FBI Agent Erika Jensen testified this week in Hunter Biden’s trial in which the president’s son is charged with falsifying a gun purchase form, saying that he wasn’t addicted to drugs.
Joe Biden admitted threatening Ukraine’s government with withholding U.S. loan guarantees to get the prosecutor fired.
According to a variety of news reports, Jensen testified to the authenticity of the infamous Hunter Biden laptop which she said contained evidence of Hunter’s drug and gun purchases.
You should remember the “laptop from hell,” and most of its ramifications. Two of them aren’t getting the attention they deserve. First is the many intelligence officials who signed a letter saying falsely that the laptop was nothing more than Russian disinformation. The second is the other evidence from the laptop that implicates both Hunter and Joe in illegal influence peddling. (READ MORE from Jed Babbin: Biden’s Latest Gaza Deal)
In October 2020, weeks before the presidential election, fifty-one current and former senior intelligence officials signed a letter saying that the laptop’s contents had all the characteristics of a Russian disinformation campaign. Among the signatories were several Trump administration intelligence officials as well as former CIA directors or acting directors John Brennan, Leon Panetta, Gen. Michael Hayden, John McLaughlin, and Michael Morell.
The media immediately picked up on the letter and ensured that it was accepted as gospel.
Only later did the evidence surface that the letter was the idea of Anthony Blinken, then a Biden campaign strategist and now secretary of state. The letter, not the laptop, was a deception.
None of the 51 current and former intelligence officials have apologized for their wrongful and purely political declaration that the laptop was a Russian disinformation plot.
All (or most) of the former intelligence officials have retained their security clearances. That is common among former top officials and some lesser figures.
One of the most common bases for revocation of security clearances is personal conduct which indicates that a person might not keep our secrets secret. The government regs describe such conduct as any general conduct involving questionable judgment, untrustworthiness, unreliability, lack of candor, dishonesty, or unwillingness to comply with rules that could indicate a person might not protect classified information.
All of the 51 displayed at least four of those types of conduct — untrustworthiness, questionable judgment, lack of candor, and dishonesty — in signing on to the Blinken letter. They all should have their security clearances revoked, but that will never happen with Joe Biden in the White House.
Let’s set the question of security clearance revocation aside for the moment. The bigger problem with the letter is the other side of what Hunter’s laptop would show in any trial of Hunter or Joe on influence-peddling charges.
Title 18 Section 201 of the U.S. code makes it a crime for any person to to offer, or for any U.S. official to accept anything of value in order to affect official acts. (That’s only one of the crimes both Bidens could be charged with but let’s stick with that one for now.)
The laptop contains hundreds of documents that Senate Republicans said in 2022 are evidence that Hunter Biden was selling influence — i.e., access and possibly bribes to his father — to affect U.S. foreign policy.
Those documents reportedly show that between 2013 and 2018, when Joe was Obama’s vice president, Hunter brought in at least $11 million from Ukraine’s Burisma energy firm and from Chinese businesses. He reportedly spent the money as fast as it came in on drugs, Porsche cars, and women.
Hunter served as a Burisma board member without experience in energy. Joe has bragged that he, using a threat of withholding U.S. loan guarantees, caused the firing of a Ukrainian prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, who was investigating Burisma’s corruption.
A jury could easily decide that was a corrupt official act by Joe Biden apparently brought about to conceal Hunter Biden’s illegal influence peddling.
Joe has also denied having any connection to Hunter’s business transactions or having any meetings with Chinese “businessmen” at Hunter’s behest. That has also been proven false. Hunter’s “business partners” in China have evaded U.S. congressional investigations because congressional subpoena powers do not extend overseas.
The Bidens have, as you would expect, denied any wrongdoing. In a closed-door hearing before congressional investigators, Hunter reportedly testified that, “I did not involve my father in my business. Not while I was a practicing lawyer, not in my investments or transactions domestic or international, not as a board member, and not as an artist. Never.”
That, of course, begs the question. Joe Biden admitted threatening Ukraine’s government with withholding U.S. loan guarantees to get the prosecutor fired. The question remains: did he profit from that transaction or did he just do it as a means of quashing Shokin’s investigation, which would inevitably lead to Hunter’s evident corruption?
It also begs the question of how and why Joe Biden met with Chinese “businessmen” who were Hunter’s partners.
Joe Biden’s brother James Biden is probably also involved in at least the Chinese dealings. James Biden’s testimony told congressional investigators, according to a February 2024 Wall Street Journal report that his brother wasn’t involved in his business ventures, saying he always kept his professional life away from their “close personal relationship.”
But now we have an FBI agent who testified to at least part of the laptop’s content as credible evidence. The agent couldn’t have been expected to testify to the rest of its contents as truthful because it isn’t relevant to the current charges against Hunter. (READ MORE: Biden Is Morally Bankrupt)
Hunter Biden is expected to stand trial for tax evasion in September. That trial, we should expect, will probably be delayed until after the November election.
In that trial — whenever it occurs — the laptop evidence will be entirely relevant. Will the FBI again testify to its veracity?
That evidence would probably be more than enough to convict Joe, Hunter, and James. It could result in Joe’s impeachment if — heaven forbid — he is reelected.
Joe is taking considerable pleasure in saying, at every opportunity, that Donald Trump is a convicted felon. But there, but for the grace of Merrick Garland, goes he.
