Fact: The Obama administration, along with the international community and Ukrainian activists, pushed to remove Shokin because of his own corruption

“The Obama administration sent Biden to condemn Shokin’s tenure as prosecutor general because of his widespread reputation for corruption.”

“Shokin’s tenure as prosecutor general was marked by keeping in place holdovers from the corrupt regime of former President Viktor Yanukovych, an ally of now-President Vladimir Putin. At the time, Shokin was also close to then-president Petro Poroshenko, contributing to Ukraine’s global reputation for corruption.”

“The International Monetary Fund cited Shokin’s continued term in office as among the reasons that a $40 billion aid package could be withheld.”

“Shokin had also become a target of popular protests in Ukraine, demanding that he be fired for such acts as launching an investigation against a Ukrainian anti-corruption watchdog group, as well as his having fired anti-corruption prosecutors.”

“Moreover, former deputy prosecutor general Vitaliy Kasko told Bloomberg this past May that the Burisma case in Shokin’s office had been long dormant: “It was shelved by Ukrainian prosecutors in 2014 and through 2015.” And while Kenneth Vogel and The New York Times said in May that Shokin had Hunter Biden’s employer “in [his] sights,” Vogel  reported on September 22 that Shokin was “not aggressively pursuing investigations into Mr. Zlochevsky or Burisma.”

“Shokin’s eventual firing was publicly hailed by European leaders. When he was fired, The New York Times described him as “one of several political figures in Kiev whom reformers and Western diplomats saw as a worrying indicator of a return to past corrupt practices, two years after a revolution that was supposed to put a stop to self-dealing by those in power.”

“Fittingly, one of his last acts out the door was to fire a deputy prosecutor who had been attempting to pursue corruption cases.”

“The bottom line: Given the widespread calls for Shokin’s dismissal, there is no disputing that Obama administration efforts were driven by good faith efforts to reduce corruption in the office.”

Fact: The identity of the whistleblower is still unknown, and the inspector general agreed that the complaint was credible and lawful under current protocols set for whistleblowing to expose unlawful activity

“The identity of the whistleblower is still unknown, making assertions that they’re a partisan deep state snitch ring hollow. Additionally, the whistleblower correctly followed protocol established by the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act of 1998. Under this statute, a whistleblower is protected from retaliation so long as they follow protocol when filing a complaint. The complaint was given to Inspector General Michael Atkinson, who then makes the decision whether it is credible, (within 14 days.). Atkinson determined that the complaint was credible and urgent, prompting him to forward the complaint to Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Joseph Maguire. In an unprecedented move, Maguire failed to forward the complaint to the intelligence committees within seven days, as required by the statute, and has also refused to comply with subpoenas issued by the House intelligence committee.”

Fact: The law requires the executive branch to turn the report over to Congress

“The law is perfectly clear. Once the intelligence community inspector general determines that the complaint is of “urgent concern” to the American people, as Michael Atkinson did in this case, then the report must be disclosed to Congress. The Justice Department has concluded that the matter involved did not meet the standards of the law, but Atkinson has stated his disagreement with this conclusion, writing that “the Complainant’s disclosure not only falls within the [director of national intelligence’s] jurisdiction, but relates to one of the most significant and important of the DNI’s responsibilities to the American people.”

“The idea that the whistleblower complaint is merely a “policy” disagreement ignores the definition laid out in the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act of what is covered in its purview: genuine abuses of power and various other violations deemed worthy of “urgent concern.” The inspector general would not have referred the whistleblower complaint Congress if he did not deem the allegation credible and concerning.”

Link to entire report: mediamatters.org/  Debunking lies about Trump, Biden, Ukraine, and the whistleblower..

On September 29, 2019, the New York Times published the following report, ” Trump Was Repeatedly Warned That Ukraine Conspiracy Theory Was Completely Debunked” by Sheryl Gay Stolberg, Maggie Haberman and Peter Baker.

Thomas P. Bossert, President Trump’s first homeland security adviser, said he was “deeply disturbed” that Mr. Trump had urged Ukraine to investigate Democrats.

 President Trump was repeatedly warned by his own staff that the Ukraine conspiracy theory that he and his lawyer were pursuing was “completely debunked” long before the president pressed Ukraine this summer to investigate his Democratic rivals, a former top adviser said.”

Thomas Bossert, who served as Mr. Trump’s first homeland security adviser, said he told the president there was no basis to the theory that Ukraine, not Russia, intervened in the 2016 election and did so on behalf of the Democrats. Speaking out for the first time, Mr. Bossert said he was “deeply disturbed” that Mr. Trump nonetheless tried to get Ukraine’s president to produce damaging information about Democrats.”

Link to entire article: nytimes.com/  Trump Was Repeatedly Warned That Ukraine Conspiracy Theory Was ‘Completely Debunked’…