११ नोव्हेंबर, २०१९

"A key to Mr. Biden’s relevance as vice president was his willingness to take jobs nobody else wanted."

"In early 2014, as others on Mr. Obama’s team raced to finish big-splash deals with Cuba and Iran, Mr. Biden told the president he wanted to take on three of the most unappetizing foreign-policy tasks left undone: containing the Islamic State, curbing immigration from Central America and keeping Russia from devouring Ukraine.... Mr. Biden applied his Amtrak charm to local players like Ukraine’s embattled president, Viktor Yanukovych, with limited effect. Former White House aides recall watching an agitated Mr. Biden ducking in and out of a secure phone booth outside the situation room in early 2014, trying to reach Mr. Yanukovych on his cellphone. 'Where the hell is this guy?' he kept asking, before learning that Mr. Yanukovych had fled Kiev, ultimately for Russia, as huge street protests erupted against his regime’s corruption and his pivot away from Europe and toward Moscow. Mr. Putin then rushed in, annexing Crimea and backing paramilitaries who invaded the country’s east.... Things seemed to be looking up in May 2014 with the election of Mr. Poroshenko, an oligarch who billed himself as a reformer. At first, the vice president’s hard-edged messages to him on corruption were coated with kibbitz — demands accompanied by Bidenesque inquiries like whether the puffy-eyed president was getting enough sleep, aides recalled. Within months, though, the State Department began suspecting that the office of Mr. Poroshenko’s first prosecutor general was accepting bribes to protect Mykola Zlochevsky, the oligarch owner of Burisma Holdings, the gas company where Hunter Biden was a board member.... The prosecutor general was fired soon after. But it wasn’t long before the new prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, was drawing allegations of corruption, including from State Department officials who suspected he was shaking down targets and intentionally slow-walking investigations to protect allies. Mr. Giuliani has claimed, without evidence, that Mr. Biden’s push to oust Mr. Shokin was an attempt to block scrutiny of his son’s actions...."

From "What Joe Biden Actually Did in Ukraine" by Glenn Thrush and Kenneth P. Vogel (at MSN.com and originally in the NYT).

That "without evidence" — in "Mr. Giuliani has claimed, without evidence..." — would make more sense to me if the same words were used when people are imagining Trump's intentions based on something that we know he did.

We know what Trump said in his Ukraine phone call, but we continually hear that's strong evidence that he was using U.S. monetary aid to bribe Ukraine into manufacturing dirt on his political opponent to serve his personal interests.

Why don't they say people only claim that without evidence? We have evidence of Biden's statements and activities, but we don't know what was in his head, but he could have been motivated by a desire to cover for his son. That's an inference you could make from the evidence, and it's always hard to prove what's inside somebody's head.

I'd just like to see a consistent approach to talking about other people's thoughts. You could say "without evidence" whenever you're making an inference about thought from the evidence that we do have. Or you could make inferences from the evidence and just speak about them as if the inferences are evidence.

Both of those approaches are bad, and I know damned well that nobody understanding the choice and wanting to be consistent and neutral would pick either option. What I want is clear speech about what evidence there is, the need to make inferences from the evidence, which inferences are stronger, and what we should do when there are different possible inferences.

१७५ टिप्पण्या:

Mark म्हणाले...

They lost me at -- "Mr. Biden applied his Amtrak charm . . ."

narciso म्हणाले...

vogel only gives half the story, if that,

https://twitter.com/ClimateAudit/status/1192616663151235072

gilbar म्हणाले...

i found a Fun New Game!
When reading our assignments, see a long it takes you before you can identify the source, from the writing style along (without peeking down below)
I guessed that this was from the NYT's, instead of the Wapoo based on (i Think this is what i based it on,) it's antipathy for the Russians .

Try It! It's Fun!

rehajm म्हणाले...

Yah- what the Hell is 'Amtrak Charm'? I suspect it's trying to make Joe into some kind of working class hero but doesn't it just make him sound like a bureaucratic failure that Hoover™'s tax money?

narciso म्हणाले...

it seems shokin was over the target,

rehajm म्हणाले...

What I want is clear speech about what evidence there is, the need to make inferences from the evidence, which inferences are stronger, and what we should do when there are different possible inferences.

Worth repeating. That'd be nice..

gilbar म्हणाले...

first prosecutor general was accepting bribes to protect Mykola Zlochevsky, the oligarch owner of Burisma Holdings, the gas company where Hunter Biden was a board member.... The prosecutor general was fired soon after. But it wasn’t long before the new prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, was drawing allegations of corruption, including from State Department officials who suspected he was shaking down targets and intentionally slow-walking investigations to protect allies.

So,
the FIRST prosecutor was covering up for Hunter's people, and got fired for that
the SECOND prosecutor was "shaking down targets" (Hunter's People?) before ....
Jo Biden Explicitly presented a Quid Quo Pro; denying aid until the Second prosecutor was fired?

elkh1 म्हणाले...

If Biden had told his son to quit Barisma, then Giuliani could never accuse papa of corruption with or without evidence, yes?

narciso म्हणाले...

the following thread, up above, shows how this is just bogus borsht,

henry म्हणाले...

Biden's true skill if finding a way to get money on the side from jobs nobody else wanted. Pure crook.

rcocean म्हणाले...

Why can't we have an honest, independent, review of what Biden and Hunter Biden did in China and the Ukraine? What is the problem? We keep having the MSM and the D's tell us he was innocent and pure as the driven snow. OK, so agree to an independent review and lets have them reach a conclusion - WHICH WOULD HELP BIDEN. Instead its, "Hey don't doubt Biden, and SHUT UP".

Its like the whistle-blower, Eric Ciaremella. Why isn't he being interviewed by schiff in public? Why isn't the MSM saying his name? Why is Youtube and facebook censoring anyone who mentions him? Why is the American public not being told the truth by our "Free Press"?

narciso म्हणाले...

this was three months before he was fired,


https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-crime/1894491-shokin-us-ambassador-discuss-tackling-corruption.html

gilbar म्हणाले...

And Remember!
Jo and Hunter Biden, are the Hill the democrats have decided to die on
Let's help them!

rhhardin म्हणाले...

Biden was in charge of the anti-gravity machine too, another failure.

narciso म्हणाले...

a month later

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/ukraine-takes-two-steps-forward-on-corruption-fight/

narciso म्हणाले...

right around that time,

https://medium.com/@VPOTUS44/notes-from-ukraine-day-three-the-honor-of-speaking-to-the-rada-22a6c35b0092

Drago म्हणाले...

"Mr. Biden told the president he wanted to take on three of the most unappetizing foreign-policy tasks left undone: containing the Islamic State, curbing immigration from Central America and keeping Russia from devouring Ukraine....

Perfect. Just perfect.

ISIS exploded and took over a vast portion of Syria including the oil fields on their way to reestablishing their beloved caliphate

Immigration exploded and set up the dems for being openly Open Borders AS well as now establishing as democrat party policy no deportation of any kind for illegal aliens AND giving lots and lots and lots of free stuff to all the illegals

And Ukraine! Well, we see how that turned out.

Hey, I know! Lets give Biden the Presidency so he can bring his track record of "success" to ALL US policies!

Bob Boyd म्हणाले...

it's always hard to prove what's inside somebody's head.

It's a little easier to prove what passed through someone's bank account, where it came from and where it went.
Maybe there would be some evidence if these reporters did an investigation instead of writing an article assuring us there's nothing to see here.
They seem remarkably incurious and perfectly content to be without evidence.

rcocean म्हणाले...

Notice how Mittens (after 2012), or the Bushes, rarely uttered a word against President Obama or VP Biden. But Trump? Suddenly, they became very active. You have to wonder why Biden's activities in the Ukraine were so acceptable to the uni-party and Trump's behavior has been so "out of bounds". Very puzzling.

narciso म्हणाले...

so when did everything change?


https://share.america.gov/2015-year-of-real-reforms-in-ukraine/

elkh1 म्हणाले...

