We have been discussing the Hunter Biden scandal and the increasingly untenable position for Merrick Garland and the media as evidence contradicts past representations of President Joe Biden. That position further to deteriorate today with a Fox story that, in 2017, President Biden, wrote a college recommendation letter for the son of a Chinese executive who did business with Hunter Biden. President Biden has long denied any knowledge or involvement in his son’s dealings — a claim that has been contradicted not only by emails found on the laptop but statements by Hunter Biden himself.
The letter is on behalf of the son of the CEO of BHR Jonathan Li. BHR features prominently in the influence peddling scandal. It was in a joint venture with Biden’s Rosemont Seneca. Hunter held a 10% stake in BHR and, while he claimed that he was entirely divested, he continued to hold shares as recently as last year.
Fox News Digital obtained emails between Hunter Biden and his business associates, including one dated Jan. 3, 2017, and sent to Hunter Biden and his business associates Devon Archer and Jim Bolger, CEO of BHR Jonathan Li writes:
“Gentlmen[sic], please find the attached resume of my son, Chris Li. He is applying the following colleges for this year,” Li writes, listing Brown University, Cornell University, and New York University.
Li goes on to attach an “updated version” of his son’s “CV” and listing Brown, Cornell, and NYU as target schools.
Hunter’s associate, James Bulger, responds with “Lets [sic] see how we can be helpful here to Chris,” Bulger writes.
Several weeks later, on Feb. 18, 2017, Eric Schwerin, who served as president of Rosemont Seneca, replied to Li. Schwerin states “Jonathan, Hunter asked me to send you a copy of the recommendation letter that he asked his father to write on behalf of Christopher for Brown University.”
Once again, it is baffling how Attorney General Garland can ignore the myriad of references to Joe Biden in refusing to appoint a special counsel.
The email direct reference to Joe Biden is a departure from the practice in these communications. People apparently were told to avoid directly referring to President Biden. In one email, Tony Bobulinski, then a business partner of Hunter’s, was instructed by Biden associate James Gilliar not to speak of the former veep’s connection to any transactions: “Don’t mention Joe being involved, it’s only when u [sic] are face to face, I know u [sic] know that but they are paranoid.”
Instead, the emails apparently refer to President Biden with code names such as “Celtic” or “the big guy.” In one, “the big guy” is discussed as possibly receiving a 10 percent cut on a deal with a Chinese energy firm; other emails reportedly refer to Hunter Biden paying portions of his father’s expenses and taxes.
Despite President Biden’s repeated claims he knew nothing about these dealings, Bobulinski has said he personally met with the senior Biden to discuss Hunter Biden’s business activities. Bobulinski had been selected by the family to handle these deals.
As vice president, Joe Biden flew to China on Air Force Two with Hunter Biden, who arranged for his father to meet some of his business interests. Hunter Biden’s financial interest in a Chinese-backed investment firm, BHR Partners, was registered within weeks of that 2013 trip. Yet, President Biden repeatedly insisted that he never discussed such dealings with his son, a claim Hunter Biden has contradicted.
There are emails of Ukrainian and other foreign clients thanking Hunter Biden for arranging meetings with his father. There are photos from dinners and meetings that tie President Biden to these figures, including a 2015 dinner with a group of Hunter Biden’s Russian and Kazakh clients.
Justice Department regulations allow the appointment of a special counsel when it is in the public interest and an “investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney’s Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances.”
The President of the United States is not only referenced in potentially receiving shares in some dealings, but he was named as one of those meant to share a Chinese-funded office and receiving funds from shared accounts. He is now directly linked to assist one of these foreign figures directly in this letter.
What was an untenable position for the White House and Garland is increasingly becoming laughable as these connections emerge.