committee on monday. how big do you expect that could be, karl? that could be very big. this is his business partner of hunter biden. in january of 2014, devon archer, who is very long standing relationship with the then secretary of state john kerry, sort of a political bag man, close associate of john kerry s and business partner to hunter biden, he goes, devon archer goes on the board of burisma, corrupt ukrainian company and he suggested several months later his business partner, hunter biden, join the board as well. this is while hunter biden s father, then vice president joe biden, is in charge of the obama administration s efforts to encourage ukraine to crack down on corruption and his son has just gone on the board of one of the big targets of the corruption efforts in ukraine, a company whose ceo was forced to flee the country and go into exile in dubai because the authorities wanted to get ahold
personally withheld u.s. aid until the prosecutor he wanted fires was actually fired. biden received a personal benefit for his official act namely the ability of his son to continue to collect money from a corrupt ukrainian company. hunter and joe biden had a direct financial stake in avoiding an investigation of barisma that myself lead to the company s demise. his gravy train would stop. of course. obvious. everybody can see it. an article that stated following about the ukrainian prosecutor s ouster. among those with a stake in the outcome was hunter biden. mr. biden s younger son at the time on the board of an energy company owned by a ukrainian oligarch in the sights of the fired prosecutor. joe biden had a personal interest avoiding a personal scandal involving his son. clearly a requested informational investigation into biden s dealings was justified as an informational
personally withheld usaid until the prosecutor he wanted fired was actually fired. biden received a personal benefit for his official act, namely the ability of his son to continue to collect money from a corrupt ukrainian company. hunter and joe biden had a direct financial stake in avoiding an investigation that might lead to the company s demise. and his gravy train would stop. of course, this is obvious and everybody can see it. there was an article in the new york times published in may that stated the following about the ukrainian prosecutor s ouster, among those who had a stake in the outcome was hunter biden. his younger son who at the time was on the board of an energy company owned by a ukrainian oligarch who had been in the side of the fired prosecutor general. and of course, joe biden had a personal interest in avoiding a political scandal involving his son. clearly a requested informational investigation into biden s dealings was justified as an informational investigati
vice president biden was the point man to ukraine. joe biden says he told ukraine he wouldn t give them $1 billion if they didn t fire the prosecutor. he said, and i quote, the prosecutor is not fired, you are not getting the money. put yourself in president trump s shoes. he has seen or heard about the video of joe biden bragging about how he got the prosecutor fired, the same prosecutor that had been investigating the same corrupt company where biden s son got a cushy spot on the board getting paid at least $50,000 a month at the same time that joe biden while serving as vice president was the point man to ukraine. my democratic colleagues seem convinced that the president was
to reset the table because we just had a break, it s a really good one, the people back home are unable to follow it because they don t have all the handouts but this is all he wants to do. on page three, it currently reads that president trump suggested an investigation of a political opponent, former vice president joseph r biden, jr., unquote. so it s just three lines, he wants to replace that with a well-known corrupt company and its corrupt hiring of hunter biden. now that is a logical amendment because it comports with the fact that everything we ve been saying here that people back home are scratching their heads right now and saying i wonder why the democrats would oppose that. here is why. a constituent sent me a note during our break for the vote series and said let me get this straight. president trump s phone call amounts to an abuse of power the vice president biden s actions do not? let s review what we know. let me go through them here real quick. first, in biden s case