Skip to main content
We may receive compensation from affiliate partners for some links on this site. Read our full Disclosure here.

Biden’s 2020 Election Nightmare: Closed Probe Revived, Son Hunter was Board Member of Corrupt Firm…


Former Obama-era Vice President, and potential Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden is in hot water.

Only a couple years after leaving his position as vice president of the United States, Biden was found boasting to an audience of foreign policy specialists about the time as vice president that he strong-armed Ukraine into firing its top prosecutor.

What we do know is that Biden forced Ukraine into firing its top prosecutor when he threatened Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in March 2016 that the Obama administration would pull $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, later, Hunter Biden was named to the board, to oversee corrupt natural gas company Burisma’s legal team and Joe Biden’s effort to fire the prosecutor overseeing it has escaped without much public debate. He thought that as an elitist Democrat, he could say or do anything and get away with it.

Well, times have changed, and the Trump administration brought back a core American ideal called “individual accountability.”

Remember, Joe Biden once plagiarized a speech and thought no one would catch him.

This time around, Biden ran his mouth once again, and his office was quoted, on record, of acknowledging Hunter Biden’s role in Burisma in a New York Times article regarding the Ukrainian general prosecutor’s Burisma case, a case that appeared four months before Biden forced Shokin’s removal. Biden’s office suggested in that article that his son, Hunter Biden, was a lawyer free to pursue his own private business deals.

Of course, Biden, like all Democrats, views himself as a protected class of elites that are above the law. But then, as Biden’s 2020 campaign gained substantial traction over the past year, current General Prosecutor Yuriy Lutsenko — the Ukrainian prosecutor whom Biden once lauded as a “solid” substitute for Shokin — reopened the previously closed probe and began looking into what happened with the Burisma case once again.


According to The Hill:

Lutsenko told me that, while reviewing the Burisma investigative files, he discovered “members of the Board obtained funds as well as another U.S.-based legal entity, Rosemont Seneca Partners LLC, for consulting services.”

Lutsenko said some of the evidence he knows about in the Burisma case may interest U.S. authorities and he’d like to present that information to new U.S. Attorney General William Barr, particularly the vice president’s intervention.

“Unfortunately, Mr. Biden had correlated and connected this aid with some of the HR (personnel) issues and changes in the prosecutor’s office,” Lutsenko said.

Nazar Kholodnytskyi, the lead anti-corruption prosecutor in Lutsenko’s office, confirmed to me in an interview that part of the Burisma investigation was reopened in 2018, after Joe Biden made his remarks. “We were able to start this case again,” Kholodnytskyi said.

But he said the separate Ukrainian police agency that investigates corruption has dragged its feet in gathering evidence. “We don’t see any result from this case one year after the reopening because of some external influence,” he said, declining to be more specific.

Ukraine is in the middle of a hard-fought presidential election, is a frequent target of intelligence operations by neighboring Russia and suffers from rampant political corruption nationwide. Thus, many Americans might take the restart of the Burisma case with a grain of salt, and rightfully so.

But what makes Lutsenko’s account compelling is that federal authorities in America, in an entirely different case, uncovered financial records showing just how much Hunter Biden’s and Archer’s company received from Burisma while Joe Biden acted as Obama’s point man on Ukraine.

Between April 2014 and October 2015, more than $3 million was paid out of Burisma accounts to an account linked to Biden’s and Archer’s Rosemont Seneca firm, according to the financial records placed in a federal court file in Manhattan in an unrelated case against Archer.

The bank records show that, on most months when Burisma money flowed, two wire transfers of $83,333.33 each were sent to the Rosemont Seneca–connected account on the same day. The same Rosemont Seneca–linked account typically then would pay Hunter Biden one or more payments ranging from $5,000 to $25,000 each. Prosecutors reviewed internal company documents and wanted to interview Hunter Biden and Archer about why they had received such payments, according to interviews.

Lutsenko said Ukrainian company board members legally can pay themselves for work they do if it benefits the company’s bottom line, but prosecutors never got to determine the merits of the payments to Rosemont because of the way the investigation was shut down.

As for Joe Biden’s intervention in getting Lutsenko’s predecessor fired in the midst of the Burisma investigation, Lutsenko suggested that was a matter to discuss with Attorney General Barr: “Of course, I would be happy to have a conversation with him about this issue.”

Unlike the leftist Democratic officials that ran the Justice Department before him, Attorney General William Barr believes in identifying a potential crime before launching a prosecution. Sadly, many Americans have become used to the Democrat agenda of “prosecute your political opponents to see if you can find a crime” model, so that is why Barr’s behavior seems strange to many. It’s called integrity. Democrats should learn to have some integrity.

The question remains whether we will be able to continue a situation where one side is bound by the rule of law and integrity when they hold power, but the left is completely unconstrained by law when they hold power. I don’t think that is sustainable for the long haul. Either the left recommits to the rule of law, and NOT just when the right holds power, or this system is doomed. That would be tragic, but I don’t think the rule of law can work in only one direction.

Was it appropriate for Joe’s son and his firm to cash in on Ukraine while Joe served as point man for Ukraine policy?

What do you think?

Leave us a comment below with your input, and don’t forget to share this article to keep the conversation going!


Source: The Hill


Join the conversation!

Please share your thoughts about this article below. We value your opinions, and would love to see you add to the discussion!

Hey, Noah here!

Wondering where we went?

Read this and bookmark our new site!

See you over there!

Thanks for sharing!