Criminal law, Justice, Politics

“Lets See How We Can Be Helpful”: Joe Biden Wrote Letter to Help One of Hunter’s Foreign Contacts

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.

117 thoughts on ““Lets See How We Can Be Helpful”: Joe Biden Wrote Letter to Help One of Hunter’s Foreign Contacts”

  1. “Prosecuting Hunter and not #thebigguy is like just prosecuting Sammy the Bull and letting John Gotti go free.”

    Rudy G.

  2. Before the primaries the Democrat elites and their MSM and media enablers all panned Joe Biden, he’s a loser, etc. Then things heated up and as expected Bernie Sanders is kicking arse and taking names and generating huge buzz among Dem. voters. The bankers and their industry support groups went insane. They looked at the list to pick anyone who would support the banks (Bernie hates banks) and the only sucker they could support who had any chance was Joe. Suddenly Joe looked great and he’s in the White House thinking his wife was Obama’s VP.

    1. Fair enough,
      But don’t forget that with Biden there is real evidence while with Trump the evidence was created by the Dems.

    2. Silberman’s version of TDS is to believe Hillary and the Dems when they say Putin stole the 2016 election, exactly the same as the Trumpists JS hates and condemn for believing Trump’s Great Lie that he won the 2020 election.

      Way to go, Jeff!

      1. Anon,

        I have never said that Putin’s efforts in Trump’s favor won the 2016 election for him. You are a liar.

        I don’t hate Trumpists; I pity them being duped by a conman.

        You are correct about one thing- I do condemn Trumpists for continuing to lie that the 2020 election was stolen.

        1 out of 3.

        1. “I have never said that Putin’s efforts in Trump’s favor won the 2016 election for him.”

          Unfortunately, even though you didn’t use those exact words, you have.

          “I don’t hate Trumpists; I pity them”

          You don’t hate them, is true. You despise them. You can’t stand the fact that they think for themselves.

          “I do condemn Trumpists for continuing to lie that the 2020 election was stolen.”

          How do you know one way or the other? You don’t. You lie about knowing the results that someone else told you.

        2. Trump isn’t the only conman in Washington DC. Another sits in the White House right now. Another ran against Trump in 2016. Avarice abounds in DC and we will all pay a steep price for it at some point in the near future.

          1. On the spectrum of conmen, Trump is at the endpoint- a “carnival snake charmer” as Turley labeled him.

            1. “Carnival snake charmer” would at least indicate Trump was not the snake. That would be Hillary or Joe, depending on the election in question.

              1. You make a good distinction. Neither a snake nor an “absurd television reality star” as Turley also demeaned Trump should run for president.

      1. Zonkmenow says:

        “Problem is it was a “Witch Hunt” in Trump’s case.”

        I would suggest you direct your comments to Turley himself. Ask him why HE has NEVER said that the Mueller investigation was a “witch-hunt.” That’s good enough for me.

        1. “Ask him why HE has NEVER said that “

          He never said that you were smart, therefore by your logic you are dumb. I think there will be a lot of agreement on that.

        2. The Mueller investigation found no evidence of any American—and this would include Mr. Trump—colluding with Russia to influence the 2016 election.

          However, it was still a witch hunt as demonstrated by the fact they neglected, perhaps purposely, to investigate the Clinton Campaign or the DNC in all they did, some of which we now have documented proof of and much more the Dunham investigation is subpoenaing from them. When the first investigation finds nothing on its target but the second finds an abundance on his opponents who initiated the first investigation, the first was by definition a witch hunt.

          1. Harrison claims:

            “The Mueller investigation found no evidence of any American—and this would include Mr. Trump—colluding with Russia to influence the 2016 election.”

            Regrettably, you have swallowed a false narrative. While Mueller was unable to establish a criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians, Mueller wrote that the “investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts.”

            Mueller DID find cooperation with Russians:

            1. sharing of polling data in states where Trump won upset victories,

            2. conversations with the Russian ambassador to influence Russia’s response to sanctions imposed by the U.S. government,

            3. communications with Wikileaks after the campaign had received emails stolen by Russia.

            Though none of this conduct constituted the crime of conspiracy, they are collusion, that is, secret cooperation.

            If you insist upon lying that the Mueller investigation was a “witch-hunt,” I am forced to pull a page out of the Trumpist playbook and dismiss the Durham investigation as a witch-hunt.

            Do you understand that two can play that game?

  4. Sorry Dr. Turley but while I’m no fan of the President’s I don’t smell blood in the water over a lousy letter of recommendation for an associate of his son’s child getting a letter for college admissions. What kind of father wouldn’t write such a letter if his son asked? This is no smokin’ gun!

