Obama Admin Cleared Hunter for Ukraine Gig Despite Warnings State Dep’t Fear Veep’s Son ’conduit for currying influence’

CAP

By Edwin Mora

The Obama administration dismissed warnings raised by top State Department official George Kent in 2015 that the Ukrainian company that was employing then-Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter at the time was corrupt, the Washington Post confirmed Thursday.

The Post’s report suggested the Obama administration allowed Hunter Biden to continue serving on Burisma Holdings’ board of directors although it knew the company was corrupt.

Echoing a report from NBC News issued earlier this week, the Post noted:

A career State Department official overseeing Ukraine policy told congressional investigators this week that he had raised concerns in early 2015 about then-Vice President Joe Biden’s son serving on the board of a Ukrainian energy company but was turned away by a Biden staffer, according to three people familiar with the testimony.

George Kent, a deputy assistant secretary of state, testified Tuesday that he worried that Hunter Biden’s position at the firm Burisma Holdings would complicate efforts by U.S. diplomats to convey to Ukrainian officials the importance of avoiding conflicts of interest, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of confidentiality rules surrounding the deposition.

Kent said he had concerns that Ukrainian officials would view Hunter Biden as a conduit for currying influence with his father, said the people. But when Kent raised the issue with Biden’s office, he was told the then-vice president didn’t have the “bandwidth” to deal with the issue involving his son as his other son, Beau, was battling cancer, said the people familiar with his testimony.

The Washington Post has previously reported that there had been discussions among Biden’s advisers about whether his son’s Ukraine work would be perceived as a conflict of interest, and that one former adviser had been concerned enough to mention it to Biden, though the conversation was brief.

Kent’s comments came during his closed-door deposition in the House Democrats’ impeachment probe on Tuesday.

When Kent raised his concerns about Burisma, the Obama administration had already cleared Hunter to serve on the company’s board of directors. Hunter joined Burisma’s board of directors in 2014. The former vice president was leading U.S. efforts to crack down on corruption at the time.

The State official explicitly warned the Obama administration that Burisma was “corrupt,” NBC News revealed near the end of its article on Kent’s testimony, noting:

During his nearly 10 hours of testimony, Kent also told members of Congress and their staff that Burisma, the energy company where Hunter Biden was a board member, was corrupt, according to a separate person who was present in the room. Kent said he told the Obama administration in 2016 that they should not hold an event with Burisma because of the company’s extensive corruption in Ukraine.

In the July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that triggered the impeachment probe, Trump urged his counterpart to investigate corruption allegations against Biden and his son Hunter.

As vice president, Biden threatened to withhold aid to Ukraine to force the Eastern European country to fire its top prosecutor in 2016, who had investigated the owner of Burisma, Mykola Zlochevsky, for possible corruption.

Hunter had been serving on the board of Burisma for up to $83,000 per month at the time despite having no background in energy, prompting allegations of corruption. He admitted to ABC News last weekend that his father’s political position helped him secure the lucrative appointment to Burisma’s board of directors.

A “whistleblower” allegation that during the July 25 call Trump attempted to pressure Ukraine into investigating the Bidens by withholding aid triggered the impeachment probe. Trump and Ukraine have denied the allegations.

The Democrats’ impeachment probe is primarily seeking to determine whether Trump withheld aid to Ukraine in a bid to get dirt on White House hopeful Biden. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the leader of the probe, has said, however, that there does not need to be a quid pro quo to impeach Trump.

 

DOC: SCHIFF STAFFER MET WITH IMPEACHMENT WITNESS IN UKRAINE… …TRIP PAID BY BURISMA SPONSORED ORG!

See the source image

By Aaron Klein – Oct 17, 2019

Itinerary for a trip to Ukraine in August organized by the Atlantic Council think tank reveals that a staffer on Rep. Adam Schiff’s House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence held a meeting during the trip with acting U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor, now a key witness for Democrats pursuing impeachment.

