I subscribe to a limited number of podcasts, all of which I frequently disagree with from time to time. Of these, due to time constraints, only a select few are libertarian. Cato Institute has probably been the longest subscribed (I'm still working through a backlog of about 2900 episodes.) Justin Amash has a more recent podcast but hasn't released episodes for several weeks now. I used to clip episodes of Tom Woods over 2 stretches in the blog but had 2 unpleasant personal encounters with him, once in a former Facebook group (it had to with his cheap shot at Mitt Romney), the second in an email exchange (he sends out a periodic self-promotional email). The second one dealt with his obsession with COVID-19, and let's just say his zealous pursuit of an alternative perspective. As I recall, he was antagonistic to attempts to control the disease for children. When I rebuked his nonsense, he responded with a personal attack and removed me from his email list. I didn't mind spam emails going away on their own, but I had no desire to promote his content moving forward. (It was more than COVID-19; for example, he and Lew Rockwell had this weird libertarian crush on Trump (I think they like his anti-establishment rhetoric). Just while I wrote this, I found him in a search characterizing Trump's indictment as "ridiculous".) I realize most people don't share any combination of my opinions, but the point I'm making is my concerns over his content had been building over time, and it was just a matter of time before I moved onto other sources for the blog.
Off the top of my head, I don't recall how I initially stumbled across the "Good Morning Liberty" podcast headed by Nate Thurston and Chuck Thompson, childhood friends who grew up in rural Illinois, had brief music careers (different bands) and currently live in the Nashville area. I think Nate flipped houses after ending his music career and among other things has developed a day trading training portal. Chuck has been more involved in HealthCare software/services company management. The basic context is they probably grew up with traditional GOP /pro-interventionist views and credit Ron Paul with his (Nate's) migration to liberty. It seems like Chuck is the senior partner with a heavy travel schedule, so it seems like Nate goes solo half the time and probably does most of the talking on joint episodes.
As I write, I don't quite recall the context of how I stumbled across GML It was likely a passing reference in an Internet search. I do think they have a Youtube version of their podcast, but I've never clipped it in my daily blog. (I may decide to start clipping their signature Friday Dumb BLEEP of the Week episodes.) The problem I generally had been uneven quality and Nate often goes over the line. Although Nate says he's never voted for Trump, he, like many libertarians, has this weird buy into Trump's talking points on numerous scandals, including the impeachments and DocumentGate. (I focus on a related issue to the first impeachment below.) Nate is also pretty much of a vaccine skeptic. (I think Chuck did do a vaccine for foreign travel.) I've written nearly a dozen posts criticizing mostly Nate rants.
So, the latest post-election GOP House majority obsession deals with this alleged FBI informant implying Joe Biden and his son Hunter being tied to Burisma through $5M bribes, supposedly backed up by a series of secretly recorded conversations with the Bidens.
For guidance, we have to reference the infamous call between Trump and Zelensky which is the scenario behind Trump's first impeachment. In 2014, Hunter Biden was appointed to the board of Burisma, founded by oligarch Zlochevsky. Zlochevsky was a former Ukraine minister who was suspected of corruption (embezzlement, money laundering, mineral rights transfers, etc.) by locals, the UK, the US, etc. Obama had delegated Ukraine handling post-revolution to his VP. It should be pointed out certain White House analysts considered Hunter's presence on the Burisma board as a potential conflict of interest.
Shokin was appointed solicitor general in the spring of 2015. He was particularly unpopular for rejecting prosecution of those who shot demonstrators during the revolution. Shokin argued his predecessor's files had disappeared. Under Shokin's year or so tenure, he slow-walked high-profile investigations and in fact targeted local anti-corruption groups, The UK had to drop a money-laundering case against Zlochevsky:
Hunter Biden had joined the board of Burisma in April 2014, the same month that British officials froze Zlochevsky’s London bank accounts containing $23 million. Britain’s Serious Fraud Office, an independent government agency, was conducting a money-laundering investigation and refused to allow Zlochevsky or Burisma Holdings, the company’s chief legal officer, and another company owned by Zlochevsky access to the accounts.
But the British money-laundering investigation was stymied by Ukrainian prosecutors’ refusal to cooperate. The Ukrainian prosecutors would not turn over documents needed in the British investigation, and without that documentary evidence, a British court ordered Britain’s Serious Fraud Office to unfreeze the assets.
