When was the investigation

[Dill]

(01-22-2020, 08:20 PM)masonbengals fan Wrote: Have you not had the TV on this year? Not trying to be a smart ass. But there has been so much smoke blown about Hunters dealings I want to know more. If it has been reliably rebuked then tell me about it.

Partly the Trump/Giuliani accusations have been reliably rebuked, but in the sense that there was never any "there" there in the first place.
There really haven't been any issues to be investigated. Hunter Biden joined the board of Burisma AFTER it had been involved in a scandal. People publicly complained that this hiring represented a conflict of interest, an attempt to gain influence with the O'bama administration. But no one can find any "favors" or other effects that would establish this (e.g. a gas contract with the US gov or US companies). Biden sr. demanded the firing of a prosecutor who was supposed to investigate Burisma but wasn't--and withheld aid to get that done. Biden was enforcing the OFFICIAL, PUBLICLY STATED POLICY of the US and EU when he did that; it was not some under the table move skirting official policy to do his son a favor.

However, it's easy to turn all that into "Biden got rid of the prosecutor investigating his son's company! Anti-corruption leader Donald Trump was looking in to that as part of his campaign to rid the Ukraine of corruption."  

The overview in this NPR article is a good place to start. I reviews the basic facts along with the Trump accusations.
https://www.npr.org/2019/09/24/763502822/what-were-the-bidens-doing-in-ukraine-5-questions-answered

Factcheck has a helpful overview of what and what has not been investigated.
https://www.factcheck.org/2019/09/trump-twists-facts-on-biden-and-ukraine/

Forbes has an even simpler one.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/lisettevoytko/2019/09/25/heres-what-happened-with-the-bidens-and-ukraine/#bfea5b393872

As far as the other side of the Trump/Guiliani propaganda coin--our own intel services tell us with the highest certainty that Russia--NOT the Ukraine--was responsible for hacking the US election to turn it in favor of Trump. Because some Ukrainian leaders recognized that a Trump win would be good for Putin and bad for the Ukraine, they spoke out against Trump, e.g., the Ukrainian ambassador to the US wrote an op ed on the undesirability of a Trump win.  https://usa.mfa.gov.ua/en/press-center/publications/4744-posol-ukrajini-vislovlyuvannya-trampa-nadsilajuty-nevirnij-signal-svitu

No surprise, then, that that op ed becomes the substance of charges that it was Ukraine that meddled in the US elections--to make sure Hillary won.  The evidence of this to date are simply Guiliani cell phone messages and statements on Fox News.  It seems he may have gotten Ambassador Yovanovitch fired by telling Trump she refused to give visas to Ukrainians willing to come to the US to testify that Ukrainians helped the Dems. That would be a paper trail which the Trump administration could have immediately discovered last summer--if it existed.
https://www.newsweek.com/rudy-giuliani-trump-ukraine-ambassador-1420074
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/17/rudy-giuliani-ukraine-ambassador-removed-086420

To understand how deeply disturbing are both sides of the propaganda coin, you have to keep in mind the distinctions between elected and appointed officials working AS legal instruments of US policy, on the one hand, and unofficial cowboys on the other, like Giuliani, Parnas and Hyde who carried presidential backing and power wherever they went, behind the scenes and under the table, doing Trump's bidding to the detriment of official policy.