Changes

In March 2015 Firtash, while living in Vienna, established the Agency for Modernization of Ukraine.<ref> https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23745118.2016.1154646</ref>

In March 2015 Firtash, while living in Vienna, established the Agency for Modernization of Ukraine.<ref> https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23745118.2016.1154646</ref>

[[File:Azov Battalion.jpg|right|350px|thumb|Obama/Biden allies in the [[neo-Nazi]] Azov Battalion threatened to arrest Firtash if the government failed to do so.<ref>https://www.salon.com/2014/02/25/is_the_us_backing_neo_nazis_in_ukraine_partner/</ref>]]

[[File:Azov Battalion.jpg|right|350px|thumb|Obama/Biden allies in the [[neo-Nazi]] [[Azov Battalion]] threatened to arrest Firtash if the government failed to do so.<ref>https://www.salon.com/2014/02/25/is_the_us_backing_neo_nazis_in_ukraine_partner/</ref>]]

In April 2015 a Vienna court presided over by Judge Christoph Bauer finally got around to hearing Firtash’s appeal against the extradition request to the United States in the Indian bribery case. In a daylong hearing, a crowded courtroom received a tutorial on the inside story of recent Ukrainian political events, including the background to [[Washington, D.C.|Washington]]’s on-again, off-again requests for Firtash's extradition, not to mention Firtash’s role in the [[Poroshenko]]-[[Klitschko]] negotiations for the presidency of new Kyiv-[[NATO]] pupet regime. Firtash’s lawyers argued that the case had little to do with bribery in India and everything to do with United States meddling in Ukrainian politics. The judge emphatically agreed, handing down a withering verdict, stating that “America obviously saw Firtash as somebody who was threatening their economic interests.” He also expressed his doubts as to whether two anonymous witnesses cited by the United States in support of its case “even existed.” The [[U.S. State Department]] announced it was “disappointed” in the verdict and maintained its outstanding warrant for Firtash, should he leave Austria and travel to some country with a legal system more deferential to U.S. demands.<ref>https://harpers.org/2015/08/undelivered-goods/</ref>

In April 2015 a Vienna court presided over by Judge Christoph Bauer finally got around to hearing Firtash’s appeal against the extradition request to the United States in the Indian bribery case. In a daylong hearing, a crowded courtroom received a tutorial on the inside story of recent Ukrainian political events, including the background to [[Washington, D.C.|Washington]]’s on-again, off-again requests for Firtash's extradition, not to mention Firtash’s role in the [[Poroshenko]]-[[Klitschko]] negotiations for the presidency of new Kyiv-[[NATO]] pupet regime. Firtash’s lawyers argued that the case had little to do with bribery in India and everything to do with United States meddling in Ukrainian politics. The judge emphatically agreed, handing down a withering verdict, stating that “America obviously saw Firtash as somebody who was threatening their economic interests.” He also expressed his doubts as to whether two anonymous witnesses cited by the United States in support of its case “even existed.” The [[U.S. State Department]] announced it was “disappointed” in the verdict and maintained its outstanding warrant for Firtash, should he leave Austria and travel to some country with a legal system more deferential to U.S. demands.<ref>https://harpers.org/2015/08/undelivered-goods/</ref>