I have been waiting for a New York Post editorial or column to bring us up to date on House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer’s struggle to extract the Form FD-1023 in which the FBI “recorded allegations, from a long-term trusted, paid confidential FBI source, that Joe Biden was allegedly paid a $5 million bribe by someone in Ukraine while he was vice president.” Miranda Devine performs the service in her column “It’s James Comer’s grit vs. Biden’s grift as family corruption scandal intrigue heats up.”
By the way, this is the second of Devine’s two column posted yesterday evening (the first one here is now appended to her column on Comer). If she isn’t the hardest working woman in show business, she’s certainly the woman working hardest on the Biden family business.
I’ve been following the story somewhat closely, but I was not aware of this point: “Initially [FBI Director] Wray had told Comer and Sen. Chuck Grassley that no such FD-1023 document existed. Then, after the two Republicans told Wray that they had already seen the document, thanks to a whistleblower, he admitted its existence.” That seems a story worth digging into by itself.
Devine reports that Comer “wants to know if the FD-1023 was discredited as Russian disinformation and buried in an inaccessible file by someone at FBI headquarters in Washington, along with other information derogatory to Joe Biden, as a whistleblower has told Grassley.” Devine draws on her own experience to make a point that continues to be salient (see the Wray denial above): “After its involvement in the farcical Russia hoax and its coercion of Twitter and Facebook to censor The Post’s Hunter Biden laptop story before the 2020 election, nobody trusts the FBI not to keep lying to protect itself.” I would only add that nobody trusts the FBI not to obstruct investigation of the Biden family business.
UPDATE: See also Mollie Hemingway’s Federalist column “Russiagate Redux: Grassley Calls Out FBI For Leaking False Narratives To Obstruct Biden Investigation.”
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.