WHAT WILL BE MADE PUBLIC AT THE PRESS CONFERENCE:
First. Today we will make public the documents revealing new details in a high-profile case concerning the bribe made by the representatives of the former Minister of Ecology Zlochevsky and his gas production company Burisma, as well as the Biden family.
Second. We will disclose records of telephone conversations between voices which appear to be Petro Poroshenko and Joseph Biden, testifying to the facts of international corruption and treason at the highest state level.
The third part of the conference will be devoted to the presentation of the colossal DemoCorruption network operating both in Ukraine and abroad. This network includes top officials of Ukraine and the USA, diplomats, officials and many others involved in stealing billions of money of Ukrainian and American citizens.
During this press conference, from a legal point of view, in the slides and texts, I ask you to understand the names “Poroshenko,” “Biden,” as people whose voices appear to be the voices of the top officials of Ukraine and the United States acting at that moment.
After a resonance press conference made by the Commissioners Cattani from NABU, who caught Burisma’s representatives red-handed when attempting to give a bribe of $6 million to close the case concerning Zlochevsky, Burisma and Biden, important information was revealed.
It is crucial that, while applauding the valiant law enforcement officers, the Ukrainians should know that the amount of the bribe, regarding which the representatives of Burisma were caught in the act of committing a crime, initially was not $6 million at all. The amount of the bribe was originally $50 million.
Once again: NOT $6 MILLION, BUT $50 MILLION!
Now we will unveil documents confirming the bribe of $50 million for closing the Burisma and the Biden family case.
Konstantin Kulyk, the Head of a Group of Prosecutors of the Prosecutor General’s Office who investigated the theft of billions of dollars of Ukrainian taxpayers’ money (убрать?), will tell about this in detail.
It was Kulyk who returned $1.5 billion to the budget of Ukraine and came close to arresting another $6 billion stolen by the organized crime group of Yanukovych from the budget of Ukraine.
I give him the floor.
Direct speech by Konstantin Kulik
As you know, the case of Zlochevsky and Biden, who were united by illegal enrichment on Ukrainian gas, has already become a symbol of international corruption.
For 4 years, I headed a group of prosecutors investigating the theft of billions of money from Ukrainians, including by those mentioned above. I want to draw attention to an essential point in the recent press conference by the Director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine Artem Sytnyk.
As Andrii Derkach has already stated, the initial amount of the bribe was not $6 million, which they put on the Sytnyk’s table. The amount of the bribe was $50 million.
How do we know that?
A week ago, while attempting to give a bribe to close the Burisma and Biden case, Andriy Kicha – Burisma’s lawyer was among others caught in the act of committing a crime.
The representatives of Burisma have already delegated Andriy Kicha in 2019 to negotiate with prosecutors of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine. The key goal of the negotiations was to close the already known criminal proceedings No. 1590 against Zlochevsky, Burisma and Biden’s associates.
Let me remind you that Burisma and Zlochevsky acted very boldly in the issues related to closing their criminal cases. Their actions were backed up by their patrons Joe Biden and Petro Poroshenko.
Then the investigation, in particular, was concerned about millions of dollars transferred by Burisma to the Rosemont Seneca Bohai and then to Bidens as payment for consulting services.
Here are these transactions.
Detailed information on money tranches is available at the link.
In total, according to our data, the Biden family received more than $3 million.
It is clear that consulting services meant the political protection of Burisma and Zlochevsky by the then Vice President of the United States, Joseph Biden.
You already know how Biden defended Burisma and his personal interests: by putting pressure on President Poroshenko and the subsequent resignation of Prosecutor General Shokin, who investigated this case.
But let’s go back to the bribe. In 2019, the “fixer” from Burisma, Andriy Kicha, already had contacts with the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine and was actively trying to close the proceedings against Burisma and Bidens.
Translation of the document:
To the Head of the Group of Prosecutors in criminal proceedings No. 12013220540000400 –the Head of Division 15/2/4
From the Prosecutor of the Division 15/2/4
On January 18, 2019, according to your instructions, following Art. 133, 135 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, I summoned Zlochevsky Mykola Vladyslavovych, born on June 14, 1966, registered at Kyiv, 29 Reiterska Str., apt. 26 to the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine to participate on January 23, 2019, in the investigation and procedural actions under criminal proceedings No. 12013220540000400, by sending the summons to the above address and publishing the summons on the official website of the Prosecutor General’s Office.
