President Joe Biden must reject the call by his son’s attorneys for a Justice Department investigation of his political enemies

Hunter Biden’s attorneys yesterday demanded a U.S. Justice Department criminal investigation of the computer repair store owner who gave Hunter Biden’s laptop to the FBI in December 2019, and of President Biden’s political enemies, including Rudy Giuliani, a former President Donald Trump advisor, who gave the laptop to the New York Post.

“Mr. [John Paul] Mac Isaac’s intentional, reckless, and likely unlawful conduct allowed for hundreds of gigabytes of Mr. Biden’s personal data, without any discretion, to be circulated around the Internet,” said Hunter Biden’s attorney.

But there is good evidence that computer store owner Mac Isaac followed Delaware law. Since October 2020, a contract signed by Hunter Biden, with Mac Isaac, has been on the New York Post website. Meanwhile, Hunter Biden’s attorneys presented no evidence to the contrary. Mac Isaac’s attorney told Public it was “an intimidation tactic.”

Many Americans still do not understand why this is an important story. They think the Hunter Biden laptop is simply about him smoking crack, having sex with prostitutes, sexually exploiting his employees, and selling access to his father, President Joe Biden, to Chinese and Ukrainian businessmen.

But Hunter Biden’s laptop may matter less for the crimes it revealed than for the potential crimes that may have ensued. No single fact summarizes the real issue better than this one: the FBI took the laptop from Mac Isaac and six months later warned Facebook and Twitter executives that “Russians would release disinformation” about Hunter Biden just before the 2020 election.

It is possible that the FBI agents who warned Twitter and Facebook executives of a coming Russian “hack and leak” operation relating to Hunter Biden did not know that other FBI agents had the laptop, and were strictly “compartmentalized.”

But it could also be that senior FBI officials, including the top agency officials, did, in fact, know that the laptop was real. Former top CIA media analyst Martin Gurri said, “I don’t think there’s any other possibility…. They knew about the laptop or must have known. And why did they say it was coming in October? They were seeding the ground to say, ‘You shouldn’t cover that.’ It was such a perversion of the truth.”

READ MORE