    1. Intellectual curiosity is not your strong suit. And what kind of father wouldn’t withhold $1 billion dollars of foreign aid to Ukraine if their President didn’t fire the prosecutor investigating corruption of a company like Burisma?

      Father of the Millennium goes to…Joe Biden.

      1. Olly says:

        “And what kind of father wouldn’t withhold $1 billion dollars of foreign aid to Ukraine if their President didn’t fire the prosecutor investigating corruption of a company like Burisma?”

        That lie has been debunked.

        Look it, I’m all for appointing a special prosecutor to investigate both Bidens, but I reserve the right to dismiss it as a “witch-hunt” no differently than Trumpists did the Mueller investigation. Fair enough?

        1. Go ahead, reserve away. Just so you understand, calling it a witch-hunt isn’t why the Mueller investigation ended up being a wtch-hunt.

          Regarding the Bidens, the hunt isn’t for witches. Hunter solved that already. The hunt is for a special prosecutor and grand jury that will indict.

          1. Olly says:

            “calling it a witch-hunt isn’t why the Mueller investigation ended up being a wtch-hunt.”

            Doesn’t help. Has Turley ever called it a “witch-hunt” or believes it was so to this day?

            Of course not, because he is not a lying Trumpist. Bless his heart!

          2. BTW,

            I hope Hunter is indicted and convicted so that I can declare, “good riddance.” Tell me, will you rejoice that the law has been vindicated if Trump or his inner circle are ever found guilty of a crime? You know what Trump will say. Will you take his word or the jury’s?

          1. Turley has said:

            “Hunter also was asked to be a director of a Ukrainian natural gas company, Burisma Holdings, owned by a government minister and close associate of bloodsoaked former president and Russian stooge Viktor Yanukovych. Biden later forced the government to fire the Ukrainian chief prosecutor fired after he threatened to investigate Burisma Holdings. Biden bragged that he held up more than $1 billion in loan guarantees and gave the Ukrainians just hours to fire the prosecutor.”

            “In fairness to Biden, the United States and many countries were clamoring for Ukraine to act on its rampant corruption, including the need for a more aggressive prosecutor. However, the obvious conflicts posed by Hunter’s dealings has been largely ignored.
            There are two concerns with Hunter Biden. One is the concern of whether Joe Biden knew that his actions may benefit his son. I am willing to believe that Biden was not aware of the potential investigation of his son’s company in the Ukraine. Yet, there is the other question of whether the Biden family cashed in on Biden’s positions in these convenient and ample contracts. Children and spouses of politicians are often given positions and contracts to influence them.”

            https://jonathanturley.org/2019/09/22/biden-i-have-never-spoken-to-my-son-about-his-overseas-business-dealings/#more-148347

            Turley does not believe the Trumpist false narrative that Joe withheld the money to protect Hunter; however, Turley believes that influence peddling of politicians is a major concern. I agree.

            1. “However, the obvious conflicts posed by Hunter’s dealings has been largely ignored.”

              …And they were ignored, over and over again. They were ignored to such an extent that Joe Biden lied about the laptop and what it contained. The press and social media lied as well. You have been no better. You lie and never even attempt to show that what you say might have proof.

              You don’t know what Turley thinks. Your swollen head makes you feel as if you do, but you know very little of what you talk about, as we have repeatedly seen.

              One can garner from the tone of Turley’s posts that, as a Democrat, he is quite disturbed by what he is seeing.

    2. Where there is smoke there is fire, as they say in SDNY. Joe must be guilty as hell. The problem, as I see it, is if they appoint a ‘real’ special proscecutor is that Joe will be incompetent to stand trial or dead by the time the investigation is completed. I say, we just go after Hunter and Jill.

    4. John Beech, you miss the point. This letter of recommendation was written for the benefit of a child of a Chinese executive. All Chinese executives are part of the government of China. Joe was doing a favor for his son. The letter was written to help Hunter in his business affairs with the Chinese Communists. This is an instance in which Joe Biden not only knew about one of Hunter’s business affairs but he used his influence to make Hunter more successful in his business endeavor. Please recall that Joe said that he was never involved in Hunter’s businesses. If this favor was just to be considered on its own it might not be such a big deal but it is just a part many instances that show that Joe Biden was involved after he lied about not being involved. All the little pieces put together tell the full story.

    5. “Associate” in this case is a foreign government or foreign business paying Hunter millions of dollars, some of which went to Joe, and Joe is returning a favor for that payment and Hunter illegally did not register as an employee of a foreign government.

      But nice try, liar!

Comments are closed.