I’ve read Sen. Ron Johnson’s report, and my impression is that despite Johnson’s denials, much of it has the aroma of pro-Russian conspiracy theories concealed with the fig-leaf of “anonymity.” Throughout, Johnson whines and complains about Democrats accusing him of engaging in partisan political attacks on him and his “investigation,” yet despite its title, Hunter Biden, Burisma, and Corruption: The Impact on U.S. Government Policy and Related Concerns, there is nothing really “there,” at least with the “evidence” being offered to back up its insinuations. Noteworthy is the fact the report does not mention that there are currently two Americans on the board of Burisma (a holding company for gas and oil exploration companies)--Alan Apter (who was already on the board before Biden) and Joseph Black--and they are not being accused of anything “untoward.” And of course nobody is suggesting that Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump be investigated to see if any of the $200+ million they have “earned” since “daddy” became president may have been due to their current “public servant” positions.
What is most amazing about this report is that it leaves out a number of pertinent facts about Hunter Biden’s relationship with Burisma. It was thought he was “a big name” that could help expand the company’s business, but the report glosses over this, repeatedly making insinuations of corruption by attempting to tie Biden in them merely by “association.” But the report never offers offers one shred of evidence that Biden himself was “in” on it. In fact, Hunter Biden never even visited the Ukraine, so he was very likely unaware of machinations behind the scenes there by the company founder--and despite the allegations. Burisma remains a major enterprise in the Ukraine, and there are those two Americans currently on its board.
Reuters reported previously than in “Interviews with more than a dozen people, including executives and former prosecutors in Ukraine,” painted a picture of Biden as someone “who provided advice on legal issues, corporate finance and strategy during a five-year term on the board.” What is so “suspicious” about that? Reuters also noted “They also said that his presence on the board didn’t protect the company from its most serious challenge: a series of criminal investigations launched by Ukrainian authorities against its owner, Mykola Zlochevsky, a multimillionaire former minister of ecology and natural resources.” Yet the Johnson report repeatedly, and repeatedly failed, to suggest that this was indeed the case.
Politico found that “The report leans heavily on 100 citations from 14 "confidential documents" in lengthy passages detailing Hunter Biden's financial connections to foreign nationals. The documents are actually Suspicious Activity Reports kept by the Treasury Department, in which financial institutions flag transactions but don't verify whether any wrongdoing has occurred. Peters said the GOP senators' decision to rely on these reports, and publicize their details without any independent investigation, was an unprecedented use of congressional power.”
The report states that after mass protests ousted then pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych, “Vice President Biden met with his son’s business partner, Devon Archer, at the White House. Five days later, Vice President Biden visited Ukraine, and he soon after was described in the press as the ‘public face of the administration’s handling of Ukraine.’ The day after his visit, on April 22, Archer joined the board of Burisma. Six days later, on April 28, British officials seized $23 million from the London bank accounts of Burisma’s owner, Mykola Zlochevsky. Fourteen days later, on May 12, Hunter Biden joined the board of Burisma, and over the course of the next several years, Hunter Biden and Devon Archer were paid millions of dollars from a corrupt Ukrainian oligarch for their participation on the board.”
Now, that all may sound “suspicious,” but the report utterly fails to separate the importance of the company--which as not “corrupt,” and its owner. The report also neglects to mention that the British government eventually released the $23 million, admitting that the evidence of corruption they had against Zlochevsky was not reliable, given the credibility of those providing it. This is not to say that Zlochevsky wasn’t corrupt, he no doubt was as many oligarchs and political leaders are in that part of the world. In 2017 all charges against him had been dismissed, but then old charges were reinstated in 2018, concerning his activities while Minister of Ecology from 2010-2012, when he is alleged to have issued gas and oil licenses to companies he owned--and before Biden was on board.
The “key findings” of the report amount to former Acting Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, George Kent, “raising concerns to officials in Vice President Joe Biden’s office about the perception of a conflict of interest with respect to Hunter Biden’s role on Burisma’s board.” The report offers no evidence at all--save the opinion of the senators who wrote the report--that these “concerns” translated into actual policy changes by the Obama administration, or that anything illegal had occurred. As I mentioned last week, Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin was widely regarded as corrupt, and the international community--not just the Obama administration--had been pressing for his dismissal; it also should be pointed out that Shokin only “resigned” permanently in the face of street protests.
Another “key finding” was speculation of whether or not former Secretary of State John Kerry “had knowledge of Hunter Biden’s role on Burisma’s board.” Whether he knew or not is irrelevant and a false story, since try as it might the report provided no proof of wrong-doing by Biden; this was clearly a “fishing expedition” that was nothing.
The absurdity of the report continued with “questions” about why the Obama administration was dealing with “odious oligarchs,” neglecting to mention that virtually everyone in power in the Ukraine is to some degree as corrupt as Donald Trump. On and on the report talks about suspicious activities not by the Burisma board, but by Zlochevsky, and insinuating by “association” that the Bidens actually participated in or enabled in it, without offering even a crumb of evidence; the report tosses around conspiracy theories like confetti--and as far as the “evidence” is, it just as light. Never once in the report does it state the fact that Hunter Biden had never even been to the Ukraine.
The insanity continued with pathetic attempts to imply something “sinister” about Hunter Biden’s declining Secret Service protection after July 2014. The report also attempted to obscure the fact that pro-Trump, pro-Russian Ukrainian diplomat Andrii Telizhenko was a source of Rudy Giuliani conspiracy theories and Russian disinformation campaign, by making “suggestions” that there was something “untoward” about meetings between the Democratic lobbying firm Blue Star Strategies and Telizhenko. But as Obama administration official Elisabeth Zentos tried (and failed) to explain to those Republicans dealing in conspiracy theories, as he was a representative of the Ukrainian government he was someone they felt compelled to speak to for “advise” on occasion.
The report repeatedly makes insinuations about payments from business partners in China, and the billionaire former wife of the mayor of Moscow. Yes, his Chinese partners had connections to the Chinese government; so does Mitch McConnell and his wife Elaine Chao, whose family owns the Chinese shipping company Foremost Group, which has close ties to the Chinese government and military. This is detailed in the book Secret Empires: How the American Political Class Hides Corruption and Enriches Family and Friends by Peter Schweizer. The Trump clan, anyone?
The report then throws out this tidbit and let’s it hang in the air without even attempting to corroborate it or justify even making the claim: “Hunter Biden paid nonresident women who were nationals of Russia or other Eastern European countries and who appear to be linked to an ‘Eastern European prostitution or human trafficking ring.’” Again and again, the report throws out insinuations without offering evidence of actual wrongdoing. Never does it offer any evidence that the Obama administration attempt to thwart investigations into the activities of Zlochevsky; it makes much of incidents where the mention of his name is omitted in public statements, but in many cases this was because there were “personal issues” between him and (then) President Poroshenko and other Ukrainian officials who did not want to be associated with discussions or policy decisions he participated in.
There is more, but all it amounts to is throwing mud at a wall and hoping something “sticks”--and almost nothing of it does. We should take Sen. Johnson at his "word": this is nothing but a political hatchet job to help reelect Trump.
No comments:
Post a Comment