- Joined
- Jun 23, 2009
- Messages
- 133,631
- Reaction score
- 30,937
- Location
- Bagdad, La.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Which law did he pass to make it OK? Wait, I didn't think the President could pass laws...
I know, my bias against bush shone through... But ultimately, things he did that WOULD be against the law, he just got a law passed to make it ok... I'd call that corrupt still.
Did you actually look up what this "boy" has done with his life? He has founded law firms, been put by various presidents (Republican and Democrat) into leadership positions, sat as president of various NGOs, been a volunteer for religious organizations, graduated from Yale etc. Meanwhile, other people are just happy to simply post on internet forums and call this pretty accomplished young man "a boy".
Which law did he pass to make it OK? Wait, I didn't think the President could pass laws...
The US butts into Ukrainian and Russian affairs and the VP's son has a job with a Ukrainian energy company, suspicious?
Why did an energy firm with big assets in Ukraine hire Joe Biden
In the span of a few weeks, an energy firm little-known inside the United States added two members to its board of directors — scoring connections to Secretary of State John Kerry and Vice President Joe Biden in the bargain.
On April 22, Cyprus-based Burisma announced that financier Devon Archer had joined its board. Archer, who shared a room in college with Kerry’s stepson, Christopher Heinz, served as national finance co-chair for the former senator’s 2004 presidential campaign.
Then, on Monday, the firm announced that Biden’s younger son, R. Hunter Biden, would join the board of directors.
Why would the company, which bills itself as Ukraine’s largest private gas producer, need such powerful friends in Washington?
The answer might be the company’s holdings in Ukraine. They include, according to the firm’s website, permits to explore in the Dnieper-Donets Basin in the country’s eastern regions, home to an armed pro-Russian separatist movement. They also include permits to explore in the Azov-Kuban Basin of the strategic Crimean peninsula, annexed earlier this year by Moscow.
It’s not clear what will happen to energy firms, like Burisma, that aim to explore and exploit potential deposits in those areas. Neither the Archer nor the Biden announcement explicitly mentions the unrest, and it’s not clear exactly when their discussions to join the board began. In an April 23 Q&A, the transcript of which appears on Burisma’s website, Archer said he had been approached “a few months ago” about the opportunity to consult for the oil company. The announcement of his directorship came less than a month after the disputed vote in Crimea to rejoin Russia.
The White House and the vice president’s office denied there was anything untoward about Biden’s appointment.
“Hunter Biden and other members of the Biden family are obviously private citizens and where they work does not reflect an endorsement by the administration or by the Vice President or President,” said President Barack Obama’s press secretary, Jay Carney. “But I would refer you to the Vice President’s office.”
Really and since when did cronyism/nepotism become a dirty word for conservatives?
Was it before baby Bush got elected or after?
Wow better then a community organizer huh? So if he is so accomplished how much of our billion dollar hand out will he be taking home?
Neither of those two sentences have anything to do with what I said. Most of what he has accomplished really can't be done through handouts. How does one apply for a handout for starting their own law firm? How do NGOs get handouts? If your biggest complaint about him is that he's successful and he has connections in government, I suggest you start complaining about anybody with a substantially higher income like the good socialist you seem to be. Hating the rich for being rich and well connect? Tsk, tsk. Socialist talk.
1. Maybe those "sentences" were not sentences at all but questions! 2. Shocking I know it's just not right to question someone in the regime of the most transparent admin in history how they might be handing out a share of a billion dollars of our money to one of their favored sons! 3.
Revisionist history.Bush was not a conservative.
And how many of his kids and other relatives got sweet deals overseas due to our interference in those countries?
Savings and loan crisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaSilverado Savings and Loan collapsed in 1988, costing taxpayers $1.3 billion. Neil Bush, son of then Vice President of the United States George H. W. Bush, was on the Board of Directors of Silverado at the time. Neil Bush was accused of giving himself a loan from Silverado, but he denied all wrongdoing.[29]
The U.S. Office of Thrift Supervision investigated Silverado's failure and determined that Neil Bush had engaged in numerous "breaches of his fiduciary duties involving multiple conflicts of interest." Although Bush was not indicted on criminal charges, a civil action was brought against him and the other Silverado directors by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; it was eventually settled out of court, with Bush paying $50,000 as part of the settlement, the Washington Post reported.[30]
As a director of a failing thrift, Bush voted to approve $100 million in what were ultimately bad loans to two of his business partners. And in voting for the loans, he failed to inform fellow board members at Silverado Savings & Loan that the loan applicants were his business partners.[citation needed]
Neil Bush paid a $50,000 fine, paid for him by Republican supporters,[31] and was banned from banking activities for his role in taking down Silverado, which cost taxpayers $1.3 billion. A Resolution Trust Corporation Suit against Bush and other officers of Silverado was settled in 1991 for $26.5 million.....
