On Friday, we analyzed a just-released FBI ‘FD-1023′ document, in which a trusted FBI informant asserted that executives from Burisma — the Ukrainian energy company that famously employed then-Vice President Joe Biden’s son, despite his dearth of relevant expertise, while the elder Biden was running point on Ukraine policy in the Obama administration — had described a multimillion-dollar bribery scheme that enriched both of the aforementioned Bidens.
The Bureau’s confidential human source (CHS) told investigators that the Burisma leaders held a dim view of Hunter Biden’s personal value and intellect, but kept the generous payments flowing to him because Hunter would “take care of all of those issues through his dad.” The function of the younger Biden, the company’s CFO reportedly said, was “to protect us, through his dad, from all kinds of problems.”
One such problem, allegedly, was an investigation by a Ukrainian prosecutor into Burisma, which the firm’s leadership wanted to go away. To that end, per former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy’s summary of the CHS’ accusations, “the founder of Burisma recounted being pressured by then-Vice President Joe Biden to put Biden’s son Hunter on the Ukrainian energy company’s board, and for $10 million in bribes — $5 million each to Joe and Hunter Biden — in order to use Biden’s political influence to force the firing of a Ukrainian prosecutor who was investigating Burisma.” That man was, in fact, fired, after Vice President Biden explicitly linked the firing as a prerequisite for unlocking $1 billion is US taxpayer aid. Biden subsequently boasted about this very episode in public remarks.
The Federalist’s Margot Cleveland immediately noted that the CHS’ account directly contradicted Biden’s explanation for triggering the firing, writing that the Burisma executive’s alleged statement to the CHS “proves significant because Joe Biden had long claimed he pushed for Shokin’s firing because Shokin was not investigating Burisma — which is the exact opposite of the details summarized in the FD-1023.” The FD-1023 includes a recollection from the CHS, who said Burisma bigwigs weren’t concerned about the claimed $10 million in bribery funds ever being discovered because they “did not send funds directly to “the big guy” (a reference to Joe Biden), and that the payments to the Bidens had been routed through so many companies and bank accounts that it would take investigators ten years to trace the payments to Joe Biden.” As we pointed out, House Oversight Committee Republicans have produced bank records showing millions of dollars in foreign (largely Chinese) money flowing to nine different Biden family members through an intricate series of shell corporations — quite possibly underscoring a modus operandi, at the very least.