a problem with Trump's children doing.






I cannot imagine the realms of stupidity into which your defensive caterwauling will venture as more and more and more and more comes out about the disgusting lout you support as President.....all to "pwn the libtards".

OpportunityCost said:

Gee, sounds like the same strategy all the alphabet networks have been using for decades. You still rely on them for news don't you? Sure you do.

Click to expand...

Yeah, whatever. I noticed you ignored the substance to whine about FAKE NEWS!!! Predictable...

JasperL said:

Yeah, whatever. I noticed you ignored the substance to whine about FAKE NEWS!!! Predictable...

Click to expand...

The substance is Biden has a real problem. The evidence being reported says that is a genuine unequivocal FACT.

That isn't "Fake News" it is in documents being released almost daily by investigative reporters and other organizations who fought in the courts through FOIA to get them released!

The only "Fake News" involved are those not covering it.

vesper said:

The substance is Biden has a real problem. The evidence being reported says that is a genuine unequivocal FACT.

That isn't "Fake News" it is in documents being released almost daily by investigative reporters and other organizations who fought in the courts through FOIA to get them released!

The only "Fake News" involved are those not covering it.

Click to expand...

Then address the substance of my comments if I'm off base. Should be easy. Neither of you did. Weird.