On January 21, 2019, in the afternoon, the Head of the Group of Prosecutors in the specified criminal proceedings – Deputy Prosecutor General Yenin Y.V. for the first time during my work in Department 14 (since April 2017) called me on my mobile phone (Annex No. 1 – screenshot of the call) and asked me to come to his office. In his office, he introduced me to citizen Kicha A.V., as the representative of Zlochevsky M.V., and asked me to provide my mobile phone number to Kicha A.V. At the same time Yenin Y.V. informed that Zlochevsky M.V. is abroad and is unable to appear for the interrogation. After writing down my phone number, Kicha A.V. immediately called the number, saying that he had called so I would save his phone number (050-358-71-24).
During this conversation in the office of Yenin Y.V., the latter offered an option to provide a list of questions directly to Kicha A.V., the answers to which the investigation intends to receive during the interrogation of Zlochevsky M.V. It should be noted that Kicha A.V. neither on that day nor later did provide the pre-trial investigation body with documents confirming his powers as M.V. Zlochevsky’s lawyer.
On the same day after this conversation, using the Internet, I found that Kicha A.V. is a business partner of Zlochevsky M.V. I reported about this fact to you immediately.
The next day, on January 22, 2019, Kicha A.V. sent me a message asking when he could receive the questions (Annex No. 2 – screenshot of the message). When answering this question, I avoided it (Annex No. 3 – screenshot of the messaging) despite the direct instructions of the Head of the Group of Prosecutors Yenin Y.V., as I did not want to provide him with a list of questions. Because this could adversely affect the course of the investigation, could be interpreted as a disclosure of the secret of the pre-trial investigation and for other reasons.
On January 24, 2019, Yenin Y.V. called me again and in an indignant tone asked why I had not yet provided a list of questions to Kicha A.V. He expressed his dissatisfaction and complained that he was called and disturbed about this (Annex No. 4 – screenshot of the call).
Then I informed you that Yenin Y.V. forces me to provide Kicha A.V. with a list of questions for the interrogation of Zlochevsky M.V. I also told you that I would not do it.
As far as I remember, I left a list of questions with you, which you passed to Yenin Y.V.
On January 25, 2019, Kicha A.V. wrote me a message again. He asked what the deadlines for providing the answers were. I told him that I did not quite understand such a format and that the answers should be registered according to the process. And this required attendance in person (Annex No. 5 – screenshot of the messaging).
In addition, it should be noted that in the period from approximately January 22, 2019, to January 24, 2019, I came to the office of Yenin Y.V. and explained that even if we provide a list of questions to Kicha A.V., Zlochevsky M.V. would still have to come in person to sign the minutes of the interrogation, because Yenin Y.V. suggested that Zlochevsky M.V. send us answers to the questions by mail. And I explained to him that such responses would not have any legal force and it is necessary to issue the minutes which should be signed by Zlochevsky M.V. with my participation.
Subsequently, after numerous explanations to Yenin Y.V., that the answers to the questions sent to the investigator, which were previously sent in some unknown way to the interrogated, cannot be used as evidence and generally violate the principles of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine,- the following format for obtaining the statements necessary for the pre-trial investigation body was chosen.
On January 31, 2019, the pre-trial investigation body received an official letter from the lawyer Biliavskyi Y.M., acting in the interests of Zlochevsky M.V., aimed to find out the reasons for summoning Zlochevsky M.V. A response to the above letter was sent to the lawyer Biliavskyi Y.M.
Subsequently, on February 11, 2019, a letter was received from Biliavskyi Y.M., stating that he had interviewed his client Zlochevsky M.V., who said that he did not take part in the negotiations and documentation of the agreement in question, as these issues were fully dealt with by the executive bodies and officials of the respective companies. And legal support was provided by the representatives of the Andreas Sofocleous law firm and the lawyer Kicha A.V., who according to Zlochevsky M.V., may recall in more detail all the circumstances of the conclusion of the mentioned agreement which are of interest to the body of pre-trial investigation.
In connection with the initiative application filed by Kicha A.V. to the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine regarding his willingness to testify about the known circumstances, on February 26, 2019, Kicha A.V. was interrogated as a witness with the participation of the lawyer Biliavskyi Y.M., who brought answers to the questions on a flash drive.
Kicha A.V. also asked me how to remove the summons to Zlochevsky M.V. from the official website of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine. Answering this question, I informed him that these matters are not within my competence. And after a while, the summons disappeared from the website for reasons unknown to me.