His willingness to take jobs that nobody...

Meaning he has to do what his boss told him to do, and his family makes a bundle on the side.

Susan म्हणाले...

The D or R after someone's name is all the evidence you need.

Unless you are a wacko conspiracy theorist.

Roy Lofquist म्हणाले...

"What I want is clear speech about what evidence there is, the need to make inferences from the evidence, which inferences are stronger, and what we should do when there are different possible inferences."

And you wonder why it's called an ivory tower.

narciso म्हणाले...

the criticism were as insubstantial as the dossier, since they came from the same sources, leschenko,

Mark म्हणाले...

"What Joe Biden Actually Did in Ukraine" by Glenn Thrush and Kenneth P. Vogel

The problem with determining with what Joe Biden actually did in Ukraine is that it requires looking into what Biden did in Ukraine. And the Dems are now shouting that to ask someone to "look into what Biden did" is an impeachable offense that endangers the rule of law and the existence of the nation.

Qwinn म्हणाले...

When the accused is on the Right, no amount of evidence is required.
When the accused is on the Left, no amount of evidence is sufficient.

narciso म्हणाले...

jan 16, is when ciaremella has a talk with the prosecutors, and quelle surprise, everything changes,

narciso म्हणाले...

around that time, biden meets with poroshenko, who has ties to zylochevsky, they wanted to purge all the judges and prosecutors, you know how hard it would be to prosecute anyone after that, years probably,

narciso म्हणाले...

as McIntyre, points out, shokin lived modestly, where were the signs of payoffs, through the looking glass,

Tom म्हणाले...

I think the safest interference we can make is that knowing the news source is critical to assessing how the story might be slanted. The slanted language is the evidence.

One reason I’ve lost trust in any news source claiming to be objective is the use of clearly slanted language to describe the actions of one side versus another. I actually prefer my news from openings biased courses - it trust those sources to be biased in a way I can easily detect and factor into my assessment.





Darrell म्हणाले...



No evidence?

In Biden's own words--in a 2018 speech at an event for the publication Foreign Affairs.

"I remember going over and convincing our team, others, to convince that we should be providing for loan guarantees. And I went over, I guess, the 12th, 13th time to Kiev. And I was supposed to announce that there was another billion-dollar loan guarantee. And I had gotten a commitment from Poroshenko and from Yatsenyuk that they would take action against the state prosecutor. And they didn’t.

So they said they had—they were walking out to a press conference. I said, nah, I’m not going to—or, we’re not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, you have no authority. You’re not the president. The president said—I said, call him. (Laughter.) I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a b-tch. (Laughter.) He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time."




Char Char Binks, Esq. म्हणाले...

If there's no investigation, there will be no evidence uncovered -- EXONERATED!

BarrySanders20 म्हणाले...

Is this the same Glenn Thrush that had all the credible with evidence sexual misconduct facts exposed?

Is this the same State Department personnel cited in the story who have worked against Trump from election day forward?

In the metoo world, I thought we dismiss the utterances of the canceled. Or is there an exception for the canceled who are now atoning by working for the party again?

And does anyone believe what anonymous State Dept leakers say was going on at the time?

David Begley म्हणाले...

Glenn Thrush is a total shill.

Gilbert Pinfold म्हणाले...

The same Glenn Thrush who would submit his drat articles to the Hlilary campaign for approval?

That Glenn Thrush?

narciso म्हणाले...

when many sources are telling you, the same story, and using the same words, well you know from Chisholm's war on walker, you're being spun,

narciso म्हणाले...

yes, he is, but I'm relying on McIntyre, who like kyle orton, isn't really keen on any faction

Gilbert Pinfold म्हणाले...

That was "draft" articles. Lousy typing on Mondays

Mike Sylwester म्हणाले...

Putin then rushed in, annexing Crimea and backing paramilitaries who invaded the country’s east

Crimea and Donbass are populated overwhelmingly by ethnic-Russians, who voted for Viktor Yanukovych in Ukraine's 2010 presidential election. According to the European Union's election observers, Yanukovych won the election fairly.

After Yanukovych assumed his office, the ethnic-Ukrainians waged a relentless campaign to remove him from his office. This subversive campaign was supported and guided by the Obama Administration.

(This campaign is similar to the campaign that the USA's Democrats have waged against President Trump. It's reasonable to say that the campaign to remove President Yanukovych was the precursor to the campaign to remove President Trump.)

Eventually, President Yanukovych was compelled to flee Ukraine on February 21, 2014.

Three weeks later, on March 16, Crimea conducted a referendum to secede from Ukraine and to join Russia. The referendum was approved by a 97% majority. The ethnic-Russians had figured that their votes for President did not count in Ukraine, even if their candidate won. By joining Russia, their future votes for President might count.

That is how Putin "annexed" Crimea -- by a 97%-majority to join Russia.

The ethnic-Russians in Donbass gladly would have conducted a similar referendum and likewise would have voted to secede from Ukraine and to join Russia peacefully. However, they have not been allowed to secede peacefully, and therefore they have rebelled and tried to secede by force of arms.

The votes of ethnic-Russians in Donbass are worthless. Even if their candidate wins and becomes Ukraine's President, he can be subverted with the CIA's help and be compelled to flee from Ukraine.

Vice President Joe Biden played a key role in the subversion of President Yanukovych.

Ann Althouse म्हणाले...

"And you wonder why it's called an ivory tower."

You're misreading me. You don't understand what is in my head. You seem to be making the inference that I believe I can get what I want or that I think people in journalism and politics will be interested in giving me that. Actually, I don't know what is in your head, but I believe you intend to insult me. Correct me if I'm wrong and while you're at it, respond to my criticism of you.

n.n म्हणाले...

The Obama administration is culpable from Baghdad to Tehran, from Benghazi to ISIS, other anthropogenic conflicts in spatial and political proximity, and for progress in Kiev and DC. However, thus far, it is only the roles of Clinton, Biden, and lower level bureaucrats that are publicly acknowledged.

Fernandinande म्हणाले...

Amtrak Charm. Bracelets.

narciso म्हणाले...

an in other news,

https://apelbaum.wordpress.com/

Ann Althouse म्हणाले...

Thanks for the push on who Glenn Thrush is. Click on my tag to see the stuff from a few years ago.

n.n म्हणाले...

Putin then rushed in, annexing Crimea and backing paramilitaries who invaded the country’s east

Russia mitigated the progress of a humanitarian crisis forced by a violent coup in Kiev. The worst that can be said is that they intervened only because of a common interest and, perhaps, shared diversity (although the refugees are not uniformly of a single color class, including Russians, Jews, etc.), with the refugees.

narciso म्हणाले...

well biden's Iraq Sherpa, peter galbraith, who was the kurds guy, was also behind the proxy attack against Karzai, which turned him against us, he also counseled against following up mccrystal's counterinsurgency strategy

Left Bank of the Charles म्हणाले...

"What I want is clear speech about what evidence there is, the need to make inferences from the evidence, which inferences are stronger, and what we should do when there are different possible inferences."

This runs both ways. For a clear-cut win, Democrats have to prove Trump was asking Ukraine to manufacture dirt on the Bidens and Trump has to prove the Bidens were dirty and the then-government of Ukraine interfered against him in the 2016 election.

Ann Althouse म्हणाले...

From Thrush's Wikipedia page:

"Thrush came under criticism from the conservative National Review and the left-leaning The Intercept after an email released by Wikileaks (the Podesta emails) showed Thrush sending John Podesta portions of a draft article that dealt with Podesta, asking that he fact-check those portions. Thrush also wrote, "No worries Because I have become a hack I will send u the whole section that pertains to u. Please don't share or tell anyone I did this Tell me if I fucked up anything." Podesta did not ask for any changes, writing back "no problems here".[17][18] It is common that reporters send drafts of articles to subjects prior to publication, asking the subjects to comment and verify the accuracy.[17][18]...

