Oh what a tangled web we weave

[Markk]

See at about 1 minute…inroads to his name

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFlZPnS0gKc

[Marcus]

You’ll have to post your own video of Hunter, my question was why you took the statement by Poland’s former president out of context.

Here is what I asked:


And here’s proof you took it out of context:


So the former president of Poland did NOT say what you implied he did. You misused the quote out of context.

HuH…how did I take it out of context? from the AP interview

you’ve got to be kidding.

If they got the monies up front MZ would not have needed the Biden name... is that MZ wanted a chunk of it and that is why he went after the son of the man that would be a big part of how th e monies were distributed. Remember the ex-president of Poland is on record of saying that Hunter was only hired because of his name...

Compare the enlarged part to the enlarged part in the former President’s statement

Hunter Biden, the son of ex-Vice President Joe Biden, was indeed recruited to join the board of Ukrainian gas company Burisma because of his name, but he didn’t use his familial connection to help the business, according to a former colleague. That colleague is Aleksander Kwasniewski, a former president of Poland.

I’ve pointed out the differences twice now. And yes, you take things out of context to support your conspiracies. It’s obvious, and it’s getting old. I don’t mind disagreeing with people, but your method is illogical.

Keep in mind Kwasniewski also has a history of corruption.

res Ipsa addressed that fallacy of yours earlier.

[Marcus]

See at about 1 minute…inroads to his name

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFlZPnS0gKc

I don’t watch random links. Do you have a point to make?

[Markk]

HuH…how did I take it out of context? from the AP interview

you’ve got to be kidding.

If they got the monies up front MZ would not have needed the Biden name... is that MZ wanted a chunk of it and that is why he went after the son of the man that would be a big part of how th e monies were distributed. Remember the ex-president of Poland is on record of saying that Hunter was only hired because of his name...

Compare the enlarged part to the enlarged part in the former President’s statement

Hunter Biden, the son of ex-Vice President Joe Biden, was indeed recruited to join the board of Ukrainian gas company Burisma because of his name, but he didn’t use his familial connection to help the business, according to a former colleague. That colleague is Aleksander Kwasniewski, a former president of Poland.

I’ve pointed out the differences twice now. And yes, you take things out of context to support your conspiracies. It’s obvious, and it’s getting old. I don’t mind disagreeing with people, but your method is illogical.

Keep in mind Kwasniewski also has a history of corruption.

res Ipsa addressed that fallacy of yours earlier.

…LOL, yes he said that, after he said Hunter was hired because of his name only. He also stated he was hired because his name as th ex president of Polan, and a no name is a nobody, it is just how business works. My assertion was he was hired because of his name, which the ex-polish president confirmed. here it is again in case you missed it. “Aleksander Kwasniewski, a former Polish president who is on the board of the Ukrainian gas company Burisma, said Thursday that Hunter Biden was indeed chosen to join its advisory board because of his name. He said that is simply how the world of business works.”

The video I gave you is not random, it is Hunter on a national broadcasted program, “Good Morning America,”stating among other things, that he was most likely hired because of his name only, which again is my assertion.

If he was not hired for his name and possible connections, why was he hired? He talked about that in the video also, maybe you should take a look at it.

What would be one of the primary reasons Archer was hired? Do you know what his connection might be that might be of interest to Burisma? Have you ever considered that question or did any critical thought on that?

[canpakes]

My assertion was (Hunter) was hired because of his name, which the ex-polish president confirmed. here it is again in case you missed it. “Aleksander Kwasniewski, a former Polish president who is on the board of the Ukrainian gas company Burisma, said Thursday that Hunter Biden was indeed chosen to join its advisory board because of his name. He said that is simply how the world of business works.”

If he was not hired for his name and possible connections, why was he hired?

For some companies, star power/name recognition alone is perceived to lend legitimacy (Kwasniewski states as much, and you posted his comment about this above). No corruption or ill intent need be assumed from it. This has happened with many dozens of high-profile organizations, and the phenomenon is well-known enough to the public.

Even if you want to make the assumption that Biden had no skills from his resume that would prove useful to Burisma, his BOD position would be par for the course in the world of business.

Below is an article - from a website literally called Directors & Boards - that talks about this sort of selection. Note some of the names, and their compensation, such as Chelsea Clinton’s:

Celebrities in the Boardroom

By Jonathan Berr
Does it lead to good corporate governance?

When the board of directors of WW (formerly known as Weight Watchers) held its annual shareholder’s meeting in New York City on Tuesday, the company’s most famous board member, Oprah Winfrey, was conspicuous by her absence because of an unspecified “scheduling conflict.”

