Biden, Biden & Burisma

Harvard Harris Poll Debrief with Mark Penn and Bob Cusack

Let's also look at a subject that the news media has oftentimes been reluctant to fully cover, which is Hunter Biden and his serving as a director on Burisma, the Ukrainian energy company. We've asked a few questions over the last couple of months. We've done a pretty thorough battery here, because given that what you see in most stories is that there's no evidence of corruption, I wanted to see here, what did the American people really think about this. And we asked them, have you heard anything about Hunter Biden serving as a director of Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company? 66% of the public, still 34% who hadn't heard?
We asked them, what do you think the compensation was? Nothing 14%; a few thousand dollars 14%; about a hundred thousand dollars 31%; 42% said more than a million. In fact, it was considerably more than a million. Even our own question previously didn't have the correct number as high as the compensation actually was. So most people, 68%, don't understand the level of compensation.
Do you think that Hunter Biden was qualified or unqualified for this job? 59% say unqualified. Do you think that Hunter Biden got the job because of his father's position or his own merit? 72% believe that he got this job because of his father's position; 28% own merit. So while people are a little fuzzy about how much money was involved, they are pretty clear that he is accepting a job here based on the job that his father had. Unquestionable clear public opinion.
Hunter Biden received millions for services as a director of Burisma, while his father, Vice President, was in charge of Ukraine policy. Do you think this is evidence of corruption or not evidence of corruption? 54% say just his receiving those millions of dollars given his father's position is evidence of corruption. The interesting thing here is that many stories say there's no evidence of any corruption. Most voters would disagree with that position. It doesn't mean that that's definitive evidence or proof that there is corruption. Quite the contrary. That's not what the question asks. And many of these statements also that appear in news stories, don't say, Hey, there's some evidence, but nothing definitive. They say there's no evidence. Most people would think that millions of dollars that went to somebody's son for a job that they say they weren't qualified for at least is evidence worthy of investigation. And do you think this merits further investigation or does not merit further investigation? 58% say merits further investigation; 42% does not merit investigation.
Interesting. At the time that he was Vice President, Joe Biden demanded that the Ukraine fire its Chief Prosecutor or the United States would withhold $1 billion of aid to Ukraine. Was this action appropriate or inappropriate? Remember, most people thought that president Trump's actions inappropriate. 64% also thought that this action by Vice President Joe Biden was inappropriate. 64% inappropriate, 34% appropriate.
Do you think Joe Biden holding up Ukraine aid at the time his son was receiving millions from Ukrainian company is just a conspiracy theory to be dismissed or a serious matter to be investigated further? 57% say it's a serious matter; 43% say it's a conspiracy theory to be dismissed. Again, I'm not suggesting and nor did these questions suggest in any way, guilt or innocence. What they suggest is that these contracts do provide a level of smoke that people say should properly be investigated and shouldn't be dismissed as something not to really look at or get a good explanation on. Doesn't mean there isn't a good explanation; doesn't mean that they were not absolutely correct in everything that was done, but this is what public opinion is and how it stands when they're asked these questions specifically about these arrangements.