Imagine being handed a smoking gun just weeks before a presidential election, only to be warned it might be a trap. That’s exactly what happened to Senator Ron Johnson in 2020 when his team was offered Hunter Biden’s infamous laptop. In a recent episode of Pod Force One, Johnson revealed the behind-the-scenes drama that unfolded long before The New York Post broke the story that would rock the political world. But here’s where it gets controversial: Johnson claims the FBI’s cryptic warning about potential disinformation felt like an ‘ambush’ designed to derail his investigation. Was it a legitimate caution or a calculated move to protect the Biden family? Let’s dive in.
Weeks before The Post published its explosive report on Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop—a device left in a Delaware repair shop in 2019—Johnson’s team was approached with an offer to obtain it. However, they ultimately declined, citing concerns about its authenticity and the possibility it could be stolen property. ‘We had to follow our rules of integrity,’ Johnson explained to The Post’s Miranda Devine. ‘It sounded like a suspicious story, and we needed to properly vet it.’
The laptop’s journey is as intriguing as its contents. John Paul Mac Isaac, the legally blind repair shop owner, believed Hunter Biden had dropped it off, though he couldn’t be certain. Copies of the hard drive were circulated, eventually landing in The Post’s hands, which used it to publish a bombshell email. The email revealed Hunter introducing Burisma adviser Vadym Pozharskyi to his father, then-Vice President Joe Biden—a revelation that dropped just three weeks before the 2020 election.
And this is the part most people miss: Despite initial skepticism, including doubts cast by 51 current and former intelligence officials, the laptop’s authenticity was later confirmed. It even played a role in Hunter Biden’s trial on charges related to firearm possession while addicted to illicit substances. Yet, social media giants like Facebook and Twitter (now X) suppressed the story, with Twitter briefly locking The Post out of its account. Was this censorship or caution?
Johnson’s encounter with the FBI adds another layer of intrigue. In August 2020, he and Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) received briefings warning them about potential disinformation from Russia and Ukraine. Johnson described the meeting as an ‘ambush,’ suggesting the FBI was more interested in throwing them off track than sharing useful information. ‘They weren’t telling me anything I didn’t already know,’ he said, visibly frustrated. ‘It felt like they were trying to discourage us from pursuing the truth.’
By late September, Johnson’s team finally obtained a copy of the laptop’s contents and reached out to the FBI for verification. Despite having the laptop since December 2019, the FBI gave them the ‘runaround’ for weeks. This raises a critical question: Why did the FBI hesitate to authenticate the laptop if they already had it in their possession?
Johnson, who chairs the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, insists he didn’t come to Washington to be an investigator. His initial focus was on fixing Obamacare and tackling the national debt. However, his role shifted dramatically in 2015 when he became chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, thrusting him into the spotlight during the Hillary Clinton email scandal. ‘It became my responsibility to investigate corruption, especially when it involved potential violations of the Federal Records Act,’ he explained. ‘That’s how my investigatory career began.’
Here’s the million-dollar question: Was the FBI’s handling of Hunter Biden’s laptop a legitimate effort to combat disinformation, or was it a politically motivated attempt to shield the Biden family? Johnson’s account suggests the latter, but what do you think? Was the FBI acting in good faith, or did they overstep their bounds? Let’s keep the conversation going in the comments—this is one story that’s far from over.
