Podcasts > The Daily > An F.B.I. Informant, a Bombshell Claim, and an Impeachment Built on a Lie

An F.B.I. Informant, a Bombshell Claim, and an Impeachment Built on a Lie

By The New York Times

Dive deep into the murky waters of political intrigue with "The Daily," where Mike Schmidt and Michael Barbaro, alongside notable figures such as Chuck Grassley and Kevin McCarthy, dissect an explosive yet uncorroborated piece of intelligence that targeted Joe Biden's integrity. The episode intricately unpicks how the Republicans used these allegations, founded on an informant's dubious claims of Ukrainian bribery involving Biden, to initiate an impeachment motion—even in the face of the claims being unproven and later exposed as fabrications.

Amidst a political landscape where perception often overshadows truth, "The Daily" explores the consequential fallout when elected officials act on unverified information. The narrative follows how the informant's allegations, steeped in deception and rooted in connections with Russian intelligence, were taken at face value by some Republican figures, raising debates on the responsibility and accountability in wielding such potent claims. This episode provides a window into the mechanics of political scandal and the robust scrutiny from justice departments that ultimately discredited the informant's narrative.

Listen to the original

An F.B.I. Informant, a Bombshell Claim, and an Impeachment Built on a Lie

This is a preview of the Shortform summary of the Mar 4, 2024 episode of the The Daily

Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.

An F.B.I. Informant, a Bombshell Claim, and an Impeachment Built on a Lie

1-Page Summary

How unverified intelligence alleging Biden corruption became weaponized by Republicans

Unverified intelligence brought forward by an FBI informant claiming Joe Biden's involvement with Ukrainian bribery has been leveraged by Republicans to fuel an impeachment inquiry. The informant's allegatons, asserting that Biden took $5 million in bribes from Burisma to protect the company from investigation, were uncorroborated and later deemed fabricated. However, this did not stop Senator Chuck Grassley and other Republicans from demanding the information be made public and using it to justify an inquiry into Biden's actions, despite the source being indicted on charges of lying to the FBI. The Justice Department's findings discredited the informant's allegations, revealing inconsistencies and the informant’s connections with Russian intelligence.

1-Page Summary

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • Burisma Holdings was a Ukrainian energy company owned by oligarch Mykola Zlochevsky. It was involved in natural gas exploration and production in Ukraine before being dissolved in 2023. The company gained attention due to its connections to Ukrainian politics and international controversies.
  • Impeachment inquiry is a formal investigation by a legislative body to determine if there are grounds to impeach a public official. It involves gathering evidence, questioning witnesses, and evaluating whether the official's actions warrant removal from office. The outcome of an impeachment inquiry can lead to the drafting of articles of impeachment, which are charges against the official. If the articles are approved, the official may face a trial to determine their guilt or innocence.
  • Senator Chuck Grassley is a prominent American politician who has been serving as a U.S. senator from Iowa since 1981. He has held various significant positions in Congress and is known for his involvement in key Senate committees. Grassley has a long history in politics and has been reelected multiple times, making him one of the most experienced and senior members in the Senate.
  • The Justice Department's findings referred to the results of an investigation conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice to assess the validity of the allegations made by the FBI informant regarding Joe Biden's involvement in Ukrainian bribery. The findings discredited the informant's claims by revealing inconsistencies and highlighting the informant's ties to Russian intelligence. This investigation aimed to provide clarity on the accuracy of the information presented and to determine the credibility of the source. The Justice Department's conclusions played a crucial role in debunking the unverified intelligence and shedding light on the situation surrounding the allegations.
  • The informant in this context had connections with Russian intelligence, which raised concerns about the credibility and potential motives behind the information provided. This association with Russian intelligence could suggest a possible agenda or bias in the information shared by the informant. It is essential to consider these connections when evaluating the reliability and accuracy of the allegations made against Joe Biden. The involvement of Russian intelligence in such matters can introduce complexities and geopolitical implications that may impact the interpretation of the situation.

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free
An F.B.I. Informant, a Bombshell Claim, and an Impeachment Built on a Lie

How unverified intelligence alleging Biden corruption became weaponized by Republicans

The story of an FBI informant's uncorroborated allegations of corruption involving Joe Biden has taken center stage in the political arena, exemplified by Republicans using the claims to mount an impeachment inquiry, despite later determinations that the informant fabricated the allegations.

The origins: An FBI informant's claim about alleged Biden bribery

The roots of the allegation spiral from an FBI informant who claimed to have learned that Joe Biden took $5 million in bribes from the Ukrainian energy company, Burisma. This claimed exchange was a purported effort to protect Burisma from corruption investigations by a Ukrainian prosecutor.

Mike Schmidt characterizes this claim as raw source reporting, akin to rumor rather than verified intelligence. He also notes that this uncorroborated information was what Rudy Giuliani hoped to bolster with evidence during his trip to Ukraine.