"In November 2017, Vox published an article containing the accounts of four female journalists who said that Thrush engaged in inappropriate sexual behavior toward them.[12] The incidents recounted in the Vox story about Thrush involve four women over a five-year period, and the women alleged Thrush groped and kissed them against their will. One woman alleged Thrush engaged in office gossip about her following an unwanted kiss.[19] In a statement published on his Facebook page,[20] Thrush disputed gossiping about the woman. After the publication of the article, The New York Times suspended Thrush, who issued a statement that read in part: "Over the past several years, I have responded to a succession of personal and health crises by drinking heavily. During that period, I have done things that I am ashamed of, actions that have brought great hurt to my family and friends. I have not taken a drink since June 15, 2017, have resumed counseling and will soon begin outpatient treatment for alcoholism. I am working hard to repair the damage I have done." The Times issued a statement saying, "We support his decision to enter a substance-abuse program."[3]

"On December 20, 2017, the New York Times reported after an investigation that Thrush was permanently removed from covering the White House and would remain suspended until late January 2018. The Times specified Thrush would be reassigned to a beat about the "social safety net in the age of Trump, particularly HUD and HHS."[21] It's been noted Thrush was moved to a subject that greatly affects women and that covering the social safety net is considered a "punishment" or demotion from covering the White House.[22][23] He was also required to undergo unspecified "training designed to improve his workplace conduct," according to a statement by Times Executive Editor Dean Baquet.[24] The behavioral inquiry interviewed 30 people from inside and outside of the newspaper in Washington and New York and was led by an internal attorney Charlotte Behrendt.[25] Carolyn Ryan, an assistant managing editor at the Times, said of the inquiry, "The people who worked most closely with Glenn in the bureau—men, women, young, old—were supportive of him and did believe that he could contribute and hadn’t seen the kind of behavior that had been described." [26]"

readering म्हणाले...

The evidence is that Trump wanted to take down his main Democratic rival and got together with Giuliani to beat him with whatever stick he could grab at. The evidence that Trump cares about fighting corruption anywhere? Zero.

narayanan म्हणाले...

elkh1 said... His willingness to take jobs that nobody...
______????
Sleepy Joe as Mike Rowe?! doing jobs that nobody?

shovels shit and finds pony and unicorn?!

I would definitely vote for this guy if he would bottle that secret

narciso म्हणाले...

and from what we've seen with landon Thomas, and Epstein, that means nearly nothing, so he was trawling princess diana conspiracies, zaid, not thrush,

Joel Winter म्हणाले...

Using the phrase "without evidence" has specific utility to the reader since it is a signifier of the author's bias and inability/unwillingness to accept certain things as evidence.

It's evidence, to us.

It's *almost* a dog-whistle (except that I can hear it, and I'm not a dog).

Drago म्हणाले...

readering: "The evidence is that Trump wanted to take down his main Democratic rival and got together with Giuliani to beat him with whatever stick he could grab at."

LOL

The lies get more and more pathetic.

If the Bidens were not guilty of corruption in 2016 and if Crowdstrike was all on the up and up with their DNC servers hacking "analysis" (which is all the FBI got in terms of server hacking analysis), then the dems should be welcoming the investigation to clear their wonderfully good names!

LOL

But don't worry readering, your little stalinesque secret show trials here in the US (as Durham and Barr continue their work) and the astonishing abandonment of Jeremy Corbyn in Britain by former Labour leaders and members due to his undeniable jew hatred bodes really well for you and your lunatic lefty fever dreams.....

cubanbob म्हणाले...

That Obama let his life insurance be in charge of these foreign policy matters demonstrates that Obama isn't any smarter than Slow Joe. What could he have been thinking to make Joe his VP and Hillary his Secretary of State? As for the Democrats they have a choice between criminals and communists and criminal communists.

Drago म्हणाले...

Bears repeating:

"Thrush came under criticism from the conservative National Review and the left-leaning The Intercept after an email released by Wikileaks (the Podesta emails) showed Thrush sending John Podesta portions of a draft article that dealt with Podesta, asking that he fact-check those portions. Thrush also wrote, "No worries Because I have become a hack I will send u the whole section that pertains to u. Please don't share or tell anyone I did this Tell me if I fucked up anything." Podesta did not ask for any changes, writing back "no problems here".[17][18] It is common that reporters send drafts of articles to subjects prior to publication, asking the subjects to comment and verify the accuracy.[17][18]..."

Our "objective" US press.......

TreeJoe म्हणाले...

"...early 2014, as others on Mr. Obama’s team raced to finish big-splash deals with Cuba and Iran, Mr. Biden told the president he wanted to take on three of the most unappetizing foreign-policy tasks left undone: containing the Islamic State, curbing immigration from Central America..."

That is one of the most damning summaries I've ever heard of the Obama admin. They focused on deals with Cuba - CUBA - and Iran (at all costs with Iran) over little things like containing or denigrating ISIS or dealing with mass unchecked immigration from the south as cartels took over vast swaths.

Put another way: Obama focused more on cutting deals with enemy or near-enemy states than he did with actually solving clear and present problems to the U.S.

I'm embarrassed by Obama's presidency. He was such an anemic leader. The shit he ignored will cause generations of problems, while the shit he addressed (Iran, Libya, Syria) was undone by the simple fact that he wouldn't take strong stances and the people he dealt with were bad actors. Or he didn't actually build consensus or get treaties signed and ratified.

bonkti म्हणाले...

Bing takes me to a definition of Homeric epithet as "a formulaic phrase (often a compound adjective) used habitually to characterize a person or thing" , for example "the grey-eyed goddess" or "rosy fingered dawn".

Contemporary usage requires that Trumpian statements be habitually characterized as " claims without evidence" or " debunked charges. "

The Homeric epithets offer consistent characterization and a soothing rhythm for the narrative.

Sam L. म्हणाले...

"What I want is clear speech about what evidence there is, the need to make inferences from the evidence, which inferences are stronger, and what we should do when there are different possible inferences." Oh, NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. What would the Dems do if they had do THAT????? (Can you say "Roaches in the kitchen, boys and girls?" Yes, I knew you could.)

narciso म्हणाले...

he knew biden would screw things up, he was against the contras, for the nuclear freeze, he was against the gulf war, perhaps one of the few things he got right, in retrospect, the earlier sentiments probably came from his affiliation with the soviet front, council for a livable future,

Carol म्हणाले...

I took a year's worth of journalism classes back in 1987, and there wasn't professor there who wouldn't have ripped these reporters a new one over this kind of thing. You do not know what someone is thinking, only what they tell you they're thinking.

But these reporters are not J school people. As Matt Taibbi points in Hate Inc, they're failed literature graduates from nice schools, like him, who wrote poetry for their college lit magazines, and were supposedly trained on the job.

J school is for the proles.

narciso म्हणाले...

re cuba, you have to consider the castro regime, was very highly praised by reverend wright, ?(who was a frequent guest) by bill ayers (who received guerilla training) probably by Roberto de unger and derrick bell, all of Obama's mentors,

Ken B म्हणाले...

“You don’t understand what is in my head.”
Thus Ann to a poster above.

I thought communicating that was the purpose of your words.

You often indicate people do know, when for example they note an implicit link between articles.

I thought his remark was perfectly comprehensible. You expressed a hope he considered unrealistic and unrealizable.

Francisco D म्हणाले...

The problem with determining with what Joe Biden actually did in Ukraine is that it requires looking into what Biden did in Ukraine. And the Dems are now shouting that to ask someone to "look into what Biden did" is an impeachable offense that endangers the rule of law and the existence of the nation.

This statement bears repeating.

If the Dems get away with it, I will be as depressed as J. Farmer about the future of our nation.

tommyesq म्हणाले...

