Connect with us


Hunter Biden falsely claims intel community labeled laptop story as ‘Russian disinformation’



Screen Shot 2021 04 09 at 4.57.09 PM scaled

Hunter Biden falsely claimed that the intelligence community has publicly determined his laptop scandal to be “Russian disinformation,” The Washington Examiner reported Friday.

President Joe Biden‘s son has been arguing he has “done nothing wrong,” saying he’s confident the Justice Department investigates his taxes he will be clear his name.

In his various interviews promoting his memoir, “Beautiful Things,” Hunter has acknowledged that the purported laptop allegedly given to a Delaware repair shop in 2019 could belong to him. Although, he has said he has no recollection and that the device could have been stolen, he could have been hacked, or—citing no evidence—Russian intelligence could have played a role.

MORE ON HUNTER BIDEN: Hunter Biden says he smoked parmesan cheese because it reminded him of crack cocaine

However, in an interview this week on the “WTF with Marc Maron” podcast, Hunter falsely claimed that a recently published report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence had determined the laptop story to be Russian-backed disinformation. Former President Donald Trump’s director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, said no evidence supported the claim that the laptop story was a Russian disinformation campaign. Last month, too, a report published by President Biden’s spy community did not specifically reference the laptop, The Washington Examiner noted.

“I say it to everybody — I think I write it in the book — is that, this is the truest thing I ever heard, is that, getting sober is easy, all you gotta do is change everything. And I can tell you that the ability to change everything requires, at least from me, not only getting honest with the people around me but getting honest with myself. And for the first time, I’ve been allowed to — I’ve given myself permission to do that,” Hunter told host Marc Maron. “Now, you know, it’s a hell of a lot easier when your story is being — um, you know, the concocted story of you out there is even worse than the story I write in the book.”

“But, did you pick up your laptop or?” Maron asked.

Hunter laughed and responded: “Yeah, the creepiest thing is — look, I have no clue what’s real. Only thing I do know is that the intelligence community just came out with a report that said the entire thing is Russian disinformation. And I tell people — just give them my book. I mean, it’s all right there. I’ve got nothing to hide.”

Maron then said, “The funny thing is like, […] given how much s— was stolen from you over the years when you were high, who the f— knows.”

Agreeing with Maron, Hunter replied: “Yeah. Yeah. I mean, exactly, who knows. Only thing I do know is that Rudy Giuliani is supposedly sleeping with it, which is creepy enough just to even think about,” referencing Trump’s personal lawyer.

President Biden’s 2020 campaign dismissed the laptop story, which broke in October, as being part of a Russian disinformation effort without backing up their claims with evidence.

After it came to light in December that the Justice Department was investigating Hunter’s taxes, concerns about him started to grow.

Read the full original Washington Examiner story here.

You can follow Douglas Braff on Twitter @DouglasPBraff.

Continue Reading


House Speaker Mike Johnson Vows to Take Legal Action After DOJ Declines to Prosecute Merrick Garland



Screen Shot 2021 02 22 at 12.40.15 PM scaled

House Speaker Mike Johnson expressed disappointment on Friday over the Justice Department’s (DOJ) decision not to prosecute Attorney General Merrick Garland after the House voted to hold him in contempt for failing to comply with a congressional subpoena. Johnson announced plans to take the subpoena to federal court and certify the contempt reports.

The DOJ stated that Garland’s refusal to comply with the subpoena, which instructed him to turn over an audio recording of President Joe Biden’s interview with Special Counsel Robert Hur, did not “constitute a crime.” This decision follows the GOP-led House’s vote on Wednesday to hold Garland in contempt, passing the resolution with a 216–207 vote.

“The House disagrees with the assertions in the letter from the Department of Justice,” Johnson wrote in a post on X (formerly Twitter). “As Speaker, I will be certifying the contempt reports to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. It is sadly predictable that the Biden Administration’s Justice Department will not prosecute Garland for defying congressional subpoenas even though the department aggressively prosecuted Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro for the same thing.”

Johnson criticized the DOJ’s decision as “another example” of what he perceives as the Biden administration’s two-tiered system of justice. He emphasized that the House would pursue the enforcement of the subpoena against Garland in federal court. The contempt order was issued after President Biden invoked executive privilege over the tapes, though Congress has received a transcript of the interview.

In a statement following the House’s contempt vote, Garland blasted the decision, accusing House Republicans of weaponizing their power for partisan purposes. “Today’s vote disregards the constitutional separation of powers, the Justice Department’s need to protect its investigations, and the substantial amount of information we have provided to the Committees,” Garland stated. “I will always stand up for this department, its employees, and its vital mission to defend our democracy.”

The Justice Department’s refusal to prosecute Garland underscores ongoing tensions between the executive branch and the GOP-led House. The situation reflects broader disputes over congressional oversight, executive privilege, and the handling of classified information.

As Speaker Johnson moves forward with legal action, the outcome could set significant precedents for the balance of power between Congress and the executive branch. The decision to pursue enforcement of the subpoena in federal court will be closely watched, as it may influence future interactions between legislative investigators and executive officials.

Continue Reading