1. Questions are types of sentences, and neither of them have anything to do with what I stated.
2. They gave a share of 1 billion dollars to this guy? Show us: When, why, and for what. If you can't, you're making much ado about nothing.
3. I'm glad you finally gave up your nonsense that this is just someone's "boy". I'd hate to ask you how many law firms you've founded or how many NGOs you've been asked to join or just what you do for a living that puts you in such a position that you can degrade someone else's work.
So as a tax payer, a citizen, I am not allowed to question what one does for a living when that one signs on to be a member of a board of directors in a foreign corporation in a nation about to receive my tax dollars handed to them in the form of "aid." And that corporation is one that is very likely to be a serious beneficiary of our tax dollar gift? Really? I got news for you, our nation is still free, and if I want to question the "boy" and his potential for rewards from our tax dollars I can all that I want. I do not have to have founded a law firm, been invited into anything or done anything to your satisfaction to enjoy my FREEDOM to question such a maneuver for personal gain with our tax dollars.
I have put in different colors all the parts of this post so that you understand just how flakey your argument is:
Blue: You being a taxpayer has nothing to do with what you've previously stated. Neither do either of the previous sentences (questions) you asked about him.
Red: Ukraine received foreign aid LONG before this crisis. If you knew a bit of history, you'd have realized that former members of the soviet union have been on the tax dollar's dime since Reagan kicked the Berlin Wall down with his
Green: This substantiated by what? It's a private company that managed to survive since 2002. I'm sure they don't really need US foreign aid and if they took advantage of it, so what? Are you suggesting it'd be better for a company with ties to Putin to take advantage of that same foreign money? I'm not really sure what your problem is with US citizens looking after US foreign interests, but if it's to support some pro-Russian nonsense, you better state it.
Black: Irrelevant, what has been asked is that you substantiate how this guy is somehow the product of a handout anymore than you are. As you have failed to even show that this independently successful man is a "boy" in any sense of the word, your diatribe about 'Murica is unwarranted.
Cyan: Please show us how his company will take advantage of US foreign aid. I will wait.
Your arguments are extremely weak and reliant on an approach just slightly more verbose than "What if". The fact that you refuse to even show any plans or attempts by this company to take advantage of US foreign aid shows that this is nothing more than a guilty by association strategy. I mean, even if you showed that Hunter Biden will eventually lobby the US for contracts, it would be well within his constitutional rights. However, you're not even sure what he's going to do, you have no idea who he is as a person and you refuse to address the rebuttals made to your rant. Simply saying "maybe", won't get you anywhere with me. I like facts, not suppositions because suppositions are as dishonest as it gets when attacking someone. However, now I have some questions for you and I have taken the liberty of showing what you will answer:
1. When did Hunter Biden get a share of "a billion dollars"? (He didn't.)
2. Would this company get a share of that billion dollars in other scenarios simply because of the nature of the work it does? (If you consider that energy companies would get help from American governments REGARDLESS of party in place, yes.)
3. How is Hunter Biden's work for this company a negative for the US? (It isn't as current US policies advocate for less dependence on Russia and the creation of jobs for Americans working the energy sector.)
So what do we have at the end? Well, we have:
You, complaining that this "boy" is where he is thanks to his connections. However, as a fact: This "boy" just happens to be a pretty successful man who was successful before he joined this company.
You, claiming that the company will get its hands on US foreign aid. However, as a fact: You've shown no evidence of such.
You, writing about your freedoms: However, as a fact: They (your freedoms) have nothing to do with the matter at hand.
I honest to god hope you don't plan to debate me again, it'd be a shame to rip your unsubstantiated suppositions apart.
When you end a " debate " the way you did in this post you show true left wing fascism.
Maybe those "sentences" were not sentences at all but questions! Shocking I know it's just not right to question someone in the regime of the most transparent admin in history how they might be handing out a share of a billion dollars of our money to one of their favored sons!
You end a debate when the other side has no argument. The only thing you have said that is true and verifiable is that Hunter Biden is Joe Biden's son. That being the case, and considering you have no argument in any tangible sense of the word, this debate is over. However, when you've got anything other than the proverbial hunch, I gladly welcome you to return to this thread and present the evidence of wrongdoing. A hunch, if your unsubstantiated claims and rants can be called that, is not a debate argument. :shrug:
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?