The Atlantic Council is funded by and works in partnership with Burisma, the natural gas company at the center of allegations regarding Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden.

Taylor has been called by House Democrats to appear next week to provide a deposition as part of the investigation being led by Schiff into President Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Taylor himself has evidenced a close relationship with the Burisma-funded Atlantic Council, writing analysis pieces published on the Council’s website and serving as a featured speaker for the organization’s events. He also served for nine years as senior advisor to the U.S.-Ukraine Business Council, which has co-hosted scores of events with the Atlantic Council.

As Breitbart News reported, Thomas Eager, a staffer on Schiff’s House Intelligence Committee, took a trip to Ukraine in August billed as a bipartisan “Ukraine Study Trip” in which ten Congressional staffers participated.

Eager is also currently a fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Congressional Fellowship, a bipartisan program that says it “educates congressional staff on current events in the Eurasia region.” The pre-planned Ukraine trip was part of the fellowship program.

Burisma in January 2017 signed a “cooperative agreement” with the Council to specifically sponsor the organization’s Eurasia Center, the same center that sponsored Eager’s Ukraine trip.

A closer look at the itinerary for the August 24 to August 31 trip shows that the delegation’s first meeting upon arrival in Ukraine was with Taylor.

Spokespeople for Schiff’s office did not reply to multiple Breitbart News requests sent over the course of the last three days for comment on Eager’s meeting with Taylor.

When Breitbart News first reported on Eager’s visit to Ukraine two weeks ago, Schiff’s office quickly replied to several comment requests, denying any impropriety related to Eager’s association with the Atlantic Council or the trip.

The unanswered Breitbart email requests to Schiff’s office from the past three days posed the following question:

See the source image

While in Ukraine, did Mr. Eager speak to Mr. Taylor about the issue of reports about any representatives of President Trump looking into alleged Biden corruption in Ukraine?

The dates of the pre-planned trip are instructive. Eager’s visit to Ukraine sponsored by the Burisma-funded Atlantic Council began 12 days after the so-called “whistleblower” officially filed his August 12 complaint.

Schiff and his office have offered seemingly conflicting statements on the timeline of the California Congressman’s initial contact with the so-called “whistleblower.”

Speaking on September 17, Schiff told MSNBC, “We have not spoken directly with the whistleblower. We would like to.”

Schiff’s spokesperson, Patrick Boland, was quoted on October 2 saying, “At no point did the committee review or receive the complaint in advance.” Boland said Schiff’s committee received the complaint the night before it publicly released the document.

On Oct 2, however, the New York Times reported that Schiff received some of the contents of the complaint through an unnamed House Intelligence Committee aide initially contacted by the so-called “whistleblower,” described as a CIA officer.

The Times reported the aide “shared some of what the officer conveyed to Mr. Schiff.”  The referenced officer refers to the so-called “whistleblower.”

The newspaper also reported:

By the time the whistle-blower filed his complaint, Mr. Schiff and his staff knew at least vaguely what it contained

Speaking to CBS’s Face the Nation on Sunday, Schiff conceded that he was not clear enough about his contact with the so-called “whistleblower.”

“I should have been much more clear,” Schiff said.

Taylor, who emerged from government retirement in June to serve as charge d’affaires in Kyiv, is being deposed by House Democrats after text messages provided to Democrats showed him expressing concern about Trump’s requests for Ukraine to investigate the Bidens over issues related to Burisma.

NBC News quoted sources saying Taylor will be represented during the deposition by attorney John Bellinger, who served at the National Security Council and as the State Department’s lead lawyer under President George W. Bush’s administration.

Bellinger was a prominent “Never Trump” Republican, drafting an August 2016 letter with dozens of other senior Republican national security officials warning Trump would be the “most reckless President in American history.”

Taylor and Atlantic Council

Taylor has authored numerous analysis pieces published by the Atlantic Council.

In March, three months before he became Trump’s ambassador to Ukraine, the Atlantic Council featured an oped co-authored by Taylor in which the diplomat argued Ukraine “has further to travel toward its self-proclaimed European goal” of reformation.

