When the son of an American Vice President deeply buried in debt due to a destructive lifestyle characterized by drugs and a depraved desire for pole dancers and prostitutes, his father, then in charge of policy-making for the White House on Ukrainian-American relations, had allowed his good name to be used as a major factor in the employment of son Hunter in a Ukrainian gas conglomerate called Burisma Holdings.
Hunter was not in any form or manner qualified to work in an energy company, much less one in the Ukraine, and even less within its board of directors. His track record was peppered with police reports of serious drug possession and use which would have immediately drawn questions of competence and qualifications. Yet he was recruited and paid $50,000 a month for simply sitting on the board.
Hunter Biden is the son of former Vice President Joseph Biden, then the second most powerful man in the United States and a likely Democratic Party shoo-in for a future run as president.
Immediately, conflicts of interest, nepotism and unethical behavioral issues entered the equation, albeit the lines still remained dotted in 2014. Where the question of extortion had yet to enter, this was not yet clearly manifest.
Not until Burisma was accused of corruption, tax evasion and money laundering by the Ukrainian authorities. That the $50,000 a month payout received by Hunter Biden was incomparable with similar directorships had placed Hunter in the hot seat.
Fortunate for him and Burisma, there is the reality of power politics. A phone call from Vice Pres. Biden and the mention of US aid to Ukraine seemed to have substantially dialed down the heat.
Within months not only was the state prosecutor investigating Burisma fired but the investigations were stopped. Suddenly extortion’s dotted lines turned solid black and very bold.
Note this report appearing in The Federalist:
“Joe Biden was so proud of his role in the prosecutor’s removal from investigating the company paying his son $50,000 merely to serve on its board that he actually bragged about it in a 2018 speech at an event for the publication Foreign Affairs. In this speech, Biden boasts his threat to withhold $1 billion in US loans from Ukraine if they did not agree to fire the prosecutor who happened to be investigating the company giving his son a cushy sinecure. The prosecutor was fired, and the investigation was dropped six months later.”
For bribery and extortion to exist, either a quid pro quo or a threat must be present. In the foregoing, note the $1 billion arrayed against US aid. Note also that threats can come in the form of a refusal of diplomatic entry or the barring of officials as we might later realize.
The interference of the Democratic Party in the justice system of independent and sovereign nations they have no business messing with is nothing new. Never mind the double standards or the ignorance of the finer points of totally distinct and diverse jurisprudence and jurisdiction. Imperialism did not die in the last century.
And never mind that in these cases of interference, these foreign politicians may actually be exerting pressure on a sovereign state for it to break its own laws, violate its constitution, distort its sense of justice, disrupt its working judicial system — all virtually allowing criminality a free pass.
It is obvious where this discussion is headed. Let’s apply those annoying acts of faux supremacy and modern imperialism to our justice system and on criminally accused suspects held accountable and, following due process, facing the Philippine justice system.
Mirroring the Biden precedent in Ukraine, note where foreign political extortionists arm-twist us to violate our laws as they force us to drop charges, declare innocent and set free those criminally accused whose charged crimes range from the drug trafficking of a self-confessed adulteress, to the tax evasion, securities fraud, violation of the anti-dummy statutes and libel faced by another with dubious citizenship and allegiance issues.