Investors in the New York-based company, whose shares have slumped more than 40% this year, are eager to hear from Winfrey given the company’s plans to rely more heavily on the billionaire media mogul/ex-TV show host for marketing after its “slow start” this year. The 65-year-old Winfrey is feeling the pinch too since she also is the company’s largest individual shareholder.

Winfrey is the latest in a long line of so-called celebrity directors, board members who companies appoint in the hopes of making a splash.

Celebrity directors are definitely not a new phenomenon. Cary Grant served on the board of Fabergé; Joan Crawford did a stint on Pepsi-Cola’s board; and Grace Kelly graced the boardroom of Twentieth Century-Fox Film.

An early sports celebrity to become a corporate director was tennis icon Billie Jean King, who was named to the board of Philip Morris Companies in 1999. She and Philip Morris were involved with the formation of the Virginia Slims Tennis Tour in 1970, which the company noted was “the birth of women’s professional tennis.” Philip Morris called her “one of the most celebrated tennis players in history” upon her election to its board.

But do celebrities in the boardroom help or hinder good corporate governance?

"I have seen it backfire,” says Nancy May, the CEO of BoardBench, a consulting firm, though she would not name a specific company. “In one case I know of a board who brought on someone who was well-known in a particular industry. They didn’t really understand the amount of work that it took. They wound up being a weak point for a particular board as opposed to an asset."

WW, which has struggled in recent years with the growth of free or low-cost apps, formed a partnership with the billionaire Winfrey who joined the board in 2015. She has been seen as an effective spokesperson for the brand because she has battled weight problems for years.

In other big-name appointments in recent years, travel site Expedia got some grief when it expanded the size of its board in 2017 to accommodate Chelsea Clinton. At the time, The New York Post criticized the online travel company for providing the former first daughter with a cushy job with compensation of $295,000. She also is on the board of internet holding company IAC. Both Expedia and IAC are controlled by billionaire Barry Diller, a supporter of Clinton’s parents former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Other celebrity board members include NFL hall-of-famer Lynn Swann, historian/journalist Walter Isaacson, tennis superstar Serena Williams and NBA legend Shaquille O’Neal.

Swann is currently the athletic director of the University of Southern California. He joined the board of engineering construction company Fluor in 2013 and is a member of the audit and governance committees. Fluor recently replaced its CEO after reporting disappointing results. Swann also recently joined the board of Evoqia Water Technologies.

Isaacson, a former CEO of CNN who has authored biographies of Steve Jobs, Benjamin Franklin and Leonardo Davinci, joined the board of United Continental in 2006. He is a member of the executive and nominating and corporate governance committees and chairs the airline’s public responsibility committee.

Both Wiliams and O’Neal are new to the world of corporate boards though not to the industries where their companies operate.

Williams, considered to be one of the greatest tennis players in history, joined the board of Poshmark, a social commerce site where customers sell used apparel and accessories earlier this year. She has had her own fashion line for years and hawks her wares on the Poshmark site. Poshmark’s initial public offering expected in the fall.

O’Neill, an NBA hall-of-famer, joined Papa John’s board in March and serves on the marketing committee. He is going to be the new face of the embattled Louisville, Ky.-based company and may get his own signature pizza. O’Neal has invested in Papa John’s restaurants since 2010, including nine Atlanta-area franchises.

Having “non-experts” on corporate boards isn’t necessarily a bad thing, according to Matt Fullbrook, managing director of the University of Toronto's Clarkson Centre for Board Effectiveness.

"They are more likely to put up their hands and say `I have no idea what’s going on. Can you explain it to me?" he says.

https://www.directorsandboards.com/news ... -boardroom

Here’s a link to a list + descriptions of 40 interesting celebrity board appointments -

https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Forty+ce ... 0476561301

If you believe that such a well-documented phenomenon indicates that corruption must follow, please list the corrupt activities that you believe Hunter Biden was involved with after joining the board of Burisma.

I’ve been waiting for you to do this for about two years, already.
: D

[canpakes]

Speaking of illogical connections, I would add another invalid argument that has been used several times in this thread:

>Everyone believes a person did A, right? [wrong.] But others say they did not-A. Therefore, that’s proof the person did A. Why? because of course others will always say the person did not-A when the person actually did A.

And another. X acted corruptly at some time. Therefore, X is corrupt. Therefore, anything about X that cannot be explained must be corruption.

It's kind of a "corruption of the gaps" argument.

Here’s how I’m seeing Markk argue this:

Person W was charged at some point with having committed corrupt business activities.
Person X did some unrelated business with Person W.
Person Y works with Person X.
Therefore, Person Z, who is related to Person Y, is corrupt and did ‘something’ wrong that no one can explain or provide details for.

[Marcus]

If he was not hired for his name and possible connections, why was he hired?