On April 12, 2019, at an operational meeting with the Prosecutor General of Ukraine Lutsenko Y.V., and with the participation of Yenin Y.V., I reported that Yenin Y.V. had put pressure on me in connection with the summons for interrogation of Zlochevsky M.V. I also reported that the summons to Zlochevsky M.V. disappeared from the website of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine. On the same day, if I’m not mistaken, the summons was back on the website.
Given the fact that at this moment you are the Head of the Group of Prosecutors under the specified criminal proceedings, I report about the facts mentioned above and ask for your instructions on the merits of the facts.
Annexes: According to the text on 5 pages.
August 02, 2019
In my hands, I have a report by the prosecutor from my group who was investigating the Burisma case. The report says that the Deputy Prosecutor General of Ukraine Yevhen Yenin pressed the prosecutor of my group, trying to fix the issues of Zlochevsky and Burisma.
Now I will read out some fragments of this report.
As follows from the report, Burisma and the Deputy Prosecutor General Yenin tried to influence the closure of the case.
Direct speech by Andrii Derkach
By the way, this is the same Yenin, whom Poroshenko made the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs in Zelensky’s new Ministry of Foreign Affairs to control the sensitive matters for Poroshenko, Biden and their American contact George Kent.
To this day, Yenin continues to contact George Kent, reporting weekly over the phone about the situation.
Direct speech by Konstantin Kulik
In addition, in August 2019, I received information that Zlochevsky put forward $50 million to close criminal cases related to the operations of Burisma.
I prepared the corresponding report and reported to the Prosecutor General about the need to document the attempt to give this bribe.
Translation of the document:
To the Prosecutor General of Ukraine
From the Head of the Fourth Division of Procedural Management of the Second Directorate for Organization and Procedural Management of Pre-trial Investigation Conducted by the Investigators of the Central Office of the State Bureau of Investigations of the Department for Organization and Procedural Management of Pre-trial Investigation of the Criminal Offenses under Investigation by the State Bureau of Investigation, Supervision of Compliance with the Law by its Operational Units and Support of Public Prosecution in the Relevant Proceedings of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine
As the Head of the Group of Prosecutors under criminal proceedings No. 12013220540000400, dated January 31, 2013, and No. 42014000000001590, dated November 17, 2014, I received a report from the Prosecutor of the Group of Prosecutors, the content of which testifies to the abuse by your Deputy Yenin Y.V. of his official position contrary to the interests of the service and in the interests of the participants in the criminal proceedings – Zlochevsky M.V. and Kicha A.V.
In particular, the Prosecutor informs that after placing the summons to Zlochevsky M.V. on the website of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine on January 23, 2019, to participate in the investigative and procedural actions, in the period from January 21, 2019, to February 26, 2019, the Deputy Prosecutor General Yenin Y.V. in the presence of a participant in the investigation Kicha A.V. systematically persuaded the Prosecutor to cancel the decision to conduct such an interrogation or to interrogate Kicha A.V. as a witness instead of Zlochevsky M.V., providing him with a list of questions for the preparation of answers. As well as to take measures to remove the summons to Zlochevsky M.V. from the website of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine.
Thus Yenin Y.V. suggested to the Prosecutor to maintain direct communication with Kicha A.V. regarding all issues that will arise concerning Zlochevsky M.V., which formed the preconditions for further provocative messaging by telephone by Kicha A.V. – namely sending pictures with images of US dollar bills, etc.
Yenin Y.V. was well aware from me that Kicha A.V. is under investigation as an accomplice of Zlochevsky M.V., Kurchenko S.V. and other participants. Concerning the latter, it was planned to carry out several investigative and procedural measures, on the results of which the establishment of material circumstances of episodes of activity of members of the criminal organization of Yanukovych V.F. and confiscation of assets of Burisma Holdings Limited and personal property of Zlochevsky M.V. would depend.
Attempts by the Deputy Prosecutor General of Ukraine Yenin Y.V. to persuade the Prosecutor of the Group of Prosecutors to cooperate with Kicha A.V. and Zlochevsky M.V. under the above circumstances did not lead to the desired result since the Prosecutor opposed Yenin Y.V. under my instructions.
At the same time, under unknown circumstances, the summons to Zlochevsky M.V. disappeared from the website of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine.
On April 12, 2019, at an operational meeting under your chairmanship as the Prosecutor General of Ukraine and with the participation of Yenin Y.V., the Prosecutor reported about the above circumstances of the pressure by the latter in the interests of Kicha A.V. and Zlochevsky M.V.