In September 2015, then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt gave a speech in which he attacked the Ukrainian prosecutor general’s office for failing to cooperate with the British investigation. .
“In the case of former Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, the U.K. authorities had seized $23 million in illicit assets that belonged to the Ukrainian people,” Pyatt said. Officials at the prosecutor general’s office, he added, were asked by the United Kingdom “to send documents supporting the seizure. Instead they sent letters to Zlochevsky’s attorneys attesting that there was no case against him. As a result, the money was freed by the U.K. court, and shortly thereafter the money was moved to Cyprus.”
And then there were the "diamond prosecutors":
David Sakvarelidze was five months into a new job as Ukraine’s reformist deputy chief prosecutor when a witness came forward with intelligence that would change the course of everything.
The witness, a sand producer in the Kiev region, complained of men extorting hundreds of thousands of dollars. It took a while to persuade the man to give evidence. But when he did, and the investigation began, the trail led to two of the country’s highest-placed prosecutors.
A search of the men’s apartments revealed a scene that looked like a comic heist: bags full of cash, diamonds and other precious stones. But that was not the only incriminating evidence. Documents seized at the time indicated the men appeared to have a connection to the top prosecutor in the land, Viktor Shokin.
Police found copies of Shokin’s passports, property registration certificates and even his licence to carry firearms. One of the two men, it transpired, was Shokin’s former driver who had subsequently climbed the ranks behind his boss.
Sakvarelidze soon found himself under investigation and forced out of the government. It was stuff like the above which not only alienated the Obama Administration, but other parties, like the European Union, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank, including significantly more than the US aid Biden cited in his late 2015 ultimatum:
Christine Lagarde, the IMF’s managing director, said on Wednesday that Ukraine needed to make a “substantial new effort” to invigorate reforms, warning that without such a push “it is hard to see how [a $40bn IMF-led rescue of the economy] can continue and be successful”.
This basically sets the stage for the infamous "perfect call" between Trump and Zelensky, and the GML guys bought fully into Trump's. I've already written a couple of critical posts on this but some additional context.
Trump signed Ukraine aid into law:
But DOD Had Twice Certified Ukraine’s Progress on Corruption: Long before President Trump ordered a halt to security assistance, the Secretary of Defense—in coordination with Secretary Pompeo—twice certified that Ukraine had made sufficient reforms to decrease corruption and increase accountability, and that the country could ensure accountability for U.S. provided military equipment. Further, after OMB held the assistance to Ukraine in July, the Department of Defense (DOD) conducted an additional analysis and concluded that the assistance was effective and should be resumed. [Amb. Taylor testimony, 10/22/19]. Finally, before the July 2019 hold, the Trump administration had approved sending foreign assistance to Ukraine nearly 50 separate times without ever holding it because of concerns that it would be diverted due to corruption.
Trump's infamous phone call was on 7/25/19. We know as late as June 18 the Pentagon had announced plans for some Ukraine aid release. Trump queried about June 19 about Ukraine assistance after a relevant news report. Apparently, by July 3, OMB had a hold on Ukraine aid under Trump's direction. Trump's hold was illegal, violating the 1974 budget law. Under bipartisan Senate pressure, Trump would release the money in September.
Now to the phone call:
I will say that we do a lot for Ukraine. We spend a lot of effort and a lot of time. Much more than the European countries are doing and they should be helping you more than they are. Germany does almost nothing for you. All they do is talk ...but the United States has been very very good to Ukraine. I wouldn’t say that it’s reciprocal necessarily because things are happening that are not good but the United States has been very very good to Ukraine.
I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it,,, I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller,,,they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible.
Good because I heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and he was shut down and that’s really unfair. A lot of people are talking about that, the way they shut your very good prosecutor down and you had some very bad people involved. Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the mayor of New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General.,. The other thing, There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it… It sounds horrible to me.
First, it's obvious from context that Trump is putting the squeeze on Zelensky; although he doesn't explicitly mention it, he has leverage in the form of unreleased aid, and I'm sure Zelensky is well-aware of it. He's pointing out the EU is all talk, but the US is a trustworthy ally which hasn't gotten much in return for all its material assistance. He wants a favor, an investigation into Biden's alleged wrongdoing.
