audacious on the paper. is that what it says? it talks about biden s son. it says biden stopped the prosecution, is that correct? that s what it says, yes. and doesn t it also say president trump asked him, if you can look into it, correct? that s correct. president trump was asking ukranian president zelensky to have out crathe ukranian officik into vice president joe biden, correct? i don t think the report says that. can you look into it, president trump is asking him i don t think it says that. i think it s ambiguous. mr. goldman, you re an experienced federal prosecutor. i know that firsthand.
with respect to burisma, deputy assistant secretary george kent testified that the company had a reputation for corruption. the company was founded by micola jejekevsky who served as director of natural resources. when he served in that role, the company received local licenses without public auctions. burisma brought hunter biden on its board of directors, according to the new york times, as part of a broad effort by burisma to bring in well-connected democrats during a period when the company was facing investigations backed not just by domestic ukranian forces but by officials in the obama administration. george kent testified about these efforts. hunter biden reportedly received
between 50,000 and $83,000 a month as compensation for his position on burisma s board. at the time that hunter biden joined the board, his father, the former vp, was the obama administration s point person for ukraine. biden has no specific corporate governance expertise, and we don t believe he speaks ukranian or russian. we don t believe he moved there. so he s getting this gigantic paycheck for what? the washington post wrote, at the time of biden s appointment to burisma s board, it looked nepotistic at best, and the washington post said, nefarious at worst. according to the wall street journal, anti-corruption active
a quid pro quo, bribery, extortion or whatever, by withholding a meeting or security atssistance as a way o pressuring ukranian president zelensky to investigate the president s political rival, former vp biden. for the president s political benefit in the upcoming election. the secondary allegation that has been levied is whether president trump obstructed congress during the inquiry. the evidence obtained during the inquiry does not support either of those allegations. the republican report of evidence lays out the reasons in more detail, but i will summarize. i will begin with the substantive allegation about an abuse of power. the inquiry has returned no direct evidence that president trump withheld a meeting or security assistance in order to
quid pro quo. because president zelensky would be the target of any alleged quid pro quo scheme, his statements denying any pressure carries significant weight. he is, in fact, the supposed victim here. other senior ukranian government officials confirmed president zelensky s statements. foreign minister prostikos said on september 21st, i know what the conversation was about and i think there was no pressure. alexander danny luc who was secretary of ukraine s defense counsel told ambassador taylor that the night of the call, they were not disturbed by anything on the call. president trump, of course, has also said he did not pressure president zelensky. on september 25th, president