On the same day, the summons to Zlochevsky M.V. was back on the website of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine.
On March 28, 2019, I announced about suspicion to Zlochevsky M.V. related to committing crimes under Part 3, Art. 209 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine for aiding and abetting the criminal organization and legalization (laundering) of funds in the amount exceeding $36,000,000 obtained by illegal means through transactions of purchase and sale of Kherson Oil Transshipment Complex, as well as through financial transactions using Burisma Holdings Limited, WIRELOGIC TECHNOLOGY A.S., DIGITEX ORGANIZATION LLP and others.
In addition to the above attempts by Zlochevsky M.V. and Kicha A.V. to influence the course of criminal proceedings where they are involved, today I received information about the fact that Zlochevsky M.V. provided $50 million for bribery of the leadership of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine and procedural officers under criminal proceedings No. 42014000000001590, dated November 17, 2014, with an aim to close the proceedings against Zlochevsky M.V. on suspicion of money laundering using the above companies.
In order to comply with the requirements of the criminal procedure legislation and anti-corruption legislation of Ukraine, I consider it necessary to perform the following priority actions:
– in order to record the actions of Zlochevsky M.V. and persons sought by him to provide the officers of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine with an illegal benefit in the amount of $50 million, send a letter to the Security Service of Ukraine on the opening of the relevant operational and investigative case and preparation of a legendized company for participation in the process of transfer/receipt of illegal benefits in any material form (cash, shares, other acts, etc.);
– to interrogate the Deputy Prosecutor General of Ukraine Yenin Y.V. under criminal proceedings No. 12013220540000400, dated January 31, 2013, as a witness in the episode of assistance to members of a criminal organization under Part 2, Art. 256 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine on the circumstances of acquaintance with Kicha A.V. and the events outlined in this report.
Annex: Report of the Prosecutor of the Group of Prosecutors ****., dated August 02, 2019, on 3 pages with Annexes on 5 pages.
Deputy Head of the Department for International Legal Cooperation – Head of the Division for Procedural Management under Criminal Proceedings of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine
– signature –
August 02, 2019
Here is this report.
According to the revealed data, Burisma representatives were ready to give a bribe of $50 million. The main requirements were to close the case related to the operations of Burisma.
The key question is how such a large amount of money can be transferred. Can you imagine the volume of banknotes amounting to $50 million? It is clear that such a bribe was impossible in cash.
Therefore, we turned to the Security Service of Ukraine with a request to help in the establishment of an undercover company, which should have received the money.
But then the leadership of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine changed: Lutsenko was replaced by Riaboshapka. After that, the process of registering $50 million bribe stopped, and Riaboshapka said that the Burisma case does not exist. You already know how the situation developed further.
But there are very strange circumstances in this case.
One of the episodes of official suspicion of Zlochevsky in the case No. 1590, which supposedly was to be closed for $6 million, includes the facts of Zlochevsky’s complicity in money laundering using the Burisma company, as well as Devon Archer’s Rosemont Seneca Bohai, who is one of the associates of the Biden family.
Let me remind you that it was through the Rosemont Seneca Bohai that Burisma transferred money to Biden for assistance in avoiding criminal liability.
Once again: Burisma representatives put forward $50 million to close not only Zlochevsky’s case but also the case against a company close to the former US Vice President Joe Biden.
When the representatives of Burisma were caught on a bribe of $6 million, the Rosemont Seneca Bohai, and accordingly the payments to Biden, were no longer mentioned in the case. Sytnyk personally confirmed this at his recent press conference.
Direct speech by Andrii Derkach
Last October, we made public the suspicion that was sent to the registered address of Mykola Zlochevsky in Kyiv.
We received this suspicion from investigative journalists, who, as we understand it, were able to get it at Zlochevsky’s place of residence.
We want to remind you that there is a suspicion in which companies related to Bidens are mentioned.
We turned to Konstantin Kulyk and showed him the received suspicion to Zlochevsky, and asked if the text corresponds to the one that was signed.
Konstantin confirmed – the text matches.
That is, the Bidens were the suspects but disappeared along the way together with $44 million, which were the main part of the bribe.
According to investigative journalists, the only person who worked in this story just for a thank you was Kholodnytskyi. He honestly volunteered while his colleague from NABU together with Poroshenko and Biden tried to fool everyone with acts in the Vinnytsia Drama Theater style.