Mr. Biden told the president he wanted to take on three of the most unappetizing foreign-policy tasks left undone: containing the Islamic State, curbing immigration from Central America and keeping Russia from devouring Ukraine....

And a bang-up job he did with all three!

p.s. - is he still looking to curb Central American immigration - I hear the current guy in the White House has some ideas...

अनामित म्हणाले...

readering: The evidence is that Trump wanted to take down his main Democratic rival and got together with Giuliani to beat him with whatever stick he could grab at. The evidence that Trump cares about fighting corruption anywhere? Zero.

Don't be coy, readering. So, the evidence for the former as opposed to the latter is....?

Please adhere to the Althousian concept of "evidence" as outlined in this post in your response, not the attempted sleight-of-hand substitution of mind-reading and question-begging that she's slamming here.

Original Mike म्हणाले...

"Mr. Giuliani has claimed, without evidence, that Mr. Biden’s push to oust Mr. Shokin was an attempt to block scrutiny of his son’s actions...."

I am (purposefully) not following this closely, but how does this square with Biden's on the record statement that if Ukraine doesn't fire the prosecutor they're not getting their billion dollars? Was the prosecutor someone other than Shokin?

Mike Sylwester म्हणाले...

Despite the Ukrainian zealots' relentless campaign -- supported and guided by the Obama Administration -- to remove Ukrainian President Viktor Yanuvoych from his fairly-elected office, Yanukovych managed to remain in office from January 2010 into February 2014.

Then Yanukovych was compelled to flee from Ukraine on February 21, 2014. The seditious campaign succeeded because of the so-called Maidan Massacre, which happened on February 18-20. The story of that event is that some of Yanukovych's supporters shot bullets into crowds protesting against Yanukovych on Maidan Park in Kyiv. About 50 people were killed.

The massacre was blamed on Yanukovych, who subsequently fled the country.

However, to this day, no shooter has been identified or charged. There is no proof that the shooters -- whoever they were -- were acting on Yanukovych's behalf or orders.

=====

An informative article about the blame for the massacre has been written by Ivan Katchanovski, a teacher at the School of Political Studies and the Department of Communication at the University of Ottawa. He has held research and teaching positions at Harvard University, the State University of New York at Potsdam, the University of Toronto, and the Kluge Center at the Library of Congress. He received Ph.D. from the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University. He is the author of Cleft Countries: Regional Political Divisions and Cultures in Post-Soviet Ukraine and Moldova.

Katchanovski's article is titled The Buried Maidan Massacre and Its Misrepresentation by the West and was published on the Consortium News website last April.

The article includes the following passages (emphasis added):

------

.... From the start, the dominant narrative promoted by the Ukrainian and Western governments and mainstream media has placed the blame for this tragedy firmly on the Yanukovych government. It contends that forces loyal to former President Victor Yanukovych— either snipers and/or the Berkut, a special anti-riot police— massacred peaceful Maidan protesters on the direct orders of Yanukovych himself. Such charges against Yanukovych, his ministers and commanders and a special Berkut unit—whose five ex-members were tried for the murder of 48 Maidan protesters on Feb. 20, 2014 — are generally taken at face value. With some limited exceptions, challenges to this narrative are treated dismissively.

For the most part, mainstream news media in the U.S. and other Western countries ignored trial evidence, public statements by officials and politicians and scholarly studies that put the standard narrative under question. This includes non-reporting about my own academic studies of the Maidan massacre.

My work found that this was an organized mass killing of both protesters and the police, with the goal of delegitimizing the Yanukovych government and its forces and seizing power in Ukraine. Oligarchic and far right elements of the Maidan movement were involved in this massacre. For this reason, the official investigation was fabricated and stonewalled. ....

The forensic medical examinations conducted for the government investigation and made public at the Maidan massacre trial revealed that the absolute majority of the protesters were shot not in front and not from horizontal or near horizontal directions that are consistent with police positions. Rather, they were shot from a top-to-bottom direction and in sides or the back that are consistent with shooting from the Maidan-controlled buildings [from buildings controlled by the anti-Yanukovych protesters]. ....

My Maidan massacre studies video appendices showed that it was in the Maidan-controlled area and that snipers on its roof during the massacre were reported by both numerous Maidan protesters, including many wounded ...

Unknown म्हणाले...

Isn't the evidence circumstantial in nature, which can in fact support certain inferences?

Bay Area Guy म्हणाले...

Quid Pro Joe!

If Kammy Harris had been dealing with Ukraine, it'd be Quid Pro Ho.

If Liz Warren had been dealing with Ukraine, it'd be Quid Pro Faux.

narciso म्हणाले...

taibbi points out, that vogel trying to debunk a story that politico itself put out there 2 and 1/2 years ago, is ironic,

Jaq म्हणाले...

You know what the New York Times didn’t see fit to include in their story? That Ukraine did interfere in US elections. That they leaked stuff from their intelligence files to Democrats who got it printed in the New York Times, and that Ciaramella met with the Ukraine prosecutor who leaked that information in the White House.

Politico had the story of Ukraine interference in January of 2017.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446

They also failed to see fit to print that the day that Biden fired Shokin, Ciaramella met with his lieutenants in the White House.

https://twitter.com/ClimateAudit/status/1193513165616644097

the New York Times also didn’t see fit to print that Burisma dropped Hunter Biden’s name with the State Department and hired a high powered law firm wired into the Democrats and Burisma ended up with a slap on the wrist at the end of the day.

Jaq म्हणाले...

It’s like what Monica Lewinsky said about power: “Power is the ability to appear in public for thirty years without ever being asked certain uncomfortable questions.” Biden has power.

Hagar म्हणाले...

"Mr. X has claimed, without evidence..."
is a stock phrase the MSM routinely inserts when referring to any claim of "wrongdoing" by Democrats.
(Wrongdoing in quote marks because all claims against Republicans are "wrongdoing" even if they only refer to inappropriate behavior, however slight, while claims against Democrats are all treated as if referring to proven criminal actions.)

However, the claims that Hunter Biden was paid $53,000+/month (or $83,000+/month ?) for several years and Joe himself was paid $900,000 for lobbying on Burisma's behalf after he left office (and isn't there supposed to have been a waiting period here?) have been around for quite a while now without being denied by anyone.

Is not the lack of denial sufficient evidence that they occurred, and are we not entitled to draw our own conclusions from that?

n.n म्हणाले...

consistent with shooting from the Maidan-controlled buildings

Shades of Antifa in Charlottesville. Fortunately, it was contained and did not progress.

narciso म्हणाले...

thanks skylark, the truth is out there, but some one has to be willing to publish it,

Bay Area Guy म्हणाले...

The NYT has reported, without evidence, blah, blah, blah, blah.

n.n म्हणाले...

politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446

Donald Trump wasn’t the only presidential candidate whose campaign was boosted by officials of a former Soviet bloc country.

Politico was so close with the headline, then they lost it with the first line.

Jaq म्हणाले...

Biden had a huge political interest in keeping his son’s name out of the press in a scandal like this during an election year. It is impossible to say that there was no “conflict of interest.” maybe the New York Times aught to give us a definition of that term that includes the exception for Biden and accounts for both family and political interests.

The whole impeachment is about Trump using his power, supposedly, to advance his political interests. How is keeping Hunter Biden’s name out of the press not in Biden’s political interest? Or the interests of his party? Schiff is using the power of impeachment to advance his political interests.

narciso म्हणाले...

They are always telling half the story:


https://mobile.twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1193920564777369601

traditionalguy म्हणाले...

Biden was a well trained Bag Man assigned to pick up the payoffs. That made him a beloved hero in DC.

Lurker21 म्हणाले...

