Shokin!

T

Tranquillus in Exile

New member
On March 29, 2016, the Ukrainian Rada finally approved the resignation of Ukraine’s disreputable Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin. He was voted out with an overwhelming majority of 289 votes, including 114 of the 134 deputies of the Poroshenko Bloc [Shokin was Poroshenko’s man from way back].

The amazing thing is not that he was sacked but that it had taken so long. President Poroshenko appointed Shokin to the role in February 2015. From the outset, he stood out by causing great damage even to Ukraine’s substandard legal system.

Shokin skillfully blocked reform. He was in charge of implementing the 2014 law on prosecution, which the European Union had insisted on for years. This involved a reevaluation of all prosecutors with the intention of weeding out corrupt and incompetent ones. Shokin manipulated the process so that the old prosecutors remained and minimal renewal occurred. Instead, he prosecuted reformers.

For these reasons, Shokin stood out as the greatest obstacle to judicial reform in Ukraine. US Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt called for his ouster in a speech in September 2015, and Vice President Joe Biden did so explicitly during his visit in December 2015. The European Union and the International Monetary Fund also called for Shokin to go.

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blo...es-honest-deputy-before-parliament-sacks-him/


“I heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and he was shut down and that’s really unfair,” Trump told Zelensky in his famous ‘perfect’ phone call. He meant Shokin.
 
Makes you curious why they don't care about corruption in other nations that are far worse doesn't it?

I suppose Hunter never had business dealings in the Congo.
 
Why Was Ukraine's Top Prosecutor Fired?


..."Ironically, Joe Biden asked Shokin to leave because the prosecutor failed [to pursue] the Burisma investigation, not because Shokin was tough and active with this case," Kaleniuk said.

Ukrainian prosecutors have described no evidence indicating that Biden sought to help his son by getting Shokin dismissed -- and have suggested that they have not discovered any such evidence.

But there is a long list of Western organizations, governments, and diplomats, as well as Ukrainian anti-corruption groups, that wanted to see Shokin fired.

They include the International Monetary Fund, the European Union, the U.S. government, foreign investors, and Ukrainian advocates of reform....


... Anders Aslund, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council think tank in Washington, wrote that his dismissal came as no surprise.

"The amazing thing is not that he was sacked but that it has taken so long," Aslund said. "Petro Poroshenko appointed Shokin to the role in February 2015. From the outset, he stood out by causing great damage even to Ukraine's substandard legal system."...
 
evince said:
What did trump do for the Congo loser
Click to expand...

Trump never went to Ukraine to get some guy fired over corruption.

And what nation would ever withhold 1 billion in funding for a single corrupt prosecutor?

How does that make any sense?

If he was corrupt then why didn't Ukraine just fire him?

Were they too stupid too see it or something?

Of course not, the prosecutor was going to tie Hunter into illegal activity with his father in the Bribery scheme, that's why this happened.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
Makes you curious why they don't care about corruption in other nations that are far worse doesn't it?
I suppose Hunter never had business dealings in the Congo.
Click to expand...

"The Congo" wasn't seeking membership of the EU and NATO, Peach. Sadly the USG, the EU, the IMF etc. don't give a damn what "the Congo" gets up to as long as they don't export it.

A more interesting question is, why did Trump say that Shokin was "a very good prosecutor" when he obviously wasn't? I'll give you a clue: it was the same motive that governs most if not all of Trump's dealings with people. He figured he could use him. Is that guy transparent or what?
 
A better question is:

Why was this guy replaced by a thoroughly corrupt, violent drunkard, who wasn't even a lawyer and never went to law school? In a nutshell, why was Shokin replaced by what had to be the most incompetent, corrupt, and unqualified person the Ukrainians could find?
 
T. A. Gardner said:
A better question is:

Why was this guy replaced by a thoroughly corrupt, violent drunkard, who wasn't even a lawyer and never went to law school? In a nutshell, why was Shokin replaced by what had to be the most incompetent, corrupt, and unqualified person the Ukrainians could find?
Click to expand...

Probably cronyism but i i don't know.

Why did Trump put in Jared Kushner when there was no chance he could get authorized for classifications?
And so on and so on...
 
QP! said:
Probably cronyism but i i don't know.

Why did Trump put in Jared Kushner when there was no chance he could get authorized for classifications?
And so on and so on...
Click to expand...