Even stranger is the fact that the absence of Biden’s name in the case, in which he definitely was involved, is confirmed by the Director of NABU Sytnyk, proposing not to interfere in international political processes.
The cynicism of this proposal goes through the roof. It was Sytnyk who intervened in the US presidential election in 2016, using fakes about the so-called Black Book in the case of Trump’s campaign manager – Paul Manafort, and then advocated for Hillary.
And also, as is already known from investigative journalists, NABU is entirely under the control of the US Embassy, whose officers are directly tied to the Democratic Party, their representative in the US Department of State and NABU curator George Kent and Joe Biden.
It was they who collected and leaked confidential information about the Prosecutor General Shokin to the US Embassy.
I have an unofficial question for Artem Sytnyk. Does he continue to meet with Poroshenko at night, and do these meetings help him in leaking criminal cases?
We appeal to the Director of NABU Artem Sytnyk with a request to give answers to the following questions:
- Why did companies close to Biden disappear from the criminal proceedings?
- How did the case with the $50 million bribe end? And, if Burisma representatives were caught on a bribe of $6 million, where did another $44 million go?
- Does the NABU intend to summon Biden’s associates involved in the case for questioning?
- And most importantly: If there is no case, as Riaboshapka stated, then why did Burisma bring millions of dollars in cash in bags?
What remained of the case No. 1590, except for the name of Kurchenko and the Kherson Oil Transhipment Complex?
Where are the files from financial monitoring authorities of Latvia and Cyprus? Were they destroyed, dissected, disposed of?!
And what about the suspicion to Zlochevsky? And also why is he not on the international wanted list?
I ask you to consider these questions as an official appeal to the Director of NABU Artem Sytnyk. I think it will be interesting for us and the public to hear his answers.
Answers to these questions are very important for Ukrainian society. But we think that Sytnyk will not be able to answer them.
Because today there is every reason to believe that NABU leadership is fulfilling the task set by the curators of the Democratic Party-oriented US Embassy in Ukraine: to save face in the scandal with Burisma and to remove the Biden family from suspicion.
The second part of our press conference, including the facts confirming external governance of Ukraine, as well as the facts of international corruption, is devoted to new records of conversations between persons with voices which appear to be Biden and Poroshenko.
We already know from the Burisma case that Biden was very interested in the energy sector of Ukraine – namely, its oil and gas resources.
As we further learn from the conversations, Andriy Kobolyev, the Chief Executive Officer of Naftogaz of Ukraine, is directly subordinate to Biden.
Andriy Kobolyev is known throughout Ukraine as a record-holding official in terms of salaries and bonuses, and at the same time for taking the last pennies from Ukrainian citizens using tariffs.
Here are just some of the facts, after which, in any other democratic state, the official would have to resign.
All the high life, show-offs with Cadillac Escalade, lavish lifestyle continue today. And you, dear Ukrainians, continue to pay for the luxurious life of Kobolyev and his company.
But why did Poroshenko lack greed and Groysman did not have the strength to fire the snotty official?
The answer is simple: Biden openly blackmailed Poroshenko with the already notorious billion in loan guarantees.
I suggest listening to it.
“Tenacious reformers and talented managers…” “We hope the current leadership stays in place,” the lord says to his vassal.
Biden will not let Kobolyev get hurt. And you know why? Because millions received from pseudo-European gas, which in reality is the reverse of Russian gas, are at stake. The price of interest was 50 euros per every thousand cubes.
We are talking here about a corruption tax for every citizen of Ukraine through overstated tariffs from Naftogaz.
Thus, according to the most conservative estimates of experts alone, the team of the so-called reformers “snatched” one and a half billion from our fellow citizens and paid it in salaries and bonuses to themselves, and shared with their American curators.
No less interesting is the fact that Kobolyev aligns his actions, related to the so-called “energy independence” of Ukraine, with the odious billionaire George Soros, and to do this he and his accomplices from Naftogaz went on business trips to London.
We can see this on the slide.
But back to the records. Have you noticed that Poroshenko got a good scolding from Biden because he was informed that somebody was messing with Kobolyev? And who complained about Poroshenko?
Quote: “I’m getting this from Amos,” Biden says.
As we said at the press conference on November 21, 2019, Hochstein is watching over Naftogaz for Biden.
To this day, Hochstein sits in the Supervisory Board of Naftogaz, the leading enterprise in the fuel and energy sector, the largest taxpayer owned by Ukrainian citizens, and oversees the same schemes for super-earnings from the so-called reverse of Russian gas to Ukraine under the guise of European gas from independent suppliers.
