Was Hunter Biden the CIA's 'Man in Ukraine'? 

Yesterday, the House Judiciary Committee reported that the CIA stuck its snoot into obstructing various federal cases against the now-president's wastrel younger son.

According to the New York Post:

The CIA blocked federal investigators from interviewing Hunter Biden’s “sugar brother” Kevin Morris during a five-year probe into the first son’s alleged tax crimes, a whistleblower has told House impeachment leaders.

House Oversight and Judiciary Committee chairmen say the whistleblower informed them the intelligence agency stopped IRS and Justice Department investigators from interviewing Morris in August 2021, a Hollywood lawyer and patron of the first son, according to a Thursday letter addressed to CIA Director William Burns.

The whistleblower informed Oversight chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) and Judiciary chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) that two DOJ officials were summoned to CIA headquarters in Langley, Va. — and told Morris “could not be a witness” for their investigation into Hunter Biden.

“However, these allegations track with other evidence showing how the DOJ deviated from its standard investigative practices during the investigation of Hunter Biden.”

Why would the CIA care whether Hunter Biden's bong-sucking lawyer and "sugar brother" talked to federal investigators? They're supposed to be focused on foreign policy, not the Hollywood chi-chi crowd.

Mike Benz, a former State Department cyber official, has a well-informed theory about what was going on:

Hunter Biden was advancing a CIA project in Ukraine to swing the natural gas market towards NATO & that’s why he’s untouchable. https://t.co/pDZZy2b0kV pic.twitter.com/TgL6hTZKRF

— Mike Benz (@MikeBenzCyber) March 21, 2024

To sum up Benz's remarks:

He's part of a CIA operation, multiple ones.

He was on the chairman's advisory board of the National Democratic Institute, an NGO linked to the CIA, a group that does overtly what the CIA tries to do covertly. 

No one who isn't linked or vetted by the CIA gets to be on that board. It's the CIA.

His partner on the board of Burisma was CIA, too.

Taking over Burisma was a CIA operation, as was Naftagaz, a state-linked public/private Ukraine gas company.

The CIA has been trying to take control of Burisma and wrest the gas market from Russia to NATO and has been trying to do so for 16 years.

It wanted a U.S.-controlled gas market with a U.S.-controlled Burisma. Putin and Soros have fought over Naftagaz, a privatization target. The idea was to cut Russia off and kick it out of the European gas market.

If you kill Russia's energy exports, you kill its arms market -- and its arms sales to Africa with its rare-earth minerals.

Hunter would have been the tip of the spear for the CIA -- and his dad was Vice President Joe Biden as well as a top Senate foreign relations committee member for 30 years.

That is the coordinating wing between the Senate and the deep-state blob. The structure of the blob: The CIA, Pentagon, and State Department are all in together. 

The CIA will lean on DoJ to kill investigations into criminal activity involving assets of the CIA so they can continue to do work in the U.S. interest even if it's a criminal enterprise, as that is its job and it has a license to do so. 

Hunter Biden was part of a plausibly deniable CIA operation to swing the gas market towards NATO. 

That's why he's untouchable.

So Benz posits, and yes, it's a credible explanation.

So like the crack-cocaine operations into U.S. inner cities that the CIA was complicit in enabling from Latin America in the 1980s, the Hunter Biden activity in Ukraine was one of these.

Hunter himself was in the role of the criminal, and yes, his activity certainly suggested that he did a lot of things criminals and drug lords do -- he certainly lived like a drug lord at Chateau Marmont in West Hollywood a few years ago. 

Joe himself, of course, was 'the big guy.'

And like the Our Man in Havana plotline of Graham Greene's entertaining 1958 novel, lots of lies flowed from it.

One of which we experienced was the phony 51 intelligence leaders who signed their names to a phony claim that the contents of Hunter Biden's abandoned laptop computer were a "Russian disinformation" plot.

Remember this?

A former CIA official testified that then-Biden campaign senior adviser, now-Secretary of State Antony Blinken "played a role in the inception" of the public statement signed by current and past intelligence officials that claimed the Hunter Biden laptop was part of a Russian disinformation campaign.

Former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morrell testified before the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees, and revealed that Blinken was "the impetus" of the public statement signed in October 2020 that implied the laptop belonging to Hunter Biden was disinformation.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Turner, R-Ohio, sent a letter to Blinken Thursday, notifying him that the panels are "conducting oversight of federal law-enforcement and intelligence matters within our respective jurisdictions."

"We are examining that public statement signed by 51 former intelligence officials that falsely discredited a New York Post story regarding Hunter Biden’s laptop as supposed Russian disinformation," they wrote. "As part of our oversight, we have learned that you played a role in the inception of this statement while serving as a Biden campaign advisor, and we therefore request your assistance with our oversight."

Unlike the merry spy of Greene's Havana, driven by a need for money to finance a lavish lifestyle and willing to send fake stories sent to the London headquarters of British intelligence in Greene's farcical novel, the target of the fakery wasn't CIA headquarters, but the sovereign American voter, which is quite a bit less funny.

That's not the CIA's job, and the CIA is expressly forbidden to do that, meddling in domestic politics, particularly elections. They sought to sway the U.S. public that the laptop was fake, and got their pals at the FBI to suppress news of the laptop on social media, and in the end, meddled in U.S. domestic politics as if they were the KGB.

The foreign policy goal, to take over Russia's natural market in energy is worth debating, too. Nations do try to advance their interests and secure their power. But to shut Russia out of its own "near-abroad," market is kind of questionable.

Wouldn't something like that make them mad? Wouldn't it seem normal that they might try to counter that by hitting out at U.S. interests, and pal around with China as a result, undermining U.S. interests in more spectacular ways? Would we be happy if Russia sought to gain control of Mexico's or Canada's energy markets? (We seems to have already handed them control of Venezuela's energy markets, through sanctions, making Putin very rich and fat indeed). Is there no recognition of any detente to keep things a little calmer and more balanced?

Maybe this explains why Putin decided to strike Ukraine, particularly, as Benz notes, the U.S. fomented the color-revolution coup in 2014 to try to wrest control of Ukraine's gas even then, triggering a smaller invasion of Ukraine from Russia.

And maybe the CIA should have drawn the line at enriching a drugged-up, gun-brandishing, wenching, irresponsible human mess like Hunter Biden, to the tune of millions of dollars based on his political ties, enabling him to live a drug lord's lifestyle on the taxpayer dime.

There's no doubt about it that Joe Biden is the CIA's man on Ukraine which might be why every covert and sneaky dirty trick in the book was employed to get him elected to power without popular support. 

That the U.S. voter and taxpayer is the victim here calls into question why we have a CIA enabled to act like this at all.

Photo illustration by Monica Showalter with use of images by Gage Skidmore, via Flickr // CC BY-SA 2.0, Acaben, via Wikimedia Commons // CC BY-SA 2.0, PxFuel // public domain, ABC News YouTube screen shot, and logo // public domain