First, it wasn't Joe Biden alone who forced out the corrupt Ukrainian prosecutor. It was an international consortium, including the IMF, that was concerned about the lax attitude shown by the prosecutor. This article appeared at the time in 2016, well before Trump started making noises about it. The Ukraine was actively trying to get aid from these various countries and loans from the IMF, and the European community was rightly concerned about in whose pockets the aid would wind up. So, as far as the part of your question about other corrupt politicians, the short answer is that people in other countries weren't trying to get money at the time. Now, I realize it's a difficult concept to understand for Trump fans, but at one time, about three years ago, the United States was an active participant with the rest of the international community, in taking actions like this:flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 9:22 amOut of all the corrupt politicians in all the countries of the world, why did Joe Biden decide to extort Ukraine into firing the one 'corrupt' politician who was investigating the company who had chosen his son out of all the totally unqualified people in all the countries of the world to be on their board?
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/30/worl ... cutor.html
As far as the claim that Shokin was "investigating" Burisma, he inherited an open investigation into Burisma from his prededessor (an investigation that eventually ended because there was nothing to prosecute). He did nothing with the investigation for over a year, much like all the other corruption investigations his office was supposedly pursuing. That's why many European countries wanted him out.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 47001.htmlThe wild conspiracy theory on which Trump based his assertion – that Joe Biden had Shokin removed to stop him investigating wrongdoing in his son’s gas company – has already been widely debunked. Put simply, the chronology doesn’t work – the investigation into Burisma, where Hunter worked, was dormant by the time Shokin was pushed out. It would also represent a major historical anomaly. During Shokin’s 13 months in office, not one major figure was convicted. No oligarch. No politician. No ranking bureaucrat. It would appear unlikely he was in the middle of breaking the habit with the Bidens. …
The approach of Shokin’s office to the Burisma investigations fell into a well-practiced pattern of corruption, the anonymous prosecutor says. By the time of Biden’s intervention, there were no active investigations to speak of. “If the idea was to get a result on the Burisma case, Shokin would have put his top people on it,” [a former Ukrainian prosecutor] says. “That didn’t happen. The aims were different.” Investigations into Burisma, which only ever covered the period from before Hunter Biden’s involvement in the company, were finally settled in 2016.
There's plenty more articles like that one. The only people vouching for Shokin's honesty are Trump, Giuliani, and Shokin himself.
As far as Hunter Biden is concerned, I'm sure Burisma felt that having the son of the U.S. Vice President on the board would be good for marketing. That's why many companies have celebrities on their Board of Directors. It's not the most savory business practice in the world, but it's not illegal, either here or in the Ukraine. And Joe Biden is not responsible for the actions of his 40-year-old son who never had any position in the U.S. government.
You bring up these same "questions" every month or so, without anything to back them up other than wild speculation and a ton of evidence to the contrary that you choose to ignore for various reasons. Then, when Bob or I debunk them, you go back into hiding for a month and then trot them out again.