Memos Crush Dems’ Ukraine Impeachment Narrative, Implicate Biden

We all know the official story behind House Democrats’ 2019 impeachment of then-President Donald Trump. The supposed quid pro quo that never transpired was an alleged attempt by the 45th president to coerce a foreign leader into investigating the man who would be his (Trump’s) 2020 challenger. In hindsight, the irony of that is dumbfounding. But newly published Obama administration memos clearly show that the backstory to the whole Trump Ukraine impeachment was fabricated. What’s more, these memos were never provided to Trump’s attorneys or to Congress. Had they been revealed at the time, the impeachment would very likely have quickly collapsed.

To recap the main details of the story behind the Ukraine impeachment, as president, Trump placed a phone call to Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky. During the conversation, Trump suggested his counterpart investigate potential corruption that might have involved the Bidens. The Obama administration had been greatly concerned about Ukrainian corruption, and so Trump was merely continuing what the Obama State Department had been working on. But Democrats suggested Trump had threatened to withhold promised military equipment unless the Ukrainians investigate the Bidens. The transcript of the conversation did not include any such threat – but Democrats insisted it was implied. The military aid was never withheld despite the fact that the Ukrainians did not open a new investigation into corruption involving Hunter Biden.

The Sham Behind the Ukraine Impeachment

Beyond the phone call, however, is the story of how, in 2015, then-VP Biden went to Ukraine and very directly threatened government officials. As described in his own later recounting of the meeting, Biden told the Ukrainians that he would withhold $1 billion in US loan guarantees unless Ukraine’s top prosecutor was fired.

At the time of the Ukraine impeachment investigation, Democrats and their media cohorts spun a story about Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin that has now been completely debunked. Biden’s demand that Shokin be fired had nothing to do with the Ukrainian energy company, Burisma Holdings, that had given directorships to Hunter Biden and his business partner, Devon Archer. That was the claim. In fact, the establishment media alleged that Shokin was not even investigating Burisma. That was not true. Burisma owner Mykola Zlochevsky had fled Ukraine after Shokin seized his assets. At least one senior Burisma executive and Devon Archer himself have confirmed that Burisma was putting a lot of pressure on Hunter Biden to make Shokin’s investigation go away.

“[Shokin] was a threat," Archer recently testified to the House Oversight Committee. "He ended up seizing assets of Mykola – a house, some cars, a couple properties. And Mykola actually never went back to Ukraine after Shokin seized all of his assets.”

The other part of the official narrative was that Joe Biden was carrying out US policy by insisting that Shokin be dismissed. The prosecutor had failed to investigate corruption, the story went, and the US considered him an obstacle to fighting corruption in Ukraine. During a 2019 Democratic primary debate, Biden himself used this false narrative to defend his actions. "I did nothing wrong,” then-presidential candidate Biden said. “I carried out the policy of the United States government in rooting out corruption in Ukraine. And that’s what we should be focusing on.”

However, newly published Obama-era memos show that the State Department at that time was very impressed with the progress Shokin was making. It even invited officials from Shokin’s office to visit Washington sometime in 2016.

A 2015 interagency Obama administration memo said, “The [Interagency Policy Committee] concluded that (1) Ukraine has made sufficient progress on its reform agenda to justify a third guarantee and (2) Ukraine has an economic need for the guarantee and it is in our strategic interest to provide one.  As such, the IPC recommends moving forward with a third loan guarantee for Ukraine in the near‐term… “

The loan guarantee referred to is the same one Joe Biden threatened to withhold unless Shokin was fired. Thus, Biden took it upon himself to undercut official US policy.

In June of 2015, Victoria Nuland, who was Vice President Joe Biden’s leading Ukraine advisor and is the current Acting Deputy Secretary of State, wrote an encouraging memo to Shokin. In part, she wrote:

“You have an historic opportunity to address the injustices of the past by vigorously investigating and prosecuting corruption cases and recovering assets stolen from the Ukrainian people. The ongoing reform of your office, law enforcement, and the judiciary will enable you to investigate and prosecute corruption and other crimes in an effective, fair, and transparent manner.”

This is hardly the message a US administration would send to a man it thought of as irredeemably corrupt and who must be relieved of his duties.

The White House still insists that Shokin was not investigating Burisma when Biden pushed for his removal. It cites media reports from The New York Times and other left-wing news outlets as proof of that. There are two problems with this transparent defense, however. First, these are the same media companies that have been covering for the Bidens all along. Second, legal filings in Ukraine, testimony from Hunter Biden’s closest business associate, Devon Archer, Ukrainian media reports from the time, and Viktor Shokin’s own statements all clearly show that the former prosecutor general of Ukraine was indeed investigating Burisma owner Mykola Zlochevsky. Shokin had seized Zlochevsky’s Ukrainian assets, causing the oligarch to flee the country.

The interagency Obama administration memos unquestionably debunk Joe Biden’s other false claim, that he was implementing US policy by demanding Shokin’s firing. There is no indication that the US government wanted Shokin dismissed, and Biden had no authorization to threaten the denial of a billion dollars in loan guarantees if the prosecutor wasn’t fired.

Joe Biden has only his denials and some old articles from loyal media outlets to support his story. Against that stand the statements and testimonies of everyone else involved, along with the documented facts and the memos distributed throughout the very administration in which Biden served. Liberty Nation has previously acknowledged that evidence doesn’t always equal proof. Republican investigators have yet to prove that Joe Biden has been involved in illegal activity, although they appear to be very close to doing just that. Nevertheless, proof that the current chief executive lied about the circumstances surrounding Viktor Shokin’s removal as Ukraine’s top prosecutor has now been established. At some point, one must accept that documented and verified fact is exactly that; it is fact – and in the face of facts, every denial becomes more incriminating.