Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It demonstrates what others have been saying-that the corruption in that administration was not limited to low-level flunkies. Obama was up to his neck in it
Great, investigate him. What's AG Barr waiting for?
Joe Biden was the point man on Ukraine, Joe decided what the state departments policy was not the other way around.
The state department did what Joe said.
Hunter was a coke headed, dolt. He was only hired as a convenient pipeline for Burisma money to flow into the Biden family's bank accounts.
There's a lot more to this than we will ever know, of that 1.8 billion I would imagine that a good percentage ended up in the family bank accounts of more than a few politicians from both sides of the isle.
The State Department did not do what Joe said. The State Department serves the President. Biden did what the Obama administration told him. And our government, along with the international community, wanted the prosecutor removed, because the prosecutor was corrupt.
Hunter Biden was asked to join the board, because his name carried weight. His reimbursement is in-line with what board members of similar companies (size and industry) get.
There is ZERO evidence that either Biden did anything illegal or wrong.
But I do think the Vice-President's staff should have provided better guidance to the VP and his son.
Again, I already gave you a link in the other thread (discussing John Kerry's comments confirming that Biden was acting on behalf of the US and not in his personal interests). You ignored it and responded with a non sequitur. You can still click on it to your heart's content.
It demonstrates what others have been saying-that the corruption in that administration was not limited to low-level flunkies. Obama was up to his neck in it
One more time. The prosecutor was CORRUPT. He was not conducting investigations or pursuing criminals, he was using his office to line his own pockets. This was not Biden's opinion. This was the opinion of our government, and multiple other governments in Europe. The pressure on Ukraine was to remove a CORRUPT prosecutor. Vice-President Biden did what he was told.
Someone is going to write a book about the dirty Democratic dealings in the Ukraine. If they can keep the Clintons out of it they might live to publish it.
Joe Biden was the point man on Ukraine, Joe decided what the state departments policy was not the other way around.
The state department did what Joe said.
Hunter was a coke headed, dolt. He was only hired as a convenient pipeline for Burisma money to flow into the Biden family's bank accounts.
There's a lot more to this than we will ever know, of that 1.8 billion I would imagine that a good percentage ended up in the family bank accounts of more than a few politicians from both sides of the isle.
Even if your newly-minted claim was really the basis for Trump's claim of corruption, all Trump would need to do is pick up the phone and ask Mike Pompeo whether Joe Biden was the person behind the policy seeking to remove Shokin. No need to involve Zelensky (or Ukrainian aid) - he would have no idea.
Of course, its been reported that Mike Pompeo told Trump to ignore Giuliani because the claims against Biden were a bunch of baloney, so I doubt your theory has any merit.
The State Department did not do what Joe said. The State Department serves the President. Biden did what the Obama administration told him. And our government, along with the international community, wanted the prosecutor removed, because the prosecutor was corrupt.
I'm really confused why people keep on defending Hunter and Joe Biden. Take off your 'Hate Trump' hat for a minute, or better, imagine if this wasn't Hunter and Joe Biden but John (made the name up) and Mike Pence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge
Hunter Biden was asked to join the board, because his name carried weight. His reimbursement is in-line with what board members of similar companies (size and industry) get.
There is ZERO evidence that either Biden did anything illegal or wrong.
A 2018 survey from FW Cook, a well-regarded executive compensation consulting firm, shows that of the companies in the S&P 500, large-cap companies, which are companies with a market value of more than $10 billion, paid individual board members a median of $275,000 a year. Among S&P 500 companies in the energy industry, board members were compensated with a median $213,000 a year, with those in the 75th percentile of the salary range still only bringing in $289,000, less than half of what Hunter Biden has been reported earning at Burisma.
Last week, Mark Hemingway of RealClearInvestigations reported on a study from Watchdog Research revealing that Hunter Biden was paid 12 times the amount expected at a similarly sized company, whose board members are typically paid about $55,000 to $83,000 for an entire year.
Burisma, according to Reuters, had a revenue of $400 million last year. In comparison, ExxonMobil reported earnings of $20.8 billion.