In 2017, Taylor wrote a piece for the Council about a Ukrainian parliament vote on health care reform.

In November 2011, the Atlantic Council hosted Taylor as the featured speaker at a discussion event when he was appointed that year as Special Coordinator for Middle East Transitions at the State Department.

When he deployed to Ukraine as Trump’s ambassador in June, the U.S.-Ukraine Business Council (USUBC), which has co-hosted events with the Atlantic Council, authored a piece in the Kyiv Post welcoming him.

Taylor for the last nine years served as a senior adviser to the USUBC.

The USUBC’s piece noted that the “USUBC has worked closely with Ambassador Taylor for many years,” touting his role as the business group’s senior adviser.

On June 26, just nine days after arriving in Ukraine as ambassador, the USUBC already hosted Taylor for a roundtable discussion about his new position.

Vadym Pozharskyi, adviser to the board of directors at Burisma Holdings, was also previously hosted as a USUBC featured speaker.

A USUBC senior adviser is David J. Kramer, a long-time adviser to late Senator John McCain, who served at the McCain Institute for International Leadership as senior director for human rights and democracy. Kramer played a central role in disseminating the anti-Trump dossier.

In the USUBC piece welcoming Taylor to Ukraine, Kramer himself commented about Taylor’s ambassador position.

“He’s a great choice for now,” Kramer gushed.

Geysha Gonzalez is the sponsoring Atlantic Council officer listed on the Congressional disclosure form for Schiff staffer Eager’s trip to Ukraine. She is deputy director of the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center.

Gonzalez is also one of eleven members of the rapid response team for the Ukrainian Election Task Force, which says it is working to expose “foreign interference in Ukraine’s democracy.”

Another member of the team is Kramer.

Kramer revealed in testimony that he held a meeting about the anti-Trump dossier with a reporter from BuzzFeed News, who he says snapped photos of the controversial document without Kramer’s permission when he left the room to go to the bathroom. That meeting was held at the McCain Institute office in Washington, Kramer stated.

BuzzFeed infamously published the Christopher Steele dossier on January 10, 2017, setting off a firestorm of news media coverage about the document.

The Washington Posreported last February that Kramer received the dossier directly from Fusion GPS after McCain expressed interest in it.

In a deposition taken on December 13, 2017, and posted online earlier this year, Kramer revealed that he met with two Obama administration officials to inquire about whether the anti-Trump dossier was being taken seriously.

In one case, Kramer said that he personally provided a copy of the dossier to Obama National Security Council official Celeste Wallander.

In the deposition, Kramer said that McCain specifically asked him in early December 2016 to meet about the dossier with Wallander and Victoria Nuland, a senior official in John Kerry’s State Department.

Schiff signed form

Schiff’s signature appears on the required post-travel disclosure form filed with the House Committee on Ethics documenting the visit to Ukraine. The form signed by Schiff says that Eager’s trip to Ukraine was paid for by the “Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center.”

The form bearing Schiff’s signature (above) describes the visit thusly:

Series of meetings and visits with gov’t officials, party officials, civil society and private sector reps in Ukraine to learn about ongoing political and military issues, including conflict in the East.

The costs for Eager’s visit listed on the form are $2202.91 for transportation, $985.50 for lodging, and $630.15 for meal expenses.

Speaking to Breitbart News, Gonzalez confirmed that Eager started his one-year fellowship with the organization in January and that Eager is still a fellow.

Gonzalez said the pre-planned trip was part of the fellowship program, which also includes a full year of round tables and other educational events. She said it was not within her portfolio to comment on issues of funding from Burisma or other donors.

Burisma and Atlantic Council 

Besides funding the Atlantic Council, Burisma also routinely partners with the think tank.

Only four months ago, the company co-hosted the Council’s second Annual Kharkiv Security Conference.

Burisma further co-hosted a U.S.-Ukraine Business Council event with the Council last year in Washington, DC.  David Kramer of the dossier episode is a senior adviser to the Business Council.