You’re the one asserting something and saying it came from the person who specifically stated otherwise. Canpakes pretty much covered it, so all I can add is you are once again claiming as evidence the lack thereof, and trying to shore up your argument by saying ‘but of course what they say is not really what they are saying, how could it possibly be different than what I believe?’

Your arguments are unpersuasive, but it is helping me to understand how people get so caught up in nonsense. Illogical thinking such as yours is way too commonplace.

[Markk]

My assertion was (Hunter) was hired because of his name, which the ex-polish president confirmed. here it is again in case you missed it. “Aleksander Kwasniewski, a former Polish president who is on the board of the Ukrainian gas company Burisma, said Thursday that Hunter Biden was indeed chosen to join its advisory board because of his name. He said that is simply how the world of business works.”

If he was not hired for his name and possible connections, why was he hired?

For some companies, star power/name recognition alone is perceived to lend legitimacy (Kwasniewski states as much, and you posted his comment about this above). No corruption or ill intent need be assumed from it. This has happened with many dozens of high-profile organizations, and the phenomenon is well-known enough to the public.

Even if you want to make the assumption that Biden had no skills from his resume that would prove useful to Burisma, his BOD position would be par for the course in the world of business.

Below is an article - from a website literally called Directors & Boards - that talks about this sort of selection. Note some of the names, and their compensation, such as Chelsea Clinton’s:

Celebrities in the Boardroom

By Jonathan Berr
Does it lead to good corporate governance?

When the board of directors of WW (formerly known as Weight Watchers) held its annual shareholder’s meeting in New York City on Tuesday, the company’s most famous board member, Oprah Winfrey, was conspicuous by her absence because of an unspecified “scheduling conflict.”

Investors in the New York-based company, whose shares have slumped more than 40% this year, are eager to hear from Winfrey given the company’s plans to rely more heavily on the billionaire media mogul/ex-TV show host for marketing after its “slow start” this year. The 65-year-old Winfrey is feeling the pinch too since she also is the company’s largest individual shareholder.

Winfrey is the latest in a long line of so-called celebrity directors, board members who companies appoint in the hopes of making a splash.

Celebrity directors are definitely not a new phenomenon. Cary Grant served on the board of Fabergé; Joan Crawford did a stint on Pepsi-Cola’s board; and Grace Kelly graced the boardroom of Twentieth Century-Fox Film.

An early sports celebrity to become a corporate director was tennis icon Billie Jean King, who was named to the board of Philip Morris Companies in 1999. She and Philip Morris were involved with the formation of the Virginia Slims Tennis Tour in 1970, which the company noted was “the birth of women’s professional tennis.” Philip Morris called her “one of the most celebrated tennis players in history” upon her election to its board.

But do celebrities in the boardroom help or hinder good corporate governance?

"I have seen it backfire,” says Nancy May, the CEO of BoardBench, a consulting firm, though she would not name a specific company. “In one case I know of a board who brought on someone who was well-known in a particular industry. They didn’t really understand the amount of work that it took. They wound up being a weak point for a particular board as opposed to an asset."

WW, which has struggled in recent years with the growth of free or low-cost apps, formed a partnership with the billionaire Winfrey who joined the board in 2015. She has been seen as an effective spokesperson for the brand because she has battled weight problems for years.

In other big-name appointments in recent years, travel site Expedia got some grief when it expanded the size of its board in 2017 to accommodate Chelsea Clinton. At the time, The New York Post criticized the online travel company for providing the former first daughter with a cushy job with compensation of $295,000. She also is on the board of internet holding company IAC. Both Expedia and IAC are controlled by billionaire Barry Diller, a supporter of Clinton’s parents former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Other celebrity board members include NFL hall-of-famer Lynn Swann, historian/journalist Walter Isaacson, tennis superstar Serena Williams and NBA legend Shaquille O’Neal.

Swann is currently the athletic director of the University of Southern California. He joined the board of engineering construction company Fluor in 2013 and is a member of the audit and governance committees. Fluor recently replaced its CEO after reporting disappointing results. Swann also recently joined the board of Evoqia Water Technologies.

Isaacson, a former CEO of CNN who has authored biographies of Steve Jobs, Benjamin Franklin and Leonardo Davinci, joined the board of United Continental in 2006. He is a member of the executive and nominating and corporate governance committees and chairs the airline’s public responsibility committee.

Both Wiliams and O’Neal are new to the world of corporate boards though not to the industries where their companies operate.

Williams, considered to be one of the greatest tennis players in history, joined the board of Poshmark, a social commerce site where customers sell used apparel and accessories earlier this year. She has had her own fashion line for years and hawks her wares on the Poshmark site. Poshmark’s initial public offering expected in the fall.

O’Neill, an NBA hall-of-famer, joined Papa John’s board in March and serves on the marketing committee. He is going to be the new face of the embattled Louisville, Ky.-based company and may get his own signature pizza. O’Neal has invested in Papa John’s restaurants since 2010, including nine Atlanta-area franchises.