I am reminded of all of those "counterintuitive" stories in the Atlantic during the Obama years. You know, the "Could Joe Biden Secretly Be Really Smart?" and "Why John Kerry Could Be A Great Secretary of State" and "Hillary Clinton Is Actually Very Likable" stories, that read like they came straight from the politicians' publicists and spin doctors.

···

Like Thrush, Vogel has also submitted articles to Democratic operatives before publication, at least according to his Wikipedia page. In his case, it was less egregious because the article wasn't wholly favorable to the Democrats.

Vogel made comments critical of Biden's Ukraine role a month back, remarking on how things could be interpreted, and he was slammed for it by Democrats, so now he is back on the reservation: Nothing to see here. Move along.

bandmeeting म्हणाले...

I truly hope nobody ever accuses me of having Amtrak charm.

narciso म्हणाले...

Indeed:



https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/11/russia_beclowns_itself_on_bolivia__alongside_cuba_venezuela_nicaragua.html

Ralph L म्हणाले...

What could he have been thinking to make Joe his VP and Hillary his Secretary of State?

We should be glad BO chose corruption and incompetence.

JAORE म्हणाले...


I'd just like to see a consistent approach to....

What I want is clear speech about what evidence there is, the need to make inferences from the evidence, which inferences are stronger, and what we should do when there are different possible inferences.

1. You and me both, sister.

and

2. Do you recall Kavanaugh at all?

Lurker21 म्हणाले...

Ivan Katchanovski is not necessarily a reliable source. I'm not saying he's unreliable. I just get the feeling that he may not be any more trustworthy than the guy who has put "Ivan Katchanovski Falsifier" all over the Internet. Feelings run high on these things and the stakes are high, so it's hard to know who to trust.

gilbar म्हणाले...

In Biden's own words--in a 2018 speech at an event for the publication Foreign Affairs

Isn't it Interesting, that dems keep accusing Trump of doing Bad Things?
Bad Things that They have previously BOASTED about doing?

"Trump colluded with the russians!" said the people that colluded with the russians!
"Trump took emoluments from foreigners!" said the people that took Hundreds of Millions
"Trump put children in Cages!" Said the people that put people in cages
"Trump had sex with women!" Said the RAPISTS that RAPED women

n.n म्हणाले...

The untold story of the Maidan massacre

Under attack, the police retreated from their position near the front line in the square, falling back along the street on the north side of Hotel Ukraine.

Protesters then advanced towards the police, where they were shot by retreating security forces and snipers from surrounding buildings.
...
When the shooting started early on the morning of the 20th, Sergei says, he was escorted to the Conservatory, and spent some 20 minutes before 07:00 firing on police, alongside a second gunman.

His account is partially corroborated by other witnesses. That morning, Andriy Shevchenko, then an opposition MP and part of the Maidan movement, had received a phone call from the head of the riot police on the square.

"He calls me and says, 'Andriy, somebody is shooting at my guys.' And he said that the shooting was from the Conservatory."

Shevchenko contacted the man in charge of security for the protesters, Andriy Parubiy, known as the Commandant of the Maidan.

"I sent a group of my best men to go through the entire Conservatory building and determine whether there were any firing positions," Parubiy says.
...
Andriy Parubiy, now deputy speaker of the Ukrainian parliament, says his men found no gunmen in the Conservatory building.

But a photographer who gained access to the Conservatory later in the morning - shortly after 08:00 - took pictures there of men with guns, although he did not see them fire.

Chris Lopes म्हणाले...

"readering: The evidence is that Trump wanted to take down his main Democratic rival and got together with Giuliani to beat him with whatever stick he could grab at. The evidence that Trump cares about fighting corruption anywhere? Zero."

I'm among the last folks on this blog to defend Trump. I didn't vote for him last time and I won't vote for him this time. He is a world-class ass clown.

That being said, this impeachment stuff is pure unadulterated horse shit. Whatever Trump was thinking or trying to do with the Ukranians doesn't matter if it didn't end up happening. You can talk about what Guilanni said to who all you want, but in the end the Ukranians got their aid and the Biddens were not investigated. There really wasn't any quid or quo, so there isn't any crime.

Mark म्हणाले...

Isn't the evidence circumstantial in nature, which can in fact support certain inferences?

The evidence is Joe Biden's admission/confession, with the corpus delicti supported by other evidence of his wrongdoing.

Clyde म्हणाले...

You're not going to get "clear speech" in any sort of unbiased way from those who are no longer journalists but partisan purveyors of narrative. Sorry, but that's the way it is, to quote another purveyor of narrative.

Mark म्हणाले...

The further evidence is the Democrats conspiracy and active efforts to obstruct justice in determining the facts of the Biden case.

Sally327 म्हणाले...

I've always wondered, is it Ukraine or The Ukraine? Like Ohio State is supposed to be The Ohio State.

Anyway, I find it amusing, the idea that Joe Biden was the man taking on the jobs nobody else wanted. Like, wow, what a team player. As if he had a choice. That's the definition of V.P. isn't it? Do whatever crap job is pushed your away or be completely irrelevant.

Martin म्हणाले...

And I am going to believe anything from Glenn Thrush?

I don't think so.

Birkel म्हणाले...

Graft comes from lots of unexpected places.

Stephen म्हणाले...

I'm inclined to agree with Professor Althouse that people should be clearer about their reasoning--but I'd be more persuaded if she applied the same standard to both sides in her own writing about Trump and the Ukraine. Still, sometimes "without evidence" can serve as fair shorthand for a more detailed analysis.

As a short hand, "without evidence" works pretty well as applied to Giuliani's claim that Biden's actions in the Ukraine were not in the national interest and aimed at protecting his son. That's not simply because Biden denies the claim, but because Biden's pressure to remove Shokin clearly reflected settled bipartisan American government policy and the policy of our allies and because no one has pointed to strong evidence that Shokin posed a threat to Burisma or Hunter Biden, let alone that his anticipated successor would have posed less of a threat to them. So the inference that Biden acted contrary to the national interest to protect his son is very weak.

Conversely, the inference that Trump acted contrary to the national interest and solely to serve his own personal interest is strong. It does not rest only on the phone call. It rests on evidence, now confirmed by a raft of testimony under oath, (1) that Trump's decision to withhold military aid was contrary to bipartisan national policy, as declared by both houses of Congress and shared by State, Defense, and the NSC, and to our national interest; (2) that Trump was not motivated by any desire to stop or ferret out corruption in the Ukraine, since he fired the anti-corruption US Ambassador for doing her job on the basis of a series of lies spread by his own lawyer, was apparently bitter about the internal Ukrainian anti-corruption efforts that exposed his campaign manager's crimes, and was pushing theories of Ukrainian involvement in the 2016 election which he had repeatedly been advised lacked any basis in fact; (3) that Trump chose to conduct this policy through his own personal lawyer and a major campaign donor, rather than through conventional diplomatic channels; and (4) that those working on Ukraine issues in the government broadly agreed that the motivation for Trump's actions was political, rather than national. And of course it also rests on the existing evidence suggesting that claims of corruption against Biden rest on speculation, rather than fact.

I'm not saying that the evidence of Trump's intent is irrefutable. But it's pretty strong, and the administration's failure to produce witnesses and documents in support of any aspect of it (including Biden's alleged wrongdoing) only strengthens it further.

Given these differences, "without evidence" works well as shorthand for the claim regarding Biden's intent. But it would not work as applied to the claim about what was on Trump's mind. Professor Althouse, what have I missed?

John henry म्हणाले...

Why do people keep calling joe Biden a "political O opponent"?

He's not. As a former vp there is close to zero chance he'll be tyne nominee.

Joe's just running for the money.

I still say he doesn't make it to December.

John Henry

steve uhr म्हणाले...