Burisma and the Atlantic Council also signed a cooperative agreement to develop transatlantic programs with Burisma’s financial support, reportedly to focus “on European and international energy security.”

Burisma advertises that it committed itself to “15 key principles of rule of law and economic policy in Ukraine developed by the Atlantic Council.”

Common funding themes

Besides Burisma funding, the Atlantic Council is also financed by billionaire activist George Soros’s Open Society Foundations, Google, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Inc., and the U.S. State Department.

Google, Soros’s Open Society Foundations, the Rockefeller Fund, and an agency of the State Department each also finance a self-described investigative journalism organization repeatedly referenced as a source of information in the so-called “whistleblower’s” complaint alleging Trump was “using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country” in the 2020 presidential race.

The charges in the July 22 report referenced in the “whistleblower’s” document and released by the Google and Soros-funded organization, the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), seem to be the public precursors for a lot of the so-called “whistleblower’s” own claims, as Breitbart News documented.OPEN

One key section of the so-called “whistleblower’s” document claims that “multiple U.S. officials told me that Mr. Giuliani had reportedly privately reached out to a variety of other Zelensky advisers, including Chief of Staff Andriy Bohdan and Acting Chairman of the Security Service of Ukraine Ivan Bakanov.”

This was allegedly to follow up on Trump’s call with Zelensky in order to discuss the “cases” mentioned in that call, according to the so-called “whistleblower’s” narrative. The complainer was clearly referencing Trump’s request for Ukraine to investigate the Biden corruption allegations.

Even though the statement was written in first person –  “multiple U.S. officials told me” – it contains a footnote referencing a report by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP).

That footnote reads:

In a report published by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) on 22 July, two associates of Mr. Giuliani reportedly traveled to Kyiv in May 2019 and met with Mr. Bakanov and another close Zelensky adviser, Mr. Serhiy Shefir.

The so-called “whistleblower’s” account goes on to rely upon that same OCCRP report on three more occasions. It does so to:

  • Write that Ukraine’s Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko “also stated that he wished to communicate directly with Attorney General Barr on these matters.”
  • Document that Trump adviser Rudy Giuliani “had spoken in late 2018 to former Prosecutor General Shokin, in a Skype call arranged by two associates of Mr. Giuliani.”
  • Bolster the charge that, “I also learned from a U.S. official that ‘associates’ of Mr. Giuliani were trying to make contact with the incoming Zelenskyy team.” The so-called “whistleblower” then relates in another footnote, “I do not know whether these associates of Mr. Giuliani were the same individuals named in the 22 July report by OCCRP, referenced above.”

The OCCRP report repeatedly referenced is actually a “joint investigation by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) and BuzzFeed News, based on interviews and court and business records in the United States and Ukraine.”

BuzzFeed infamously also first published the full anti-Trump dossier alleging unsubstantiated collusion between Trump’s presidential campaign and Russia. The dossier was paid for by Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee, and was produced by the Fusion GPS opposition dirt outfit.

The OCCRP and BuzzFeed “joint investigation” resulted in both OCCRP and BuzzFeed publishing similar lengthy pieces on July 22 claiming that Giuliani was attempting to use connections to have Ukraine investigate Trump’s political rivals.

The so-called “whistleblower’s” document, however, only mentions the largely unknown OCCRP and does not reference BuzzFeed, which has faced scrutiny over its reporting on the Russia collusion claims.

Hunter Biden Defends Ethics Of Foreign Ventures

 

Posted By Tim Hains

Hunter Biden defended the ethical implications of his private ventures in an interview with ABC News, but conceded a political “mistake.”

“I know I did nothing wrong at all. Was it poor judgment to be in the middle of something that is a swamp in many ways? Yeah,” he told ABC’s Amy Robach at his Los Angeles home.