Trump's "very good prosecutor" is Shokin, of course; he's completely bought into Shokin's false face-saving excuse that he was fired because he was investigating Burisma. The opposition to Shokin was broad-based, including local anti-corruption groups, IMF, EU and World Bank. The fact is there was zero progress on any high-profile target, including Burisma, on Shokin's watch. And Trump is outright lying about Biden's claim. Biden never claimed credit for closing the Burisma investigation. Biden took credit for getting Shokin fired. But that happened months after Biden's ultimatum, and it was the Ukraine parliament. . And other allies dispute Biden was the first to call for Shokin's ouster. And the investigation wasn't shut down; as Zelensky points out, the case would be taken up under his own solicitor general. Biden went after not because Burisma was getting investigated but because the investigation had gone nowhere under Shokin. If anything, Biden was putting Hunter's appointment to the Burisma board at risk.
I've made it clear I believe Trump abused his Presidential foreign affairs authority in going after a political rival for self-serving, not national reasons. But the essay is really focusing on a more recent development. This involves a whistleblower complaint in the FBI alleging Biden and his son are recipients of $5M bribes involving Burisma:
In a Senate floor speech on Monday, Chuck Grassley said an FBI document that he had seen, detailing unverified claims of a confidential source, revealed that a Ukrainian gas company executive who allegedly bribed President Joe Biden and Hunter Biden made audio tapes of phone conversations with them.
While he did not say that the FD-1023 form disclosed any of the supposed conversations between the president, his son and the Burisma official, the senior Republican senator for Iowa claimed it said there were 17 such recordings in the executive's possession.
He continued: "According to the 1023, the foreign national possesses 15 audio recordings of phone calls between him and Hunter Biden. According to the 1023, the foreign national possesses two audio recordings of phone calls between him and then-Vice President Joe Biden."
The FBI previously told Newsweek that such forms only report a human source's claims, rather than additionally weighing the truth of those claims against other information the FBI has obtained.
One source familiar with the contents of the FD-1023 document suggested to Fox News that Zlochevsky could be the confidential source cited in the form, but added that the Burisma executive's identity is redacted.
The Ukrainian Supreme Anti-Corruption Court is seeking to try [Zlochevsky] in absentia over allegations of trying to bribe Ukraine's National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine and Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office with $5 million in benefits, Ukrainian outlet Slovo i Delo reported in February.
I have no doubt Trumpkin Congressmen still resent Trump's first impeachment and Republicans since Guliani have desperately been trying to turn the tables on Biden ever since. Of course, the problem is the FBI hasn't been able to recover the alleged tapes to date.
But this allegation really doesn't pass the smell test, Biden as VP had nothing to offer Burisma, never mind the fact he promotes green energy, not natural gas. He had no influence on the internal decisions of the Ukraine government. True, there may be strings attached to foreign aid, but the POTUS/VP were largely constrained by legislation. I seriously doubt Biden would take or make a call to some Ukrainian businessman, especially given the administration's high priority on corruption. Every source I've seen shows Ukraine saying the Bidens aren't involved in Burisma legal matters, no attempt to carve out an exemption on corruption charges to Burisma, It's even harder to make a case for Hunter Biden, who has had no connections to US or Ukrainian power
But the possibility, even likelihood that the undisclosed source is Zlochevsky is troubling. This is a guy who was thought, at least in the US, UK, and local corruption groups, to be corrupt. Given rampant corruption in the Ukraine government it would not surprise me if Zlochevsky was buying protection from Shokin and the Obama Administration's crackdown could open Pandora's Box of uncertainty. Someone who is claiming to have secretly recorded conversations with the VP of the US doesn't sound like someone "protecting himself" but someone trying to entrap someone in wrongdoing and use it for extortion. Who knows? Maybe Zlochevsky put Hunter on the Burisma board hoping it would stave off local prosecution and the VP was willing to move forward even at the expense of Hunter's board seat.
The prior discussion is speculative, of course. Maybe there really are recordings; I'm not sure why they haven't surfaced until now if they really existed. It's why I haven't done a separate essay on the kerfuffle.
The issue I have with Thurston and Thompson is not the fact I disagree with them. It's more the lack of due diligence and the sarcastic tone. Almost everything I've written is available through the web.