Republicans demanding the intelligence be disclosed

Senator Chuck Grassley alleged that whistleblowers informed him of the FBI possessing very damaging intelligence regarding the Biden family. Despite the lack of concrete evidence, Grassley and his House Republican allies went on to subpoena the FBI for the document that describes these bribery allegations.

Mike Schmidt remarks that even after the indictment of the informant, some hardline Republicans stood by the claim, suggesting that it was now part of a coverup. However, Republicans had failed to establish any connection between Joe Biden and his son's business dealings in the years prior until they seized upon the informant's claim.

Republicans using the intelligence to launch a Biden impeachment inquiry

With little else to marshal against Joe Biden, Republicans used the unverified bribery allegation from the informant as the foundation of their impeachment inquiry. Kevin McCarthy announced a formal impeachment inquiry into Biden, placing the bribery claim at heart of their argument.

Michael Barbaro and Mike Schmidt discuss how the cornerstone allegation ...

Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary

Registered users get access to the Full Podcast Summary and Additional Materials. It’s easy and free!
Start your free trial today

How unverified intelligence alleging Biden corruption became weaponized by Republicans

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • The uncorroborated allegations of corruption involving Joe Biden centered around claims that he took $5 million in bribes from a Ukrainian energy company, Burisma, to protect them from corruption investigations. These allegations were initially brought forward by an FBI informant but were later found to lack evidence and credibility. Republicans used these unverified claims as a basis to launch an impeachment inquiry against Biden, despite the lack of concrete proof to support the allegations.
  • The FBI informant claimed that Joe Biden accepted $5 million in bribes from a Ukrainian energy company, Burisma, to protect them from corruption investigations. This unverified claim was central to allegations of corruption against Biden and his son, Hunter Biden. The informant's story was later discredited due to inconsistencies and his history of dishonesty, leading to the collapse of the bribery allegations. Republicans used this unverified claim as a basis for launching an impeachment inquiry against Joe Biden.
  • Raw source reporting in this context refers to unverified information provided by a source without additional evidence or confirmation. It is akin to a rumor or initial claim that has not been substantiated through independent verification or corroboration. This type of reporting can lack credibility and reliability until further investigation or evidence is presented to support its claims.
  • Rudy Giuliani, a lawyer and former mayor of New York City, played a significant role in promoting the uncorroborated claim of Joe Biden's alleged corruption involving Burisma. Giuliani sought to gather evidence in Ukraine to support these allegations, which were based on information from an FBI informant. His involvement in pushing these claims further amplified their visibility in the political arena.
  • Senator Chuck Grassley, a Republican, played a key role in demanding the disclosure of damaging intelligence regarding the Biden family. Grassley alleged that whistleblowers had provided him with information about the FBI possessing incriminating intelligence related to the Bidens. He and his House Republican allies took steps to subpoena the FBI for documents detailing these allegations, despite the lack of concrete evidence at the time. Grassley's actions were part of a broader effort by Republicans to investigate and potentially impeach Joe Biden based on unverified claims of corruption.
  • The Republicans, led by Senator Chuck Grassley and House allies, demanded the FBI to provide documents related to bribery allegations against Joe Biden. Despite lacking concrete evidence, they issued a subpoena to obtain the intelligence that supposedly implicated Biden in corrupt activities. Grassley and his Republican colleagues sought to use this unverified information as a basis for launching an impeachment inquiry against Biden. The FBI was pressured to disclose the documents that were believed to contain damaging information about the Biden family.
  • The impeachment inquiry against Biden was based on unverified bribery allegations that claimed he took $5 million in bribes from a Ukrainian energy company. Republicans used this uncorroborated claim as the foundation for launching the inquiry, despite later revelations that the informant who made the allegations had fabricated them. The Justice Department eventually determined that the informant had lied about various matters, discrediting the source and undermining the basis for the impeachment efforts against Biden.
  • The cornerstone allegation against Joe and Hunter Biden was discredited when significant inconsistencies in the informant's story were revealed, including discrepancies in timelines and travel records. The informant's credibility was further undermined by his known bias against Joe Biden and past interactions with Russian intelligence. Ultimately, the Justice Department indicted the informant for lying to the FBI, casting serious doubt on the allegations that formed the basis of the impeachment inquiry against the Bidens.
  • Grassley positioned the uncorroborated claim in the impeachment case by alleging that the FBI possessed damaging intelligence about the Biden family, despite lacking concrete evidence. He and other Republicans demanded the disclosure o ...

Counterarguments

  • The informant's allegations, while unverified, could be seen as a starting point for further investigation rather than a conclusion.
  • Demanding the FBI disclose intelligence could be part of oversight responsibilities to ensure transparency and accountability.
  • Subpoenaing documents is a standard procedure in investigations and does not necessarily imply wrongdoing.
  • The use of unverified claims in political strategies is not unique to one party and can be a broader issue of political tactics.
  • An impeachment inquiry, even if based on weak allegations, could be argued as a legitimate tool for Congress to investigate potential misconduct.
  • The discrediting of a source does not automatically invalidate all related inquiri ...

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free

Create Summaries for anything on the web

Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser

Shortform Extension CTA