Your whataboutism aside, If Shokin was corrupt the guy that replaced him made him look like a paragon of virtue and a saint. Yet, Biden didn't do a damn thing about that guy because he wasn't investigating shit. It sure looks like the fix was in and Joke was in on making it happen...
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Your whataboutism aside, If Shokin was corrupt the guy that replaced him made him look like a paragon of virtue and a saint. Yet, Biden didn't do a damn thing about that guy because he wasn't investigating shit. It sure looks like the fix was in and Joke was in on making it happen...
Click to expand...

It is not whataboutism but you are too dumb to understand subtleties.

If tomorrow the US and the EU and UN all demanded Putin be removed due to corruption, as a way to get rid of the sanctions on Russia that DOES NOT MEAN the person who would replace Putin would be a saint or even better than Putin.

Because Russia might put in someone as bad or worse DOES NOT MEAN that the US did not want Putin removed due to corruption.

You have no ability to apply logic to thought and as such you say things that do not connect.

It is entirely possible that while pushing for reform, something the US, EU and Biden DID NOT ultimately control in Ukraine that they went from bad to worse, That DOES NOT mean that they did not get rid of a bad apple while HOPING for a better outcome.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
Makes you curious why they don't care about corruption in other nations that are far worse doesn't it?

I suppose Hunter never had business dealings in the Congo.
Click to expand...

Can you follow a subject? You rightys are taught to deflect instead of responding to a direct question. If Trump got us into a nuclear war, you would have said "What about the laptop".
 
QP! said:
It is not whataboutism but you are too dumb to understand subtleties.

If tomorrow the US and the EU and UN all demanded Putin be removed due to corruption, as a way to get rid of the sanctions on Russia that DOES NOT MEAN the person who would replace Putin would be a saint or even better than Putin.

Because Russia might put in someone as bad or worse DOES NOT MEAN that the US did not want Putin removed due to corruption.

You have no ability to apply logic to thought and as such you say things that do not connect.

It is entirely possible that while pushing for reform, something the US, EU and Biden DID NOT ultimately control in Ukraine that they went from bad to worse, That DOES NOT mean that they did not get rid of a bad apple while HOPING for a better outcome.
Click to expand...

That is asininely stupid. First, your example is pathetic. The US, EU, and UN couldn't remove Putin, and that wasn't the case in the Ukraine. Biden was there and demanded--unilaterally I might add-- that Shokin be removed. It's clear from his own statements that Obama wasn't in the loop when he demanded it.

That a high ranked politician, any such politician, would accept an even bigger, more corrupt, more incompetent person replace the corrupt person they wanted out of office is ridiculous. Any reasonable person would see that as highly questionable, and even very suspicious. A politician wanting to see corruption removed would reasonably expect the replacement to be less corrupt and more competent.

Your version amounts to Oh, we managed to get rid of Putin but the new leader is WORSE than Putin was... How stupid is that?
 
T. A. Gardner said:
That is asininely stupid. First, your example is pathetic. The US, EU, and UN couldn't remove Putin, and that wasn't the case in the Ukraine. Biden was there and demanded--unilaterally I might add-- that Shokin be removed. It's clear from his own statements that Obama wasn't in the loop when he demanded it.

That a high ranked politician, any such politician, would accept an even bigger, more corrupt, more incompetent person replace the corrupt person they wanted out of office is ridiculous. Any reasonable person would see that as highly questionable, and even very suspicious. A politician wanting to see corruption removed would reasonably expect the replacement to be less corrupt and more competent.

Your version amounts to Oh, we managed to get rid of Putin but the new leader is WORSE than Putin was... How stupid is that?
Click to expand...

This whole thing has corruption written all over it.
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
On March 29, 2016, the Ukrainian Rada finally approved the resignation of Ukraine’s disreputable Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin. He was voted out with an overwhelming majority of 289 votes, including 114 of the 134 deputies of the Poroshenko Bloc [Shokin was Poroshenko’s man from way back].

The amazing thing is not that he was sacked but that it had taken so long. President Poroshenko appointed Shokin to the role in February 2015. From the outset, he stood out by causing great damage even to Ukraine’s substandard legal system.

Shokin skillfully blocked reform. He was in charge of implementing the 2014 law on prosecution, which the European Union had insisted on for years. This involved a reevaluation of all prosecutors with the intention of weeding out corrupt and incompetent ones. Shokin manipulated the process so that the old prosecutors remained and minimal renewal occurred. Instead, he prosecuted reformers.

For these reasons, Shokin stood out as the greatest obstacle to judicial reform in Ukraine. US Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt called for his ouster in a speech in September 2015, and Vice President Joe Biden did so explicitly during his visit in December 2015. The European Union and the International Monetary Fund also called for Shokin to go.