Looking at director compensation on ExxonMobil’s board of directors provides an even better perspective on Biden’s pay from Burisma. According to a 2018 proxy statement filed with the Securities and Exchanges Commission (SEC), the average level of compensation for Exxon’s board of directors in 2017 was almost $365,000. The median compensation was nearly $337,000. Only one of the company’s members of the board made more than $350,000 in total benefits, which was Susan K. Avery, who brought in approximately $767,000 for her work on the board.
While more than Biden’s pay from Burisma, Avery boasts an impressive resume with extensive knowledge in the field. Her experience, according to the report, includes membership on scientific and research advisory committees of NASA, NOAA, the National Science Foundation, the National Park System, the Climate Change Science Program, the Center for Southern Hemisphere Ocean Research, the Qingdao National Laboratory for Marine Science and Technology, and the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology.
She also came into the position at Exxon with experience serving as a member of the Scientific Advisory Board of the United Nations Secretary-General and the National Research Council Global Change Research Program Advisory Committee. Even more, she was the president and director of the global research organization, the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution from 2008 to 2015.
Hunter Biden’s qualifications? His father was the vice president of the United States and played a pivotal role in setting U.S. policy towards Burisma’s home country of Ukraine. It landed him a salary far above the typical board member.
I'm really confused why people keep on defending Hunter and Joe Biden. Take off your 'Hate Trump' hat for a minute, or better, imagine if this wasn't Hunter and Joe Biden but John (made the name up) and Mike Pence.
A 2018 survey from FW Cook, a well-regarded executive compensation consulting firm, shows that of the companies in the S&P 500, large-cap companies, which are companies with a market value of more than $10 billion, paid individual board members a median of $275,000 a year. Among S&P 500 companies in the energy industry, board members were compensated with a median $213,000 a year, with those in the 75th percentile of the salary range still only bringing in $289,000, less than half of what Hunter Biden has been reported earning at Burisma.
Last week, Mark Hemingway of RealClearInvestigations reported on a study from Watchdog Research revealing that Hunter Biden was paid 12 times the amount expected at a similarly sized company, whose board members are typically paid about $55,000 to $83,000 for an entire year.
Burisma, according to Reuters, had a revenue of $400 million last year. In comparison, ExxonMobil reported earnings of $20.8 billion.
Looking at director compensation on ExxonMobil’s board of directors provides an even better perspective on Biden’s pay from Burisma. According to a 2018 proxy statement filed with the Securities and Exchanges Commission (SEC), the average level of compensation for Exxon’s board of directors in 2017 was almost $365,000. The median compensation was nearly $337,000. Only one of the company’s members of the board made more than $350,000 in total benefits, which was Susan K. Avery, who brought in approximately $767,000 for her work on the board.
While more than Biden’s pay from Burisma, Avery boasts an impressive resume with extensive knowledge in the field. Her experience, according to the report, includes membership on scientific and research advisory committees of NASA, NOAA, the National Science Foundation, the National Park System, the Climate Change Science Program, the Center for Southern Hemisphere Ocean Research, the Qingdao National Laboratory for Marine Science and Technology, and the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology.
She also came into the position at Exxon with experience serving as a member of the Scientific Advisory Board of the United Nations Secretary-General and the National Research Council Global Change Research Program Advisory Committee. Even more, she was the president and director of the global research organization, the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution from 2008 to 2015.
Hunter Biden’s qualifications? His father was the vice president of the United States and played a pivotal role in setting U.S. policy towards Burisma’s home country of Ukraine. It landed him a salary far above the typical board member.
Why is it so hard to admit that this is not okay?
Not okay does not equal criminal corruption. Hunter Biden didn't commit any crimes. Neither did his father. Why is this so difficult to understand?
Not okay does not equal criminal corruption. Hunter Biden didn't commit any crimes. Neither did his father. Why is this so difficult to understand?
Yep. If you want to discuss whether the Biden’s decisions were wise or the optics good, we can have a whole different discussion. However, based on what we already know, Joe Biden could not possibly have been acting corruptly when he sought to remove Shokin because he was acting at the State Department’s behest.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
