Latest News

July 14, 2023

“You don’t have to be Columbo to figure out who was there.”

Those are the words of one ex-federal investigator who talked with the NEW YORK POST on Thursday.  And he’s not the only one crying foul over the White House announcement that the Secret Service investigation of how cocaine got into the White House is closing with no physical evidence found and no suspects.  The End.

The BABYLON BEE predicted something very similar a week ago...

As we mentioned yesterday, Dan Bongino, who worked for over a decade in the Secret Service, isn’t buying it.  “They have suspects,” he said.  “I just don’t think they want to tell you who the suspects are.”

The story the White House is sticking with now is that the cocaine was discovered by an agent on July 2 in locker #50, one of 182 in in the foyer of the West Wing’s basement entrance, one floor below the Oval Office and very near the Situation Room.  These “cubbies” lock with keys, and the key to locker #50 is apparently missing.  This has the look of a drug drop.  If that’s the case, we have a supplier and a recipient, and one of them likely has the key.

Since Hunter can’t exactly go out on Pennsylvania Avenue and score his own drugs, that’s one possible scenario.  But there’s one question we haven’t heard asked:  if the lockers have keys, and keys are turned in somewhere, this locker would have been assigned, would it not?

“This is a cover-up,” the POST’s source told them.  “How can they say they have no leads?”  They keep a log book, he said, wondering aloud if they’d have the same answer if it had been anthrax.  It was a small amount, less than a gram of powder, the White House says (if anyone cares to believe them), but that makes no difference.  If someone can bring in cocaine undetected, surely, they can bring in any toxin.

Multiple sources also aren’t buying that no physical evidence, such as fingerprints and/or DNA, could be gathered by forensic testing. 

This is an area that conveniently has no cameras, because of the sensitive nature of materials that might pass through (such as classified papers?).  So the White House says they needed physical evidence to identify the culprit out of hundreds of people who’d been in and out of there.

It’s absurd to think that with the advanced technology that was used to track down over a thousand Trump supporters who’d been in the vicinity of the Capitol building on January 6, they would have no way (and little inclination) to solve a security mystery that involved an area so close to the Oval Office and Situation Room.  (Comedian Joe DeVito observed on “Gutfeld” that if someone had left a red MAGA cap at the White House, you can bet they would have tracked down its owner by now.) As another former investigator put it, “We have a tale of two countries.  They identified hundreds of people who were in the Capitol building on January 6 after an extensive investigation, but they don’t know who left something in an 8x10 room in the White House?”

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy certainly doesn’t buy it.  “You can’t tell me in the White House, with 24/7 surveillance, in a cubby hole near the Situation Room that they don’t know who delivered it there,” he told FOX NEWS.  We should get an answer to the question.  It just seems to me that in America today, anything involving ‘Biden Inc.’ gets treated differently than anything else, and that shouldn’t be the case.”

South Carolina Rep. Nancy Mace expressed similar disbelief that “some of the best law enforcement officers in the world” can’t solve this mystery in “one of the most secure locations in the world.”

Probably the only reason we heard about this at all is that the white powder had to be considered a dangerous substance until identified, meaning they had to evacuate the building while a DC Fire and EMS hazmat team came in to do testing.  An initial test showed cocaine, and the FBI lab later confirmed that.

I would love for those ex-investigators who talked with the POST to comment on what Democrat Rep. Jared Moskowitz of Florida had to say to Piers Morgan Thursday night on FOX NEWS.  Moskowitz very surprisingly said that in their Secret Service briefing, members of Congress were told not to worry --- that there ARE measures in place to protect against toxic substances such as anthrax and ricin, but NOT drugs like cocaine.  What??

“As far as anthrax or ricin,” he said, “I can’t go into the details, because some of that obviously was done in the briefing that’s classified, but there are protocols in place, and there is also technology in place, to catch anthrax and to catch ricin.”  They’re set up to find those poisons, and also explosive devices, but “are not set up to find drugs,” he said.

Being someone with a brain, Morgan was understandably skeptical.  “I’m staggered,” he said, “...that you would never think about people bringing drugs to the White House?”