I don’t think he was bribed into manufacturing dirt on Biden. I will assume that trump honestly was seeking only a thorough investigation and nothing more because he honestly believed that Ukraine would uncover preexisting dirt. He still asked a foreign power to investigate a political rival and his decision to delay military aid was directly connected to said investigations according to several witnesses including political appointees. And he had his personal lawyer engage in shadow diplomacy on behalf of his client. Thus there were two foreign policies, the official one on behalf of the USA and the unofficial policy on behalf of trump the person. Gee, I wonder which will prevail.

Ben Lange म्हणाले...

Biden was constantly being kept busy doing jobs no one else wanted. Weird how evidence of his uselessness is being spy the other way.

n.n म्हणाले...

Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine

The official form is Ukraine.

Europe :: Ukraine

conventional long form: none
conventional short form: Ukraine
local long form: none
local short form: Ukrayina
former: Ukrainian National Republic, Ukrainian State, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic
etymology: name derives from the Old East Slavic word "ukraina" meaning "borderland or march (militarized border region)" and began to be used extensively in the 19th century; originally Ukrainians referred to themselves as Rusyny (Rusyns, Ruthenians, or Ruthenes), an endonym derived from the medieval Rus state (Kyivan Rus)


Another horse, of course, of course, and there is a consensus.

JMW Turner म्हणाले...

Joe Biden NYT tongue bath.

Jim at म्हणाले...

For a clear-cut win, Democrats have to prove Trump was asking Ukraine to manufacture dirt on the Bidens and Trump has to prove the Bidens were dirty and the then-government of Ukraine interfered against him in the 2016 election. - left bank

Or you could save yourself a lot of trouble and effort by reading the transcript and then listening to Joe Biden's own words.

But, yeah. Why do that?

Jim at म्हणाले...

I 'worked' with Ken Vogel back in 2004. By worked, I mean I was a flack and he was a session scribe for The News Tribune(Tacoma, WA) in Olympia. Even had a few brews with him.

Smart enough guy. Savvy. Not completely leftist insane. Can't say he's been corrupted since then, but making the jump to the Big Leagues will do that to a person.

Drago म्हणाले...

Jim at: "Or you could save yourself a lot of trouble and effort by reading the transcript and then listening to Joe Biden's own words."

Amazing isn't it?

left bank and all his pals refuse to look at what they can see with their own eyes and hear with their own ears because they are too busy watching the funny little light that Schiff-ty keeps moving around on the wall.

But then again, that's the kind of obliviousness and refusal to see reality that makes them good lefty foot soldiers/cannon fodder.

Mike Sylwester म्हणाले...

I've always wondered, is it Ukraine or The Ukraine?

In Russian, the word means something like "the border-land" or "the margin-land" or "the edge-land", because it was the place along Russia's border. The word's root kray means "edge".

The word was translated into English as "The Ukraine". The Russian language does not have our English article "the", but English-speakers reflexively put that article before such an expression.

After the Soviet Union fell apart, Ukrainians decided and requested that the country's name should be translated into English as just "Ukraine". I suppose the reason was to disassociate the country's name from Russia.

narciso म्हणाले...

I pointed out, from contemporaneous, how much horse hockey, these claims against shokin, are, then there is the other documentation from foia, re blue star strategies, the shokin deposition, the audiotape from the nabu,

Mike Sylwester म्हणाले...

Stephen at 1:44 PM
Biden's pressure to remove Shokin clearly reflected settled bipartisan American government policy and the policy of our allies

A statement without evidence.

Name one ally that demanded the removal of Shokin.

Mike Sylwester म्हणाले...

Stephen at 1:44 PM
Professor Althouse, what have I missed?

You missed that Ukrainians were bribing Joe Biden -- the Obama Administration's "point-man on Ukraine" -- indirectly by giving lots of money to his son Hunter.

Mike Sylwester म्हणाले...

steve uhr at 1:53 PM
he had his personal lawyer engage in shadow diplomacy on behalf of his client

Exactly when and how did Giuliani work as Trump's personal lawyer?

Stephen म्हणाले...

Mike Sylvester, I had in mind the European Union.

steve uhr म्हणाले...

Mike, I don’t think it is in dispute that Giuliani was working on behalf of trump in Ukraine. Who did he bill for his travel expenses? Did he pay out of his own pocket?

Iman म्हणाले...

“I'd just like to see a consistent approach to talking about other people's thoughts.”

One would think this is not a big ask, but one would be very wrong.

buwaya म्हणाले...

The first casualty is truth.
This is a war, and you are listening to a propaganda system.
I think you need to adjust your expectations.

And besides having a ministry of information, in effect, you also have a KGB and a nomenklatura and Djilas “new class”, also all in the bargain.

Mike Sylwester म्हणाले...

Stephen at 2:42 PM
I had in mind the European Union.

What did the European Union ever say about Ukraine's Prosecutor-General Viktor Shokin?

Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves म्हणाले...

Can I get a 50,000/per month job? in Ukraine? in a biz know nothing about?

Mike Sylwester म्हणाले...

steve uhr at 2:45 PM
Mike, I don’t think it is in dispute that Giuliani was working on behalf of trump in Ukraine.

What's your evidence that Giuliani was working as Trump's personal lawyer in Ukraine?

Stephen म्हणाले...

Mike Sylvester,

Was Giuliani Trump's lawyer: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/19/us/politics/giuliani-trump.html

Does the fact that Burisma was paying Hunter Biden large sums show that Biden acted to protect Burisma and or Hunter. This runs up against the fact that the goal of removing Shokin was the policy of the US, the European Union and the IMF, among others. And the fact that the evidence that Shokin posed a threat to Burisma--let alone to Hunter--is weak. Does that mean that Hunter showed good practical or ethical judgment to take or keep the position, or that his father should not have raised the issue with him? No, but the question is whether Biden's exercise of Vice Presidential power was corrupted. And on that issue, the available evidence is strongly against.

Susan म्हणाले...

Joe didn't want the job? Cripes I would have done it if they'd have to paid my kid half what Hunter made.

Mike Sylwester म्हणाले...

Stephen at 2:59 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/19/us/politics/giuliani-trump.html

Thanks for the link, but I can't read it. Please summarize it.

In particular, when and how did Giuliani work as Trump's personal lawyer?

When Giuliani was collecting information about the Ukrainian bribing of Joe and Hunter Biden, was he doing so as Trump's personal lawyer? If so, then what is the evidence for that?

I am not arguing with you. I am just asking for information. I don't claim to know the answers to my questions.

Ann Althouse म्हणाले...

“ You expressed a hope he considered unrealistic and unrealizable.”

He inferred that I was some things that I was not. The inference was based on my expression of an ideal. To state what is ideal is not to express an opinion that it is achievable. You have to make an inference and the inference about my state of mind was incorrect.

Stephen म्हणाले...

Mike Sylwester:

This is the first article that comes up on Google when you put in Shokin and European Union.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/eu-hails-sacking-of-ukraine-s-prosecutor-viktor-shokin-1.2591190

I'm beginning to doubt whether you are actually interested in evidence.

narciso म्हणाले...

the eu past and future officials were tied to zylochevsky, fischer from germany, some French and the fmr. polish pm, so who were they really investigating,

Ann Althouse म्हणाले...

“ Isn't the evidence circumstantial in nature, which can in fact support certain inferences?”

Yes. In that sense, it’s wrong to say Giuliani is “without evidence.” The attack on Trump relies on such inferences.

Evidence is anything that makes a fact in issue more likely to be true... or less likely.

I used to teach Evidence, by the way.

Jaq म्हणाले...

"I think you need to adjust your expectations.”

Oh, that’s been done, but it was a bitter pill to see a system I kinda sorta believed in exposed for what it is.

Mike Sylwester म्हणाले...

Stephen at 2:59 PM
This runs up against the fact that the goal of removing Shokin was the policy of the US, the European Union and the IMF, among others.

The US State Department should release all the relevant evidence.

* Correspondence with the EU and IMF about Shokin

* Position papers, briefing papers and memoranda related to Biden's demand that the Ukrainian government fire Shokin

* Reports and documents about Burisma, Hunter Biden and Shokin.

