The FBI Has a Curious History with Laptops


FBI Badge
Image: Pixabay

On March 29, Congressman Matt Gaetz (R, FL) questioned Bryan A. Vorndran, the Assistant Director of the FBI’s cyber division. Specifically, Gaetz wanted to know the status of the Hunter Biden laptop – which we know the FBI has. Gaetz even produced the receipt which the FBI gave the Delaware repair shop when they confiscated the laptop.

Under questioning, Vorndran admitted to no knowledge of the laptop’s whereabouts. Is it too much to ask that the guy charged with government computer security, would know something about a computer, that contains information that could compromise the President of the United States?

The content of the laptop is not a secret. Multiple copies of its hard drive exist. Gaetz even had a copy in his hand during the questioning and entered it into the congressional record. But the fact that the head of the FBI’s cyber division can’t account for it is still a huge deal.

The FBI has a curious history with laptop computers. When the public became aware that Hillary Clinton was conducting government business on a private, and illegal, email server, Clinton deleted over 30,000 emails – in violation of an order to preserve those emails. The FBI’s response was: Oh well, I guess they’re lost. There’s nothing we can do about it. But then, agents investigating another case, discovered the missing emails on Anthony Weiner’s laptop. That would be the Anthony Weiner who was married to Huma Abedin, one of Clinton’s aides. The agents on the Weiner case, sent the laptop to the agents on the Clinton case, who apparently threw it in the corner and did nothing with it.

In 2015, the laptop of Cheryl Mills, Hillary Clinton’s Chief of Staff at the State Department, was confiscated by the FBI during its investigation of Clinton’s illegal email server. At the conclusion of the investigation, the laptop was destroyed by the FBI. Does the FBI always destroy evidence at the end of an investigation? What if another crime is discovered in the future in which that evidence is material?

Seth Rich was a Bernie Boy and an employee of the DNC. Many have suspected that Rich was the actual source of the infamous DNC hacked emails, not the phantom Russian spies we were all told did the deed. In 2016, Rich was murdered in Washington DC. In 2019, FBI Director Christopher Wray testified before congress that the FBI did not possess Rich’s laptop, and had no interest in the case, as it was considered a local police matter. But in 2021 we discovered that his testimony was not accurate (as in the Director of the FBI lied to Congress). A freedom of information request revealed that the laptop had actually been in the FBI’s possession for over 3 years, along with tens of thousands of pages of investigatory notes. Wray had just chosen to mislead the committee responsible for oversight.

Now questions are coming up about the Hunter Biden laptop. That would be the laptop that a drug addled Hunter abandoned at a Delaware computer repair shop. The laptop that the FBI seized in 2019 – but not before the shop made a copy of its contents. The laptop that has such interesting information as:

  • Financial arrangements between the Biden family and operatives in China, Russia, and Ukraine
  • Department of Defense encryption keys that enabled Hunter to access secure defense email servers
  • Evidence of crimes (by Hunter’s own admission) that could be used by foreign actors to blackmail the Biden family

Under questioning, the Assistant Director of the FBI’s cyber division treated the committee to an entertaining rendition of a Sgt Schulz routine: I don’t know anything about the laptop…I don’t know where it is…I don’t know who to ask…I know nothing…nothing!

The FBI sure seems careless in the handling of laptops – at least the ones owned by Democrats.

Does the FBI really not know, or care, where Hunter Biden’s laptop is? Is their discipline so lax that they don’t know, or care, that to lose the chain of custody could render the laptop inadmissible in court? Or is that the point?

It leaves us with two possibilities.

Possibility 1 – The FBI has devolved into a bunch of incompetent idiots. The fact that it took 15 agents, over a week, to determine that a garage door pull, was a garage door pull, and not a hate crime, would tend to support this theory.

Possibility 2 – The FBI is corrupt and willing to tank or taint evidence to spare Joe Biden from a presentation of the facts in court. The Kevin Clinesmith conviction for altering evidence to facilitate illegal surveillance of the Trump campaign would tend to support this theory.

Either possibility supports the argument that investigatory findings and testimony from the FBI are no longer credible.

There has been a great deal of speculation recently about why the New York Times and Washington Post are suddenly running stories about the Hunter Biden laptop. For 2 years, both publications took steps to aggressively censor any information about the laptop. Is it possible that Washington insiders are leaking information to them that a Hunter Biden indictment is imminent? We know that any trial of Hunter will be a disaster for “The Big Guy” that got 10 percent of the payoffs from China.

Is this scenario a possibility?

  • The DoJ indicts Hunter Biden
  • The FBI admits that they misplaced the laptop temporarily – breaking the chain of custody
  • The judge rules that the laptop is therefore inadmissible
  • Charges are dropped
  • Joe Biden is spared disclosure of the evidence in court
  • The New York Times and Washington Post both run stories that the Hunter Biden laptop scandal has been debunked

It sounds farfetched. Almost as farfetched as Hillary Clinton using three financial cutouts, to pay Russians, to make up a story of Russian collusion about Donald Trump. And then the FBI using that story, the Patriot Act, and falsified evidence to go on a search for impeachable offenses, by a newly elected president.

Author Bio: John Green is a political refugee from Minnesota, now residing in Idaho. He currently writes at the American Free News Network and The Blue State Conservative.  He can be followed on Facebook or reached at

Follow AFNN:
  CloutHub: @AFNN_USA

4 thoughts on “The FBI Has a Curious History with Laptops”

  1. I don’t know when it happened, but what did happen was the FBI became an ideological enforcement agency, from supposedly being a law enforcement investigative agency. When that is understood the agency has no justification, under the Constitution, to exist, as if it ever had that justification.
    Someone won’t be able to turn around the mess that the FBI has become, if they had the rest of their life to do it. I know there has to be a lot of good people in the FBI, but institutionally, it is a broken agency.

    • I couldn’t agree more. I have always felt that it’s conversion to a political rather than law enforcement entity began we we started appointing former US Attorney’s to run the FBI as a reward for serving their political masters. Robert Mueller took a number of steps during his time at the FBI to begin the conversion, and it has accelerated ever since.

Leave a Comment