Moskowitz obviously was doing the interview to try to distance the Biden family from what happened.  The area where the coke was found, he said, was a place for “guests” to leave belongings before being escorted on a tour of the West Wing.  “It is not for people who work there on a regular basis.  It’s not for anyone related to the family --- the Trump family or the Biden family.”  (See how deftly he worked “Trump” in there?)  Piers said he found that for the White House, this is “a pretty lame excuse.”  

We have a question, too:  if the area isn’t for people who work there, why DON’T they have cameras?  What “sensitive” materials are being brought in by guests being taken on tours?  This makes no sense.

Anyway, the interview, which also included Florida Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, ended on a fun note, after Moskowitz tried to say the Secret Service had destroyed the “Hunter’s coke” narrative.  Piers responded, “To be fair, no one’s denying it was Hunter.  The White House was asked to and chose not to.  No one’s denied it.  And let’s be honest, Hunter Biden has an extensive record of drug abuse. So why wouldn’t he be a suspect?”

Moskowitz, with no comeback, sat awkwardly with a sour look on his face, knowing he’d been bested, as Piers thanked both guests and moved on.  Priceless.  Here’s the full segment…

According to Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert, who with other members of Congress attended an FBI briefing, this is actually the third time since last year that drugs have been found in the White House, but the other two times involved not a potentially lethal white powder but marijuana.

“This is the third time that drugs have been found on the White House property since 2022,” she said, “and we did not even hear about the marijuana...So everything they do is to move along to the next story.  They know there will be another Biden crime crisis.”

It occurs to us that this growing crisis is so significant that perhaps they need to appoint a Biden Crime Crisis Czar.  Of course, they know not to appoint Kamala Harris this time because the job involves a lot of serious work.  On second thought, the attorney general and FBI director have been functioning in this role for quite some time.  Call them co-czars.

RELATED:  There’s a public congressional hearing coming up next week that might actually be productive:  the House Oversight and Accountability Committee, led by Kentucky Rep. James Comer, is bringing in two FBI whistleblowers to detail their allegations of influence peddling by the Biden family.  This is scheduled for next Wednesday, July 19, starting at 1 PM Eastern, and will be livestreamed.

You know the name of one, Gary Shapley. But the other investigator has so far maintained anonymity, and that’s about to change.  Both investigators, who worked extensively on the Hunter case, have previously testified to the House Ways & Means Committee, as they had to present their evidence there first since it’s the “gatekeeper” for any personal tax information that might need to be revealed.  In that testimony, they alleged that Biden-appointed officials had improperly interfered in the investigation into Hunter’s finances.  The apparent goal, they said, was to keep the charges as light as possible and to delay the case until after the election season.

The Oversight Committee has already gone through thousands of financial records and knows the Biden family set up over 20 shell companies as part of what Comer calls an “intentionally complicated” scheme to hide their transactions with foreign adversaries.  But it’s no thanks to the FBI.  These whistleblowers have testified that when they repeatedly addressed their concerns about the handling of the case, they were ignored.

So, this hearing is one to watch.  It’ll be especially interesting to learn the identity of Whistleblower #2.  We owe much gratitude to both these individuals, who gave up a lot to come forward.

WRAY TESTIMONY FOLLOW-UP:  Law professor Jonathan Turley has an excellent column on FBI Director Christopher Wray’s dreadful shortcomings and describes Matt Taibbi’s new release from the “Twitter Files” that shows Wray’s testimony from Wednesday to be false.


Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

More Stories

Legal News Update

Comments 1-1 of 1

  • Kenneth Rumbarger

    07/14/2023 01:06 PM

    I am really getting weary of the high volume of attention, criticism, and repetition being given to absolutely anything that even minutely suggests a flaw or shortcoming in the Biden family or administration. Actually, I would think a simple pair of vinyl gloves, so plentiful since COVID, would account for there being no fingerprints or DNA. On the other hand, I have to admit that it's hard to protect against anthrax or ricin incidents if you can't catch cochise being left. But all that's really being revealed is how anxious everyone is to nail Hunter. You have people out here who are past tolerance and past saturation. We want less of this just like Vermont wants less rain.