Home » Garland appoints Weiss as special counsel in the Hunter Biden case

Comments

Garland appoints Weiss as special counsel in the Hunter Biden case — 19 Comments

  1. Can a special councel sequester witnesses or otherwise make them legally unavailable to the House Oversight Committee?

  2. Just heard Andy McCarthy on the Clay and Buck Show and he was very good on this.

    The whole thing is a sham.

  3. A stall tactic. It will take a long time, like until the 2024 election is history, before the Special Counsel publishes any findings.

    The evidence has been available to Garland, et al, for a along time.

    There is no new evidence. There is only evidence that was hidden, but has now been made public.

  4. I was going to response to “Another possibility” with the old “embrace the power of ‘and'”, but the Comer quotation recognizes the ‘and’ clearly. I have low expectations, but I’m very happy to see Republicans at least calling out the behavior of the DOJ. Weiss is unfit to be Special Counsel on this matter. He made his case, lied about it, and his intentions were already rejected by a judge, while the House was mulling over contempt charges for lying to Congress. Frankly, Weiss being named Special Counsel now should also be considered contempt on the part of AG Garland.

  5. “Can a special councel sequester witnesses or otherwise make them legally unavailable to the House Oversight Committee?”

    That’s exactly what the Mueller special prosecutor investigation did – they used heir LawFare developed misinterpretation or redefinition of the § 1001 Obstruction statue to stone wall Congressional investigations by Republican majority committees. It was only when Barr was confirmed as AG, and immediately held he highly partisan Mueller prosecutors to the DOJ OLC official interpretation that the Mueller investigation was shut down. But by then, the Dems had retaken both Houses of Congress, and Pelosi and Schumer shut down the investigations.

    Their theory (for stonewalling Congress) was that the Congressional investigations would be interfering with the Mueller investigation, and thus would be Obstructing Justice.

  6. The uber-weasel Garland has his flunky Weiss on a tight leash.

    Time for Congress to make Fido bark.

  7. They are so blatant now is their BS stonewalling. Obviously they think there’s nothing anyone can do to stop them…..and they’re probably right. And since the MSM isn’t covering any of this, the average Joe/Jill is ignorant of the level of malfeasance that is the government now. Of course it’s just going to grow, but by that time we are either in CW2, or all under their thumb.

  8. From Ace: Merrick Garland Appoints David Weiss Special Counsel — Which He Should Have Done Years Ago — in Apparent Bid to Protect Weiss From Being Investigated Over His Attempt to Defraud the Court to Covertly Confer Blanket Immunity on Hunter Biden


    Another Friday news dump.

    If you missed how it all shook out, David Weiss hid the covert blanket immunity provisions for Hunter Biden in a separate document, as an addendum to the alternative sentencing agreement for the gun charge. He kept this out of the actual plea deal so that the judge would not see it.

    His scheme was to confer blanket immunity on Hunter Biden for all crimes he committed in the past, including those never named or referenced. Immunity deals are read in favor of the defendant by judges — so Hunter, by merely showing this secret codicil could be read as conferring blanket immunity, would in fact have blanket immunity. A judge would say, “Well the prosecutor wrote this sloppily, but we construe these agreements against the prosecutor and in favor of the defendant, so congratulations, you have blanket immunity for all crimes in your entire past!”

    But of course this arrangement was not done “sloppily.” David Weiss wanted to give Hunter Biden blanket immunity for all past crimes, but he knew a judge would never, ever agree to that, given that he was already giving Hunter a sweetheart deal on the three crimes actually named in the plea agreement (lying on a gun application and two of his tax evasion charges that Weiss had not yet allowed to lapse via the statute of limitations).

    Before, Weiss could not investigate any crimes that occurred outside of Delaware.

    Now he can do that — hypothetically.

    But he’s not being appointed special counsel so that he’ll have the power to investigate all crimes Hunter committed in other jurisdictions.

    Oh no. Oh no no no no no.

    He’s being appointed special counsel so that he’ll have the power to grant immunity to all crimes Hunter committed in other jurisdictions.

    Banana Republic. Illegitimate tyrannical junta.

  9. What a joke. But it will work. Look how successful the whole “Trump appointed Weiss” gambit was.

    And still, every mainstream press report I read on this matter explains it by saying “Hunter Biden was late paying his taxes, but he paid them.” As if that was the entirety of the matter.

  10. [W]hat makes a special counsel special is that you’re a lawyer who’s brought in from outside the United States government, not just outside the Justice Department, outside the government.

    Can somebody sue Garland to get Weiss replaced?

    Or would that just be another “no standing” case?

  11. I thought it odd that Neo’s source for the excerpt from McCarthy’s interview on Fox was Mediaite — considering their spin on other posts about the same story.

    Here’s an example of “lying by omission” from the first link.
    https://www.mediaite.com/news/foxs-andrew-mccarthy-decries-sham-hunter-biden-special-counsel-meant-to-be-someone-from-outside-the-government/

    Attorney General Merrick Garland named U.S. Attorney David Weiss, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, as the special counsel in charge of investigating Hunter Biden, whose hopes for a new plea deal fell apart earlier on Friday. But despite wanting to see a special counsel appointed to further look into Hunter Biden’s financial dealings, the right is up in arms over the choice of Weiss.