More recently, it was through the International Monetary Fund that lobbying for the greater independence of the Naftogaz Supervisory Board from the state took place.
The International Memorandum signed by the Ukrainian government about it states directly: “Dear citizens of Ukraine, you will pay a corruption tax in the form of an inflated gas tariff, and no government or elected Verkhovna Rada will affect this process.”
So, once again, I want to recall what Amos Hochstein is known for. He is one of the main architects of the Naftogaz reforms.
Hochstein, together with Andriy Kobolyev and Andrey Favorov, is also the co-author of the enrichment scheme using the reverse of Russian gas, which was claimed to be the European supplies. The corruption component here, as I would like to emphasize once again, according to the experts, is $1.5 billion at least.
On the slide, we see how this scheme worked:
Russian gas crossed Ukraine and went through the pipe for one and a half kilometres to the territory of Slovakia and, without stopping, returned back to the territory of Ukraine, but as “European” gas.
What made the gas European?
In Slovakia, according to the documents, shell companies close to our heroes were attached to the gas. They added their interest – 50 euros per every thousand cubic meters.
And success: Ukraine received European gas with the scent of freedom and democratic values.
Once again: we are talking about the supposed to be European gas, which all of us, the citizens of Ukraine, heroically buy within the framework of energy independence. This is the same Russian gas that has overgrown with the interests of the Hochstein, Kobolyev and Biden.
Thus, these guys managed to snatch $1.5 billion out of the blue.
The investigation by the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine of the illegal operations of the Burisma company, as well as the leadership of Naftogaz of Ukraine, actually managed by Amos Hochstein, made it impossible to implement the plans of the Biden family in the energy sector of Ukraine.
In this regard, Joe Biden put pressure on Poroshenko regarding the dismissal of Shokin, who investigated these facts of international corruption, so Biden put his “watchman” in the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine.
In conversations with Poroshenko, Biden complained about Groysman not only concerning the conflict with Kobolyev. His complaints were ongoing. Saying Groysman is uncontrollable and does what he sees fit, although Biden gave an explicit instruction to Petro Oleksiyovych to watch how his subordinate will carry out the tasks.
Although Rada saved Poroshenko’s ass, as he put it, now Petro Oleksiyovych’s task is to raise tariffs. Otherwise, he will not see the billion.
As we recall from the previous press conference, Poroshenko brilliantly coped with this task, raising tariffs by 100%, while his overseas bosses asked only for a 75% increase.
This is not just infographics. They took money from the pocket of every Ukrainian. This is not abstract corruption. This is what concerns everyone, every family!
In the next record, Biden gives Poroshenko the task to control Groysman personally, and see how he will fulfil the IMF requirements.
Biden bluntly says to Poroshenko: “Make the Prime Minister do what we need, and you will get your billion.”
As we all remember, in the result Groysman’s Cabinet of Ministers raised tariffs for the people of Ukraine, hiding behind the fact that it was not his will. Some part of it was true.
Poroshenko listened to Biden on most issues that related to the governance of the state. Kobolyev, tariffs, Hochstein, coalition, Premier – everything was controlled by Biden.
As you know, Poroshenko agreed with Biden on the candidacy of the Prosecutor General.
For the sake of a billion, Petro Oleksiyovych was ready to “put pressure” on everyone he could. He needed to receive only, I quote “a signal of support”.
In other words, direct instruction. For example, he received such a signal about the appointment of Lutsenko to the post of the Prosecutor General from the representative of the US Department of State, Victoria Nuland.
But even here, Biden did not trust Petro Oleksiyovych. He placed his watchers in all strategic positions. Let’s listen to another example of external governance of the country.
For Biden, it was important that after Shokin, the case of Burisma and companies close to Biden was dropped. Considering that Biden’s name disappeared the other day from suspicion, for closing which the “fixers” from Burisma gave a bribe, and the bribe itself was lost along the way – instead of $50 million, Sytnyk showed only 6, we can say that Biden completed his task.
This is not the first time when NABU leaks files. For example, in November, we held a press conference on gas fraud and embezzlement of one and a half billion of Ukrainians’ money. Under the fact of the press conference, the Security Service of Ukraine registered two criminal proceedings.
Two weeks ago, these criminal proceedings were taken from the Security Service of Ukraine… And transferred to NABU. Apparently for dissection. We won’t be surprised if it soon becomes known that these cases have nothing about Kobolyev, gas, Hochstein or one and a half billion of stolen money.