“I don’t regret being on the board [of a Ukrainian gas company]. What I regret is not taking into account that there would be a Rudy Giuliani and a president of the United States that would be listening to this ridiculous conspiracy idea,”he said, saying the allegations of impropriety have been “debunked by everyone.”

Robach next asked if he would have gotten the board seat if he had a different last name.

“I don’t know, probably not,” he responded.

 

JUST IN: GOP Congressman Matt Gaetz Kicked Out of Impeachment Inquiry Hearing

CAP

 

Congressman Matt Gaetz (R-FL), a very ardent supporter of President Trump’s, was booted from a congressional hearing Monday morning.

Gaetz, a member of the House Judiciary Committee tried to sit in on a testimony from Fiona Hill, a former National Security Council expert on Russia.

Rep. Gaetz was told to leave the hearing because he was not a member of the House Intelligence Committee.

Gaetz told reporters that Schiff didn’t want him sitting in on Fiona Hill’s testimony because Schiff  likes to use “selective leaks” to damage President Trump.

“It’s not like I’m on agriculture,” Gaetz said to reporters. “What are the Democrats so afraid of?”

Gaetz fired off a tweet blasting Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler and House Intel Chairman “Shifty Schiff.”

CAP

The Democrats’ lies and impeachment (coup) efforts can only thrive in darkness which is why they are conducting everything in secret and behind closed doors.

SHIFTY SCHIFF: ‘THERE DOESN’T NEED TO BE A QUID PRO QUO’ TO IMPEACH TRUMP

Shifty Schiff: ‘There Doesn’t Need to Be a Quid Pro Quo’ to Impeach Trump

Democrats moving impeachment goal posts once again

OCT 14, 2019

House Intelligence Committee chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said that there doesn’t need to be a “quid pro quo” for President Trump to be impeached.

During an appearance on CBS’ “Face The Nation” on Sunday, Schiff appeared to move the goal posts once again, asserting that Trump committed an impeachable offense despite lack of evidence of a quid pro quo in Trump’s phone call with Ukraine’s president.

“Well, we’re keeping our focus right now on the president’s coercion of an ally, that is Ukraine, to create this sham investigations into his political opponent,” Shiff said.

“We have discovered in very short order not only the contents of that call but also the preparatory work that went into that call. The effort to condition something the Ukrainian president deeply sought, that is, a meeting with the president, to establish this new president to the Ukraine had a powerful patron in the United States that was vital importance to Ukraine, that was being conditioned as digging up dirt on the Bidens.”

“There doesn’t need to be a quid pro quo,” Schiff continued. “But it is clear already from the text messaged that this meeting that the Ukraine president sought was being conditioned on their willingness to interfere in the U.S. to help the president. That is a terrible abuse of the president’s power.”

“Whether that abuse goes further, that is the withholding of military aid as leverage. There is certainly strong indication that’s is true as well. We will get to the bottom of it. Here you have a president of the United States abusing his power to the detriment of our national security. And doing so yet to get another foreign country to intervene in our election. It’s hard to imagine more of a corruption of the office than that.”

The reason for Schiff’s sudden dismissal of a “quid pro quo” is obvious: the transcript of the Ukraine phone call released by Trump directly contradicts Democrats’ assertion that he somehow pressured Ukraine President Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden.

 

Fired Anti-Trump Ukrainian Ambassador Was Monitoring Communications of John Solomon and US Journalists Prying into Ukraine! …UPDATED

By Jim Hoft

Last week House Democrats called in fired US Ambassador Marie Yovanovich to testify in their sham impeachment proceedings.

Ambassador Yovanovich is a noted Trump-hater who blocked Ukrainian officials from traveling to the United States to hand over evidence of Obama misconduct during the 2016 election to President Trump.

Yovanovich was US ambassador to Ukraine during the 2016 election when the Ukrainian government was colluding with the DNC and Hillary Campaign to undermine the US presidential election.

Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenkoko told journalists in March that Yovanovitch gave him a “do not prosecute” list during their first meeting.

The president ordered her removal from her post in Ukraine in May 2019.
She was openly anti-Trump.

