promotion image of download ymail app
Promoted
Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 7 months ago

If an Attorney General is replaced, does that mean that all current investigations are stopped?

If not, then how did removing Ukraine's Prosecutor General stop ongoing investigations?

10 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    7 months ago
    Favorite Answer

    Removing an attorney general could cause disruption to ongoing investigations. Of course, most criminal investigations are handled at a level well below the Attorney General. But important cases, one switch the Attorney General is actually involved in, could suffer some disruption. Furthermore, removing in attorney general, or other law enforcement official, could impact the matter in two ways. First off, that person could be replaced by someone who is more loyal to the administration and who will do whatever they say. Second, that tendency could be increased by the removal. By removing an investigatory official, he president would be sending a message about what they want done in that case. So, to take the example of James Comey who was fired in order to disrupt the Russian investigation, the next head of the FBI would understand implicitly that they should not press the Russia matter too strongly because that is not what the president wants and that doing so may result in them getting fired.

    The same thing could, theoretically, happened in Ukraine. But there's a couple of problems with this scenario. First is that Hunter Biden himself was never under investigation common there was never even any sort of allegation that he might have done something wrong. This pennyweights any sort of mood is that Joe Biden might have had for removing this prosecutor. Secondly, the investigation into the company which Hunter Biden work for was already completed by the time Joe Biden began pushing for this prosecutor to be removed. And the investigation was concluded in a positive manner for the company since the prosecutor found no evidence of wrongdoing. This also undermines the idea that Joe Biden might have had a motive to go after this prosecutor. Of course, one can always seek revenge, but it's significantly less important if there is no investigation going on. Third, Joe Biden was not the one who came up with the idea for this prosecutor. This was a policy initiated by the Obama Administration. Bye-bye. It had broad support among foreign policy officials in the US government, including many republican members of Congress who were aware of the issue. All of them regarded this prosecutor is insufficiently strong on corruption and wanted him replaced. This brings us to our fourth point. The entire push of the US government was for Ukraine to crack down on corruption. The reason that they wanted this prosecutor gone was because he was not, in their view, sufficiently aggressive in Prosecuting corruption issues. By replacing this prosecutor Joe Biden would have actually made it more likely that his son would be investigated, not less likely. What this shows is that all of the supposed elements of any kind of corrupt going on with Biden r apps. The facts just don't support the notion that he acted in a corrupt manner

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 7 months ago

    Not necessarily. But if it were a pet project it might stop some of them.....especially if the next guy knows that's why he was fired.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 7 months ago

    The problem was there was an open investigation of Bursima on paper.  Shokin was doing nothing to further the investigation. That is why Shokin was fired.  Trumpsuckers deny that reality.  

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 7 months ago

    The next Ukrainian Prosecutor, FINALLY began investigations on Burisma.

    To be very clear, while EVERYONE agrees that Burisma was corrupt, Biden, The US, The GOP in the Senate, the European Union, and the IMF  ALL AGREE the prosecutor was corrupt and NOT investigating Burisma, and that was why he was fired. 

    The next prosecutor DID investigate Burisma. 

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 7 months ago

    No.  The problem with Shokin was that he wasn't pursuing the investigations into corruption.  Unfortunately, his successor, Lutsenko, was no better and was also replaced.  

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    7 months ago

    Under Shokin, the investigation into Burisma had been dormant. Also, the investigation into Burisma only pertained to events happening before Hunter Biden joined the company.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 7 months ago

    No. The AG is in charge of the entire Justice Department. Attorneys continue their work.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    7 months ago

    "A Republican Conspiracy Theory About a Biden-in-Ukraine Scandal Has Gone Mainstream. But It Is Not True." https://theintercept.com/2019/05/10/rumors-joe-bid...

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Sandy
    Lv 7
    7 months ago

    when the previous Ukraninan president is weak or corrupt enough to obey the corrupt VP of another country to get foreign aid, then all investigating that would expose that corruption would die, wouldn't it? 

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    7 months ago

    The next Ukrainian Prosecutor, stopped all investigations on Burisma. 

    To be very clear, when EVERYONE agrees that Burisma was corrupt, Biden claims the prosecutor was corrupt and that was why he was fired, the next prosecutor did not investigate Burisma. 

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.