The Ukrainian government had plans to reopen an investigation into Burisma Holdings, the company at which Joe Biden's son, Hunter, sat on the board, months before President Donald Trump brought up the issue on a call with current Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky, according to Fox News.

The revelation could be severely damaging to Democrats' attempt to impeach President Trump for allegedly pressuring Zelensky to look into the Bidens and their Ukrainian business activities in July.

What did we learn?

Ukrainian officials had planned the investigation before Zelensky even assumed the presidency. A document obtained by Fox News contributor John Solomon reveals that in February, when Petro Poroshenko was still president, Ukraine's National Anti-Corruption Bureau requested that the Burisma investigation be revisited.

Additionally, Solomon reports that the U.S. government was aware of this at the time.

"The U.S. government had open-source intelligence and was aware as early as February of 2019 that the Ukrainian government was planning to reopen the Burisma investigation," Solomon said on "Hannity" on Tuesday night. "This is long before the president ever imagined having a call with President Zelensky."

What was being investigated?

The NABU was looking into the existence of "illicit funds" going through Burisma, owned by Mykola Zlochevsky.

According to Solomon, this "illicit" financial activity overlapped with the time Hunter Biden was on the board, when he was making as much as $1 million per year.



A "notice of suspicion" filed by the NABU questioned whether $3.4 million that was paid to Hunter Biden's firm may have been part of that illicit funding.

Who knew about this?

If Solomon's reporting is correct, and the U.S. government was fully aware of the NABU's intention to investigate Biden and Burisma, the question arises: Did the whistleblower who flagged Trump's call with Zelensky know about it? Was it intentionally omitted from the complaint, or was the whistleblower ignorant of the situation?

"A month later, in April, the prosecutor's office — open-source intelligence, again — the U.S. government officials confirming they were aware of this — made a request of another investigative agency in Ukraine for assistance in going through these bank records," Solomon said on "Hannity." "That is a significant change in the timeline — it was omitted from the whistleblower's complaint, and the question is did he not know it or did he exclude it because it didn't fit the narrative he was trying to write."

Why this matters



There is significant evidence pointing to Democrats' efforts to influence the 2016 election in favor of Hillary Clinton by colluding with Ukrainian officials. However, the Democratic Party has put a tight focus on President Trump's July 25 phone call with Zelensky, claiming that his attempt to invite foreign influence into the 2020 election is grounds for impeachment and removal.

If the whistleblower complaint about the Ukraine call intentionally omitted information that Burisma and the Bidens were already subject to Ukrainian investigation, that lends credence to suspicions that the complaint (which does not contain firsthand information) was misleadingly crafted to implicate the president.

For more on the connections between Democrats and Ukraine, visit GlennBeck.com and watch Glenn's recent investigative special "Ukraine: The Democrats' Russia."