Let's see the State Department's proof that international organizations approved Joe Biden's demand that Shokin be fired.

narciso म्हणाले...

and who did they prosecute afterwards, at least 1.6 billion from that loan, was lost through privat bank estimates are total losses were at least 5 billion, when they had to nationalize the bank,

Stephen म्हणाले...

Mike Sylwester,

The New York Times article reports Trump's retention of Giuliani for his personal legal team.

Steve

narciso म्हणाले...

the times strikingly does not review the big foia they did on all persons, related to burisma,

Stephen म्हणाले...

Mike Sylwester,

The US State Department could release all the relevant evidence regarding Shokin's firing if it chose to or if Trump ordered it to. What's more the Senate Intelligence Committee could request it. What inference do you draw from the fact that this has not occurred?

narciso म्हणाले...

have you been paying attention how many officials at foggy bottom, believe they are the ones that determine policy, not carry it out,

narciso म्हणाले...

the senate intelligence committee, don't make me laugh, burr has been totally useless,

Mike Sylwester म्हणाले...

Stephen at 3:0 PM
This is the first article that comes up on Google when you put in Shokin and European Union.

Thanks for the link.

The linked article fails to provide the context that the Ukrainian parliament voted to fire Shokin because Joe Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion of US taxpayers' money from Ukraine.

The article gives the false impression that the Ukrainian parliament itself decided that Shokin should be fired. In fact, the Ukrainian parliament decided only that it could not afford to lose $1 billion of US aide.

The article does not provide any evidence that the EU played any role in Biden's demand that Shokin be fired. It seems to me that the EU merely responded after-the-fact.

Let's see all the US State Department's documents related to the EU and Shokin. Maybe those documents contain compelling proof that the EU pressured Biden to get Shokin fired. Maybe the documents do not contain such proof. Let's see.

(I have to go take care of my grandson right now.)

Mike Sylwester म्हणाले...

Stephen at 3:16 PM
What inference do you draw from the fact that this has not occurred?

The inference I draw is that the State Department does not have any documents proving that any international organizations expressed any desire that Biden cause Shokin to be fired.

I am willing to be convinced otherwise. I want to see the State Department's documents in order to make up my mind.

Jaq म्हणाले...

For a clear-cut win, Democrats have to prove Trump was asking Ukraine to manufacture dirt on the Bidens and Trump has to prove the Bidens were dirty and the then-government of Ukraine interfered against him in the 2016 election. - left bank

Well it’s Trump for the win then, since Ukrainian interference has been widely covered in the pres.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446

https://www.thenation.com/article/ukraine-elections-2016/

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/462658-lets-get-real-democrats-were-first-to-enlist-ukraine-in-us-elections

If you poke around enough in that last one, you will see that the Ukrainians themselves had looked into the interference in the US election and not only documented it, they said officially that they were pressed to do so by Democrats. None of this stuff did the New York Times see fit to print.

Here, led the Ukrainian ambassador explain it:

“The Embassy got to know Ms. Chalupa because of her engagement with Ukrainian and other diasporas in Washington D.C., and not in her DNC capacity. We’ve learned about her DNC involvement later,” Chaly said in a statement issued by his embassy. “We were surprised to see Alexandra’s interest in Mr. Paul Manafort’s case. It was her own cause. The Embassy representatives unambiguously refused to get involved in any way, as we were convinced that this is a strictly U.S. domestic matter.”

“All ideas floated by Alexandra were related to approaching a Member of Congress with a purpose to initiate hearings on Paul Manafort or letting an investigative journalist ask President Poroshenko a question about Mr. Manafort during his public talk in Washington, D.C.,” the ambassador explained.


Wait! There’s more!

a Ukrainian court ruled that the country’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau, closely aligned with the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, and a parliamentarian named Serhiy Leshchenko wrongly interfered in the 2016 American election by releasing documents related to Manafort.

The acknowledgement by Kiev’s embassy, plus newly released testimony, suggests the Ukrainian efforts to influence the U.S. election had some intersections in Washington as well.

Nellie Ohr, wife of senior U.S. Justice Department official Bruce Ohr, acknowledged in congressional testimony that, while working for the Clinton-hired research firm Fusion GPS, she researched Trump's and Manafort’s ties to Russia and learned that Leshchenko, the Ukrainian lawmaker, was providing dirt to Fusion


Leshchenko met with BIden in the White House, BTW.

https://twitter.com/ClimateAudit/status/1193569479835258880

So at least we have Left Bank of the Charles agreeing now that this impeachment is bullshit. AmIright?

Jaq म्हणाले...

I knew intellectually that our press had been co-opted by billionaires who needed a way to leverage government, but I would say that the final straw was ABC Disney killing the Epstein story on behalf of Bill Clinton. This New York Times piece though is amazing for what it studiously avoids, because to acknowledge that simple fact would, as Left Bank correctly said, give Trump the clear win and devastate their Democrat allies and betray their billionaire masters.

Birkel म्हणाले...

narciso,
Not true about Richard Burr. He is fulfilling his role expertly. His role is to stop investigations into criminal behavior by the Alphabet Agencies alongside Mark Warner.

The fact that his preferred role is corrupt is another matter entirely.

Birkel म्हणाले...

Some European officials have said they supported the US position that Shokin should be removed.

They reported ambivalence but supported the American position. That is now used to foster the falsehood that the EU wanted Shokin gone.

Notice the pattern? The circular support for the Deep State position?

narciso म्हणाले...

true, he's useless for his designated purpose not actual, he's let mark warner walk all over him, with the backchannel to deripasha, who I conjectured went along with this, as revenge play against manafort when the price of aluminium collapsed,

Birkel म्हणाले...

Skylark,
Did you know the ABC CEO* flew on Epstein's Lolita Express?

*It may not be the current CEO. That I did not catch.

Sebastian म्हणाले...

"What I want is clear speech about what evidence there is"

I'm conflicted: I appreciate the fact that you are trying to be honest, but that oh-so-sincere desire for honesty gets a little old in the face of the deluge of prog propaganda, shoveled at us by the hegemonic prog media, which has made a mockery of any honest discourse for several decades now.

Jaq म्हणाले...

Who has a better supply of very young actresses with compliant mothers willing to do anything to get on TV than Disney ABC?

“Lay back and think of being on the Disney Channel honey!” - Mommy

Speaking of which, Whistleblower’s lawyer, a man in his 40s, had a strange fascination for Disney Channel clips of pretty teenage actresses. It’s almost like the whole system is rotten to the core.

I'm Full of Soup म्हणाले...

Who are they kidding ? Joe Biden has not had a real job in over 40 years and these two NYT asskissers want us to believe Biden was looking for real work while he was VP.

Unknown म्हणाले...

> he wanted to take on three of the most unappetizing foreign-policy tasks left undone: containing the Islamic State, curbing immigration from Central America and keeping Russia from devouring Ukraine....

He FAILED at ever task!

Remember when he was going to cure cancer?

Ralph L म्हणाले...

I read somewhere last weekend that Shokin confiscated some of the Burisma dude's assets a few days before Biden got him fired. Anyone else read that?

narciso म्हणाले...

yes, that's the gist of it, and considering burisma's European connections, represented by that yearly conference in Monaco, you can see why they were concerned where shokin was going,
so from what McIntyre has been able to cobble together, they didn't really have any objections to him, till January, a mere month before his ouster, before biden spoke to poroshenko,

narciso म्हणाले...

just a coincidence,


https://twitter.com/JesseKellyDC/status/1194015776791023617

Earnest Prole म्हणाले...

When the Times says someone claimed something without evidence, it's merely another way of saying they're a Republican.

Amadeus 48 म्हणाले...