Having “non-experts” on corporate boards isn’t necessarily a bad thing, according to Matt Fullbrook, managing director of the University of Toronto's Clarkson Centre for Board Effectiveness.

"They are more likely to put up their hands and say `I have no idea what’s going on. Can you explain it to me?" he says.

https://www.directorsandboards.com/news ... -boardroom

Here’s a link to a list + descriptions of 40 interesting celebrity board appointments -

https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Forty+ce ... 0476561301

If you believe that such a well-documented phenomenon indicates that corruption must follow, please list the corrupt activities that you believe Hunter Biden was involved with after joining the board of Burisma.

I’ve been waiting for you to do this for about two years, already.
: D

Well, like I have told you up teen times, an investigation would need to started and finished to see if there is corruption, and if so, how deep. And that is what I am trying to discuss, is their enough evidence when added up for a deep investigation. But alas, trying to get you guys to add or entertain any critical thinking into the conversation is impossible at this point.

I can’t even get you guys to admit and expand on just how deep MZ and Burisma were into corruption which would be critical to understand my position and the larger picture here.

In regards to his name…come on, MZ is a shrewd multi millionaire if not billionaire Russian backed Oligarch (again,I recommend the book Money Changers)…he knew exactly what he was doing when he when after Biden, again it would be naïve to think otherwise. Also which we haven’t got into yet, is why Archer? Well, it is because Archer is a family friend and worked with Kerry on his run for president. As you know Kerry was secretary of state during much of their time with the VP. So both Archer and Biden could be used for their connections, aside from Obama himself, to two of the the most influential American politicians in deciding aid to the Ukraine. We know that billions when to the Ukraine and we know once the government get it, who really knows where it all goes, googling that is almost overwhelming.

Biden had no experience in natural gas, he did not speak Ukrainian, he is not a lawyer in regards to Ukrainian law…his duties were described in generalities, I haven’t read about any major accomplishments he did to help Burisma?

Your post shows yo hav no motivation for any critical thought here and as i said in the beginning…your goal and motivation is to protect your tribe, and you are working backward with pre-determined mindset that Hunter and Archer are clean good business men, and Joe could not possible be tied to any corruption in a very corrupt environment, without the least bit of critical thought.

They article you pasted kinda proves my point…celebrities and are recruited to boards for their name, connections, and celebrities. Biden and Archer had no celebrities value in the Ukraine, that is for sure, they knew nothin about the natural gas industry, so it had to be for connection, and it is obviously because of the connections to the Obama administration the were hired and for no other reason…if i am wrong here please tell me specifically what else they really had to offer? Always keep in mind Burisma was a corrupt company with deep Russian ties ran by a very evil man.

[Markk]

If he was not hired for his name and possible connections, why was he hired?

You’re the one asserting something and saying it came from the person who specifically stated otherwise. Canpakes pretty much covered it, so all I can add is you are once again claiming as evidence the lack thereof, and trying to shore up your argument by saying ‘but of course what they say is not really what they are saying, how could it possibly be different than what I believe?’

Your arguments are unpersuasive, but it is helping me to understand how people get so caught up in nonsense. Illogical thinking such as yours is way too commonplace.

You have not added one thing to this conversation that you can back up and you are clearly unprepared to have a conversation about what is going on here. You refused to even entertain, on nation television Hunter himself saying it was most likely because of his name he was hired.

I suggest you start by reading the book “Money land” https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07J4XTXBD/re ... TF8&btkr=1 it really opened up a lot of how men like MZ operate.

Pakes did nothing but set up a straw-man…you tell me how Archer and Hunter Biden, in 2014 were somehow celebrities, especially celebrities in the Ukraine. They are infamous celebrities today, one a ex crackhead and the other in prison, but hardly never ever a marketable celebrity in the Ukraine.

[Markk]

And another. X acted corruptly at some time. Therefore, X is corrupt. Therefore, anything about X that cannot be explained must be corruption.

It's kind of a "corruption of the gaps" argument.

Here’s how I’m seeing Markk argue this:

Person W was charged at some point with having committed corrupt business activities.
Person X did some unrelated business with Person W.
Person Y works with Person X.
Therefore, Person Z, who is related to Person Y, is corrupt and did ‘something’ wrong that no one can explain or provide details for.

Res…we haven't even begin to explore just how deep this goes, you dodge, duck and, avoid, any attempts to actually dig into this.

Why did Archer and Biden receive 112K…before they were hired, and before JB was to leave to the Ukraine. I don’t know…if you don’t know that’s okay, we can then move on, or if you do know, let me know, give me a cf, and I will review it and we can discuss whether it lends to your position or mine.