4/ be that as it may, there had been a sea change in US attitudes towards Shokin between Sep 25, 2015 and Feb 16, 2016. Biden's position is that Shokin's firing was over "concerns about corruption and ineptitude", "widely shared by Western allies". pic.twitter.com/v0m8Gb5Y7Z— Stephen McIntyre (@ClimateAudit) November 10, 2019
6/ I've looked thru date-limited social media between Sep 2015 and Feb 2016 to try to more exactly delimit when Shokin became persona non grata to the US viceroys in Ukraine. It's an interesting exercise and still in progress.— Stephen McIntyre (@ClimateAudit) November 10, 2019
... during his six months of tenure as Prosecutor General, Shokin had overseen the establishment of an anti-corruption bureau (NABU) as requested by US/West. A director (Sytnyk) had been appointed in April, offices set up in May, investigative staff hired in August.
He had also established a committee for appointment of a Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor (as requested) with appointment announced in November (Kholodnitsky).
After US-initiated regime change in Feb 2014, Shokin had been called out of retirement by new government to assist in reforming the Prosecutors' office, initially as a Deputy Prosecutor General, then appointed as Prosecutor General in Feb 2015.
To put this in perspective (and I don't wish to over-press coparison), Bill Barr was also a retired former official called out of retirement to reform a DOJ. Tensions inevitably arose between Barr and (for example) Andrew Weissman. Tensions also arose between Shokin and several ambitious younger Ukrainian prosecutors, especially Kasko, Sytnyk (who had been appointed head of NABU) and Sakveralidze, who had been imported from Biden's Georgia posse as a Deputy PG.
I don't pretend to be able to sort out the rights or wrongs of subsequent quarrels between Shokin and younger prosecutors. At a distance, it's impossible to sort out. I only observe that such quarrels arise when ambitious people are involved and, as shown below, US viceroys early on took the side of the prosecutors who were Weissman's age, not Barr's age.
As a preview, the influential Atlantic Council demanded a Robespierrian gutting of entire Ukrainian justice system, including the dismissal ("lustration") of all 10,000 judges. After all, <sarc> lustration of Saddam's army had worked out really well </sarc>.
20/ meanwhile, on Dec 9, NYT published a damning story entitled "Joe Biden, His Son and the Case Against a Ukrainian Oligarch" which contained surprisingly pointed criticismshttps://t.co/UTWPXQKYN6 pic.twitter.com/zZvuuGR5RI— Stephen McIntyre (@ClimateAudit) November 10, 2019
22/ but as of Jan 6, 2016, ambassador Pyatt looked back with satisfaction on 2015 as a "year of real reforms".https://t.co/OcjsBxyeRm. Pyatt stated in 2015 (while Shokin Prosecutor General) that Ukraine "passed more reform legislation than in all the years prior". pic.twitter.com/zdo2UT868c— Stephen McIntyre (@ClimateAudit) November 10, 2019
26/ Leshchenko reported that he had visited Washington in the week prior (~Dec 3) to Biden's trip to Ukraine (Dec 9) and that Shokin's very name enraged "everyone" "in the Vice President's office" and the "leading think tanks" (Atlantic Council presumably). pic.twitter.com/WR0L4kDRe6— Stephen McIntyre (@ClimateAudit) November 10, 2019
28/ Leshchenko also reported that his Washington hosts also wanted a "full restructuring" of the prosecutor's office - this was presumably the "lustration" (dismissal) and replacement of the 10,000 existing prosecutors later demanded by Atlantic Council. pic.twitter.com/Y3EMPnqKxM— Stephen McIntyre (@ClimateAudit) November 10, 2019
29/ on Jan 19, 2016, the three Weissman-age Ukrainian prosecutors (Sytnyk, Kholodnitsky and Sakveralidze) visited US officials in Washington without Shokin. Andriy Telizhenko of Ukr embassy reported that US officials asked Ukrainian prosecutors to dig up dirt on Manafort.— Stephen McIntyre (@ClimateAudit) November 10, 2019
31/ but there's something additionally important about the Jan 19, 2016 meeting: the primary host was ...... Eric Ciaramella, much in the news recently. pic.twitter.com/iUXEZ9jxR1— Stephen McIntyre (@ClimateAudit) November 10, 2019
34/ meanwhile, ANTAC continued to campaign for Shokin's removal, tagging ambassador Pyatt https://t.co/FCPa5g0WEk— Stephen McIntyre (@ClimateAudit) November 10, 2019
Alleged "whistleblower" (I think "leakerblower" is a better description) Eric Ciaramella was himself involved in Biden's original quid pro quo (or, as the Democrats like to call it, "extortion").
Further, he seems to have been involved in the original Russia-collusion hoax. Having hosted them, Ciaramella is probably who asked the Ukrainians to dig up dirt on Manafort!
The efforts of the "whistleblower" may be more motivated about covering up his own activities than anything else.
1/ Ciaramella was personally involved in issuing Biden demand that Shokin be fired as condition for IMF $1 billion. Ukr prosecutors informed of demand by US officials at Jan 19, 2016 meeting in Washington https://t.co/h50kZRwpzr, one month before Shokin resignation.— Stephen McIntyre (@ClimateAudit) November 11, 2019
Hat tip: BadBlue News, my 100% replacement for Drudge.