Althouse has put her finger on the thing that irritates me the most about journalism and news reporting these days--the double standard. I don't have any problems with journalists throwing metaphoric rocks at DJT, GWB, GHWB, and RWR, but only if they also do it to BHO, WJC, and JEC, which they didn't and apparently won't. The ""without evidence should be applied to both sides or else abandoned. Of course, most journalists and news people don't want to apply it to Democrats under any circumstances.
As a result, I think, "There probably is evidence." And then I mentally delete the phrase.

Stephen म्हणाले...

Mike Sylwester,

I don't understand why you don't think that the Trump White House or the Trump State Department's failure to release evidence tending to show that Biden acted corruptly in seeking Shokin's removal supports an inference that no such evidence exists. Wouldn't such evidence, if it exists, be in their custody and control? And don't they have a strong motivation to make it public? So what's your explanation?

Stephen म्हणाले...

An open question to the commenters and the Professor. Where should I look for the best reasoned, fairest, evidence-backed argument that Joe Biden acted corruptly in seeking Shokin's removal--that is, that he did so against the national interest and in Burisma or his son's interest?

To repeat, my best understanding of the evidence is that Biden acted at all times consistent with consensus bipartisan US policy and his President's views at the time and that there is no strong evidence that he was concerned with protecting Hunter Biden, or that he had reason to believe that removing Shokin would do so. I am not seeing coherent, convincing statements of the opposing point of view here--I welcome citations.

narciso म्हणाले...

I show you from contemporaneous records, that's bogus, tell me what high profile target did they nab after they fired shokin,

Stephen म्हणाले...

Stephen said

"I am not seeking coherent, convincing statements of the opposing point of view here--I welcome citations."

Oops. Probably a Freudian slip. I meant to say, "not seeing." My interpretation--my unconscious doesn't want to be persuaded. But notwithstanding what Scott Adams may say, my ego is not simply a tool of my unconscious. So please send ahead the pieces that represent the best reasoned, most persuasive account of how Biden acted corruptly. I look forward to seeing them.

Jaq म्हणाले...

"most persuasive account of how Biden acted corruptly. I look forward to seeing them.”

Why, there have been plenty, you simply refuse to read them.

Given the transcript, isn’t the real question whether Ukraine meddled on behalf of Hillary, which is a settled question that they did?

Jaq म्हणाले...

I am not seeing coherent, convincing statements of the opposing point of view here--I welcome citations.

Complete bullshit. Read the thread again.

narciso म्हणाले...

harwood is a hack, but they almost all are:


https://twitter.com/jabeale/status/1193936896239554561

rcocean म्हणाले...

We talk about "The Ukraine" but never say

"The England"
"The Japan"
"The Russia"


IgnatzEsq म्हणाले...

Late (as always) but you have to adjust for new meanings of words now days. Two common ones I've seen are "without evidence" which means "with evidence" and "debunked" which means "things that I (the speaker) do not want to be true and haven't researched or investigated"

Sprezzatura म्हणाले...

We know Biden was into getting rid of the two corrupt dudes who were giving a pass to the owner of the company that Hunter worked for.

We know DJT held up aid and a visit in exchange for an effort re coming up with dirt re the Biden family.

Spot the difference?

I see, in this thread, Althouse is jabbering about her law prof skilz.

WI must be a real shit level school.

Or age results in slowing.

There’s evidence for either or both. But I’m not in her mind.

I dunno.

JamesB.BKK म्हणाले...

Joe utterly failed in all those things. A perfect record.

walter म्हणाले...

Much improved management of whitespace, Sitter.
Dude gotta go!

Mark म्हणाले...

Why oh why doesn't Blogger have a "block user" function???

Sprezzatura म्हणाले...

Maybe Althouse shoulda been a white space prof. Enforcing that is her thing.

MAGA apologist.

Michael K म्हणाले...

Thus there were two foreign policies, the official one on behalf of the USA and the unofficial policy on behalf of trump the person.

No, this is just the usual bullshit. There is a TREATY ! It requires Ukraine to investigate corruption.

Mike Sylwester म्हणाले...

Stephen at 6:05 PM
Where should I look for the best reasoned, fairest, evidence-backed argument that Joe Biden acted corruptly in seeking Shokin's removal--that is, that he did so against the national interest and in Burisma or his son's interest?

I hope that the US State Department will release its documents about Vice President Biden's actions to get General-Prosecutor Shokin fired.

* Correspondence with the Ukrainian Government about Shokin

* Correspondence with international organizations about Shokin

* Reports and position papers about Shokin

* Briefing papers for Biden before he took his actions

* Memoranda and after-action reports

* All reports about Burisma

Biden's story is that he acted in concert with international organizations who wanted Shokin fired. Let's see the State Department's evidence for Biden's story.

Mike Sylwester म्हणाले...

Stephen at 6:05 PM
Where should I look for the best reasoned, fairest, evidence-backed argument that Joe Biden acted corruptly in seeking Shokin's removal--that is, that he did so against the national interest and in Burisma or his son's interest?

In your opinion, why did Burisma hire Hunter Biden to serve on its Board of Directors?

narciso म्हणाले...

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/analysis-democrats-have-a-col-vindman-problem

Joanne Jacobs म्हणाले...

"Coated with kibbitz" is a very odd phrase. Kibbitz is a verb. (See https://www.npr.org/programs/atc/features/2002/yiddish/words.html) Does the writer mean "schmaltz?"

In my decades in journalism, I never saw "without evidence." A reporter would write "X charged that . . . " and then "Y denied the charges, saying that . . . " I think "without evidence" dates to the election of Donald Trump and is only used in reference to Trump or his supporters.

Ann Althouse म्हणाले...

"I think "without evidence" dates to the election of Donald Trump and is only used in reference to Trump or his supporters."

That's something that can be checked. It's a little hard, but it can be done.

Jaq म्हणाले...

"We know Biden was into getting rid of the two corrupt dudes who were giving a pass to the owner of the company that Hunter worked for. “

Actually, he had opened an investigation and was going to call Hoover Biden for a depostion. And the new prosecutor let off Burisma with a slap on the wrist, after Burisma dropped Hunter’s name and hired a high powered Democrat law firm.

The stuff you leave out is pretty funny, ads. It’s almost as if you were studiously avoiding certain facts that render the whole “impeachment” silly.

Jaq म्हणाले...

The information in the comments I have made above is why Schiff is trying so hard to limit the scope of questioning by Republicans to attempt to preclude them from presenting what is a devastating defense, and Schiff knows it.

Trump’s biggest problem is that the Democrats have the press supressing this stuff too. Bitch and moan all you want about Twitter, but that is where this stuff leaks past the gatekeepers.

Mike Sylwester म्हणाले...

Stephen at 6:05 PM
Where should I look for the best reasoned, fairest, evidence-backed argument that Joe Biden acted corruptly in seeking Shokin's removal--that is, that he did so against the national interest and in Burisma or his son's interest?

Where should I look for the best reasoned, fairest, evidence-backed argument that Viktor Shokin was corrupt? Provide specific examples of his corruption.

JamesB.BKK म्हणाले...

Political questions all? That's why this thing is headed for the wall.

Jaq म्हणाले...

"Provide specific examples of his corruption. “

He subpoenaed Hunter Biden.

Gretchen म्हणाले...

Claiming Trump wanted the Ukraine to "manufacture dirt on Biden" i laughable. There is nothing in the phone conversation that remotely hints that is what he wanted. He DID want the Ukraine to look into Biden's possible corruption, which, unlike what was done with the Steele dossier isn't manufacture, because Trump sees something was obviously amiss with Hunter Biden being paid that much money when Joe was overseeing relations with the Ukraine. Uncovering is a world away from manufacture.

hombre म्हणाले...

Don’t I recall that Shokin has executed an affidavit saying he was told that his termination related to investigating the Hunter Biden company? (Burisma)

If so. That’s more evidence than has supported any NYT story since 2016.