Starting in 2018 Yovanovich denied Ukrainian officials visas to enter the United States to hand over evidence of Obama administration misconduct to Trump administration officials.

Wednesday night on Hannity John Solomon announced that the former Ambassador Yovanovich was monitoring the reporters digging into Ukrainian lawlessness.

There is evidence now that Yovanovich was spying on John Solomon.

What a crook.

UPDATE– We heard from a trusted source that this is much broader than is being reported and that the ambassador is out of her mind.
This is going to be a really big story!

Rachel Maddow Blames RUSSIA For Ukraine-Gate

OCT 10, 2019

Paul Joseph Goebbels: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

This woman needs a straight jacket and four padded walls.

 

Pelosi Faces Tough Decision On Formal Impeachment Vote As Case Against Trump Comes Under Pressure

By Tyler Durden

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is in a tough spot. After caving in to pressure from her party to launch an impeachment inquiry based on a CIA ‘whistleblower’ report that Trump abused his office to pressure Ukraine into investigating 2020 rival Joe Biden, Pelosi must now decide on whether to proceed with a formal vote amid mounting evidence that Trump did nothing wrong. 

Trump has pushed for a vote – which would allow Republicans to issue subpoenas, as well as grant the White House the ability to cross-examine witnesses. To that end, the White House outlined in a Tuesday letter that they will refuse to cooperate with an inquiry that is “invalid” due to Pelosi’s refusal to make it official.

“Never before in our history has the House of Representatives — under the control of either political party — taken the American people down the dangerous path you seem determined to pursue,” wrote White House counsel Pat Cipollone.

When asked on Wednesday if he would cooperate with Pelosi’s impeachment inquiry, Trump told reporters “we would if they give us our rights, it depends.” 

Pelosi, meanwhile, says the effort to force a vote is nothing more than a “Republican talking point.” 

“If we want to do it, we’ll do it. If we don’t, we don’t. But we’re certainly not going to do it because of the president,” said Pelosi in an interview last week with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

A decision whether to call the president’s bluff is likely to be a main topic when Pelosi convenes a conference call with House Democrats at the end of the week. Representative Dan Kildee of Michigan, one of the leadership’s vote counters, said Democrats could easily pass a resolution authorizing the impeachment inquiry with as many as 230 votes.

With the White House vowing to block any cooperation, Pelosi is scheduled to hold the conference call on Friday to chart the next steps. The committees conducting the investigation have already issued a salvo of subpoenas for testimony or records directed at administration officials such as Secretary of State Michael Pompeo as well as Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani. –Bloomberg

“We continue investigating and digging to uncover more of the truth. Nothing has changed,” said Pelosi spokeswoman Ashley Etienne on Wednesday, adding that Democrats have yet to settle on legal or tactical responses to the White House letter.

Pushback

House Republicans led by Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California have been “using ads, press releases and other efforts to hammer Democratic House members from GOP-leaning districts over impeachment,” according to Bloomberg.

Trump and Republicans also have complained about the fairness of the process, citing closed-door hearings, and what they say are limitations by committee Republicans to subpoena their own rebuttal witnesses, or for the White House to have legal counsel in the room during depositions. –Bloomberg

According to Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH): “If Democrats were interested in fairness, they would follow the same process as previous impeachment proceedings. Instead, they just make up the rules as they go along.” 

Quid Pro Nope

The House impeachment inquiry was launched after a CIA officer reported that President Trump pressured Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter for alleged corruption.

After Democrats uncritically launched their impeachment inquiry based on the initial whistleblower report, the White House upset their strategy – releasing a transcript of the call between Zelensky and Trump and the whistleblower complaint itself – plain readings of which reveal that Trump did not threaten, pressure or suggest a quid pro quo in exchange for a Biden investigation. Furthermore, Zelensky himself has said as much.

So as the case against Trump continues to unravel, Pelosi and the Democrats have some tough decisions to make as we head into the 2020 election.

 

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