The following record confirms Biden’s control over the actions of the Governor of the National Bank of Ukraine in the process of commandeering PrivatBank.
I suggest listening to this conversation.
There is another interesting detail in this conversation. A character like Oleksandr Onyshchenko who is Poroshenko’s partner in bribing Members of the Parliament and working in the gas market, which posed a direct threat to Poroshenko.
In particular, as is known from open sources, Onyshchenko had records of his conversations with Poroshenko.
Poroshenko also discussed the threat from Onyshchenko with Biden. A defiant fact is an illegal use by Poroshenko of special services of foreign countries to exert pressure on his former accomplice and citizen of Ukraine.
The legal grounds for engaging special services by the US Vice President to resolve personal issues of the President of Ukraine are also quite interesting.
An international corruption cooperative, with elements of state illegal power support.
As we see from the record, Biden is deeply involved in the processes of pressure on Onyshchenko, as a real threat to his controlled President of Ukraine Poroshenko, as well as a competitor to Burisma in the Ukrainian gas market.
It is now clear to whom Poroshenko should be grateful for eliminating the threat of Onyshchenko.
However, if they had a consolidated position regarding Onyshchenko on his elimination as a businessman and a politician in Ukraine and abroad, then in the case of Yatsenyuk, who, as we already knew, was more of a Biden’s man than of an “independent President’s”, Poroshenko gave any personal guarantees of security, if only he had resigned as Prime Minister.
This is another example of the double standards of senior officials.
Let’s listen to this conversation.
And in continuation, another shameful situation for an independent state, when the US Vice President asks the President of Ukraine what tasks should be conveyed to the Prime Minister of Ukraine.
That is, the President of Ukraine communicates with his Prime Minister through the Vice President of the United States.
But back to PrivatBank.
Biden calls the nationalization of PrivatBank, “a key test for Poroshenko commitment.”
Let’s listen to this conversation.
“We have no money to do tough things,” Poroshenko complains. That’s not an issue,- Biden replies. We will get you the money.
By the way, pay attention, neither Biden nor Poroshenko is confused by the statement of Petro Oleksiyovych that he had a meeting with the chief executive officers of Ukrainian TV media for coordination of the messages.
“We need a joint position,” says Poroshenko. “I try to do my best” – reports the President of a sovereign European state to his overseas boss.
This is what external governance of the state looks like, multimillion-dollar bribes, censorship, total control over key state bodies: the Verkhovna Rada, the Cabinet of Ministers, the Prosecutor General’s Office, the so-called anti-corruption authorities.
Intervention in the affairs and operations of private companies, pressure on the media, the involvement of national and foreign special services to resolve personal and corruption issues. Securing political and illegal business interests.
This is how international corruption looks, which has permeated Ukraine to the roots with the help of a curator-Vice President of the United States.
Petro Oleksiyovych’s team complained that we publish only part of the records of conversations. The publication of hundreds of hours will require the broadcasting of a separate television channel, which, unlike Petro Oleksiyovych, we do not have. Can you imagine how difficult it is to translate records in Georgian?
Since the facts of international corruption with the participation of senior officials of Ukraine and the United States are multiplying, we are initiating the creation of a large-scale anti-corruption platform, the task of which will be to investigate these facts in order to preserve the strategic relations between the two partner states – Ukraine and the United States.
And now I would like to present how a large international corruption network looks like.
This is the beginning of our work and an incomplete, preliminary map of international corruption compiled jointly with investigative journalists, experts, specialists, investigators and all those who seek to clear the relations of our countries from corruption.
In this table, you can see the full extent of corruption of the Democratic Party in Ukraine over the past 10 years. You can see how everything is interconnected here: personalities, connections, companies, movement of funds.
All these connections are constantly updated with new data from investigators of international corruption (their names are on the left and right side of the table).
The table is continuously updated.
In the centre, you see the main beneficiaries, puppeteers and the watchers from DemoCorruption not only in Ukraine but also in many countries of Eastern Europe.
We are currently working on 10 cases, which include the representatives of the DemoCorruption, grant-eaters and Soros’s allies.
Through such a massive network, the influence of DemoCorruption and Soros in Ukraine has reached incredible proportions. It has become a giant squid that has entangled the government of Ukraine, the political and economic elite, and the law enforcement system.
Given the fact that international corruption goes far beyond the territory and jurisdiction of Ukraine, it is extremely important to continue the work in these areas in the United States, using all available legal instruments of both countries-strategic partners.