    Notice what they left out (although McCarthy does mention his other connections with the case): Weiss was the architect of the first failed plea deal. The new one is explained in another post at the site.
    “JUST IN: Federal Prosecutors Say Hunter Biden’s Plea Negotiations ‘Are At An Impasse,’ Case Headed For Trial”

    I thought Jake Tapper was trying to regain a soubriquet I and others once awarded him, “The last honest reporter,” which he lost when Trump was elected. Watch what he does here.
    And note the media boilerplate at the end.

    https://www.mediaite.com/crime/jake-tapper-says-conservatives-have-legitimate-questions-about-garlands-odd-special-counsel-pick-in-biden-probe/

    He concluded, “This move makes it seem as though, well, maybe the whistleblowers were right. Maybe what they were alleging is true, and he didn’t have the ability to charge whatever he wanted to charge, and now he does. So I do have a lot of questions about that, and I do think some of the political questions being raised by Republicans have merit.”

    Congressional Republicans allege Biden was in business with his father Joe Biden when the latter was vice president and perhaps beyond. Some have even accused the elder Biden of bribery, but no evidence has emerged to support the explosive claim.

    Everybody who believes Weiss was appointed so he could actually bring charges against Hunter raise your hand.

    https://babylonbee.com/news/democrats-say-itll-take-a-lot-more-than-eyewitness-testimony-bank-records-audio-video-complete-confessions-for-them-to-believe-biden-did-anything-wrong

    Notice what Carlucci implies in this post, which is blatant spin: GOP wanting a special counsel in no way translates to what he claims.
    His first claim is just malarkey.

    https://www.mediaite.com/politics/democrat-on-fox-says-garland-announcing-hunter-biden-special-counsel-was-a-surprise-to-white-house/

    This shows the independence; the DOJ wants an independent case here, so that’s why it was a surprise to the White House, as we’ve learned, that President Biden didn’t even know about this happening. And [Merrick] Garland went ahead with the special counsel for Weiss to show that independence. And I think that’s what we see here,” Carlucci said.

    “Why now?” asked anchor Sandra Smith.

    “Why ever, right?” Carlucci replied. “I think this is something that originally Republicans did want, they wanted Weiss to be the special counsel. Now it’s actually happening, so I think it shows independence, I think it shows the movement away from the White House, and this will be not a political witch hunt, but an actual trial.”

    This is actually something we would like Mediaite’s readers to know, and the journalist could have added the context for them.
    https://www.mediaite.com/politics/comer-rages-after-hunter-biden-special-counsel-named-trying-to-stonewall-congressional-oversight/

    Notably, Comer did not specifically explain how a special counsel would interfere with his investigation, which he vowed to continue.

    And finally, just so you all know what the Democrats are reading, this post quotes a letter purporting to demonstrate that Rep. Comer is a lying no-good flim-flammer — and maybe some of it is even true — but not this part. For his first claim, which narrows the president’s connection to the absurdly narrow level derided by most intelligent pundits and readers, I refer you to the Website of Record above.

    https://www.mediaite.com/news/white-house-drops-searing-memo-on-hunter-biden-probe-an-hour-before-hunter-biden-special-counsel-named/

    Sams — who is the Biden administration’s chief spokesman for investigations — dropped his third memo this week torching the probes looking to implicate President Joe Biden in his son’s business and other troubles, all of which note what other fact-checkers have also pointed out: that there is no evidence to make such a direct connection.

    And over and over again, independent reporting has found his investigation has been unable to uncover any evidence of wrongdoing:

    • New York Times:

    • Axios:

    • CNN:

  12. Ace, quoting Turley, addresses the “there’s no evidence” spin.
    https://ace.mu.nu/archives/405719.php
    “Jonathan Turley on Democrat Partisan Media’s Spin That No Money Has Yet Been Proven to Have Gone to Joe Biden: You’re Aware That Mafiosi Routinely Direct Paymemts to Their Family Members So the Feds Can’t Touch It, Right?
    Actually he does not make that analogy but that’s basically what he’s talking about.”

    Turley doesn’t use an analogy at all, he states plainly that enriching a person’s family IS a bribe.

  13. This level of corruption has occurred in our history but never by the President himself. It was always underling like Albert B Fall who was Harding’s Secretary of the Interior, appointed by Harding to try to improve relations with Mexico.

    “Grant was personally honest with money matters. However, he trusted and protected his close associates, in denial of their guilt, despite evidence against them.[5][6] According to C. Vann Woodward, Grant had neither the training nor temperament to fully comprehend the complexities of rapid economic growth, industrialization, and western expansionism.[6][7] During his presidency, Grant enjoyed speaking with men of wealth and influence, but he was also personally generous to the poor.[8] Grant had come from a humble background where men of superior intelligence and ability were threats rather than assets. Instead of responding with trust and warmth to men of talent, education, and culture, he turned to his military friends from the Civil War and to politicians new as himself.[6][7] According to Grant’s son, Ulysses Jr., his father was “incapable of supposing his friends to be dishonest.”

    Neither was ever shown to be corrupt. Biden is a first.

  14. This “special counsel” appointment feels like a turning point for me personally – so particularly corrupt and blatant that it seems to cross a disgust threshold.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>