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blo...es-honest-deputy-before-parliament-sacks-him/


“I heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and he was shut down and that’s really unfair,” Trump told Zelensky in his famous ‘perfect’ phone call. He meant Shokin.
Click to expand...

The funny thing is that you think this makes Shokin look bad.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Biden was there and demanded--unilaterally I might add-- that Shokin be removed. It's clear from his own statements that Obama wasn't in the loop
Click to expand...

Obama’s ambassador calls for drastic reform in Ukraine

September 25, 2015
The U.S. ambassador to Ukraine has accused the country’s Prosecutor-General’s Office of obstructing efforts to combat corruption.

Western governments supporting Ukraine’s reform agenda have repeatedly stressed the need for Kyiv to tackle endemic corruption. But the comments by Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt were unusually blunt for a U.S. official speaking before the public.

“Rather than supporting Ukraine’s reforms and working to root out corruption, actors within the Prosecutor-General’s Office are making things worse by openly and aggressively undermining reform,” Pyatt said in the speech.

https://www.rferl.org/a/us-ambassador-upbraids-ukraine-over-corruption-efforts/27271294.html


The following December Vice President Biden visited Ukraine and called for Prosecutor General Shokin to be removed from office. That’s what Trump seized on. He claimed, without evidence, that Biden himself had corrupt motives (but not Ambassador Pyatt or the EU or the IMF, as far as I know).

More than seven years later, Trump’s lackeys are trying to revive the story.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
That is asininely stupid. First, your example is pathetic. The US, EU, and UN couldn't remove Putin, and that wasn't the case in the Ukraine. Biden was there and demanded--unilaterally I might add-- that Shokin be removed. It's clear from his own statements that Obama wasn't in the loop when he demanded it.

That a high ranked politician, any such politician, would accept an even bigger, more corrupt, more incompetent person replace the corrupt person they wanted out of office is ridiculous. Any reasonable person would see that as highly questionable, and even very suspicious. A politician wanting to see corruption removed would reasonably expect the replacement to be less corrupt and more competent.

Your version amounts to Oh, we managed to get rid of Putin but the new leader is WORSE than Putin was... How stupid is that?
Click to expand...

You are the one being asinine and stupid and you are LYING.

If Russia loses or has to abandon this war in Ukraine it is believed he will be pushed out or killed as a result. If Russia then wants the sanctions lifted so they can rebuild their economy then of course the US and others could absolutely add pressure to oust Putin.

That is the same thing they did in Ukraine. The International Monetary Fund said, 'you want more investment Ukraine...then we want big reforms including the prosecutor gone'. The EU said 'you want better relations with the EU and more trade... then we want big reforms including the prosecutor gone'.

You characterization that this was Biden alone is a complete and utter lie. COngress put together a GOP lead committee who investigated and determined 'reform was needed and the prosecutor needed to be gone'.


There were about 5 se[erate powerful and independent groups (EU, IMF, COngress Committee, etc) all of which as a result of Ukraine asking for more investment and interaction with the West, who said the Reform was needed and the prosecutor must go.

Stop watching Fox and other right media who are not telling you the whole story.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
Trump never went to Ukraine to get some guy fired over corruption.

And what nation would ever withhold 1 billion in funding for a single corrupt prosecutor?

How does that make any sense?

If he was corrupt then why didn't Ukraine just fire him?

Were they too stupid too see it or something?

Of course not, the prosecutor was going to tie Hunter into illegal activity with his father in the Bribery scheme, that's why this happened.
Click to expand...

Trump is pro-corruption. He sympathizes with crooks.
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
Obama’s ambassador calls for drastic reform in Ukraine
...
Click to expand...

Ya Terry is just a pathetic liar.

For years Ukraine was asking the UN, EU, USA and IMF for more support and more Money and they all were pointing at the same issues of corruption reform being needed and that Shokin needed to be gone.

Reality is the exact opposite that this was a Biden solo mission.




IMF Demand For Ukraine Reform Just Latest Red Flag For Poroshenko

...Anticorruption campaigners point to the controversial appointment in February 2014, at the height of the Euromaidan furor, of sexagenarian Prosecutor-General Viktor Shokin.

Shokin previously served in the same post under Presidents Leonid Kuchma and Viktor Yushchenko, and in his new tenure has proposed a number of Yanukovych-era holdovers for key functions, making him the ultimate political insider in the eyes of critics.

Poroshenko has ignored repeated calls to sack Shokin, including from more than 100 members of parliament...
Click to expand...

Envoys pushed to oust Ukraine prosecutor before Biden
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top