Hundreds of millions of dollars of American taxpayers are wasted or spent on feeding former diplomats of Ukraine and the USA, professional activists-grant-eaters.
Examples of non-rational use and misappropriation of money for unworthy programs are simply outrageous. Just look at their titles and amounts!
- Strengthening Public Confidence – almost $52 million;
Well, dear citizens? How is your confidence … after hearing such news…? Is it strengthened?
- Ukraine Confidence Building Initiative – more than $36 million.
I think those who have misappropriated these $36 million really feel very confident.
- Democratic Governance East – $57 million.
Where is all this money?
And there are many more such examples.
We really need the bipartisan support of our US strategic partner. The difference is that for us, it is vital that such bipartisan support would not be provided by damaging the sovereignty of Ukraine and by covering international corruption. It is also crucial for us that this support was not provided through the misappropriation of financial assistance from the United States, which over the past 10 years has become a feeder and a source of enrichment for former officers of the diplomatic missions of Ukraine and the United States. Fearing investigations, these diplomats and journalists and experts lured with technical assistance write collective complaints and comments, statements in the spirit of Soviet propaganda, while parasitizing on the slogans of “liberalism”, “democracy”, “European values” and “bipartisan support”.
As an example of how the platform works, we can look at a case with the same Naftogaz, which was mentioned earlier.
During the press conference, you saw a slide that was easy to understand. And this is the original scheme with which the investigative journalists and our fellow lawyers have to work with.
The result of such work was, among other things, forcing Naftogaz to lower gas tariffs for the people, which the external curators and concessionaires of Naftogaz really dislike.
The issue of signing a Memorandum with the International Monetary Fund on Ukraine’s obligations to provide full independence to the Supervisory Boards of Ukrainian state-owned enterprises from the state of Ukraine and the people of Ukraine is now relevant.
For two and a half-billion dollars, the current government sells sovereignty.
And independence from Ukraine and unconditional dependence on external curators will undoubtedly lead to an attempt to increase tariffs for the population, as well as pumping out funds from ordinary citizens of Ukraine.
We will now give you an example on the diagram of how this is happening today. In our opinion, this is very bad and critical.
The obligations of Ukraine to the International Monetary Fund will generally mean the lack of the right of the state to influence the work of state banks and monopolies.
This goes beyond the boundaries of cynicism.
The same person is included in different Supervisory Boards and receives fabulous wages.
For example, Sevki Acuner is a member of the Supervisory Boards of UkrEnergo and Ukrainian Railways, and Adomas Audickas is a member of the Supervisory Boards of the same Ukrainian Railways and Mahistralni Gazoprovody Ukrainy.
Again, the Supervisory Board of Ukrainian Railways includes 7 persons – 5 of them are foreigners, and one of the Ukrainians is Serhiy Leshchenko. The salary of one member of the Supervisory Board of Ukrainian Railways starts from $15 thousand a month. I emphasize that this is the minimum salary.
The Naftogaz Supervisory Board also consists of 7 persons, the salary of one member of the Supervisory Board starts from $22 thousand. 4 out of 7 are foreigners.
And, for example, the Supervisory Board of UkrEnergo consists of 5 persons and only 1 of them is a citizen of Ukraine. Their earnings start from “modest” $4 thousand a month.
This situation is relevant not only for the state-owned enterprises but also for the state-owned banks. For example, the Supervisory Board of Oschadbank includes 8 persons, 5 of them are foreigners. And at the same time, the State Savings Bank refused to provide the Ukrainian media with information about the remuneration of the members of their Supervisory Board allegedly because the Bank could not disclose their personal data.
We not only systematize this information but are actively fighting this phenomenon.
On March 17, we, together with my colleague Alexander Dubinsky, submitted a bill on state-owned enterprises, which implies ensuring equal rights and opportunities for citizens related to the representation in the Supervisory Boards of state-owned enterprises, as well as a ban on foreign citizens from participating in the management of state-owned enterprises.
I want to address the investigative journalists, officials, prosecutors, law enforcement officers who have faced international corruption: share the information about corruption that you have personally encountered with or if you have any other information on this issue.
We guarantee confidentiality and security, obtaining the status of an accuser of corruption with the subsequent provision of legal support and rightful compensation.
The corresponding form will be posted on the NABU-LEAKS website.
In the future, we will always find the opportunity to ensure the constitutional right of citizens to receive information; we will try to ensure the effective and safe work for journalists.
External governance of our state and international corruption must be stopped.