Six witnesses can reportedly back up claims that the federal prosecutor investigating Hunter Biden lacked the full authority to prosecute the First Son outside of Delaware, contradicting testimony stating otherwise from Attorney General Merrick Garland.
Shapely testified that Weiss announced he was ânot the deciding officialâ on whether charges were filed against Hunter Biden and that DC US Attorney Matthew Graves refused to allow charges to be brought against the First Son in his district. That, according to Shapely, meant that Biden would not be prosecuted for tax charges related to âforeign income from Burisma and a scheme to evade his income taxes through a partnership with a convicted felonâ in 2014 and 2015.
This revelation contradicts Garlandâs testimony, which stated that Weiss, a Trump administration appointee, was at liberty to criminally charge Hunter Biden in whatever jurisdiction he deemed appropriate.
âHe is the supervisor of this investigation,â Garland said of Weiss, telling Republican Tennessee Sen. Bill Hagerty in April 2022, âwe put the investigation in the hands of a Trump appointee from the previous administration, who is the US attorney for the district of Delaware, and ⦠you have me as the attorney general, who is committed to the independence of the Justice Department from any influence from the White House in criminal matters,â the New York Post reported.
Either Delaware US Attorney David Weiss was lying to the IRS team investigating Hunter Biden, or Attorney General Merrick Garland lied to Congress.
Either way, Justice Department fumbling has already let Hunter escape justice for several years of tax crimes.
Which means the judge overseeing his potential plea deal must wait until Congress can get to the bottom of this mess.
According to whistleblower Gary Shapley, Weiss in January 2022 sought to indict Hunter on felony charges for 2014 tax evasion (and misdemeanor charges for 2015) on his windfall from Ukraine â but then told the team he couldnât, because US Attorney for DC Matthew Graves (a President Biden appointee who had jurisdiction because that was Hunterâs legal residence in those years) wouldnât go along.
So the statute of limitations expired, and so (in Shapleyâs words) the Biden Justice Department âsanitized the most substantive criminal conductâ in Hunterâs case.
By the way, as for Weiss: News accounts routinely call him a âTrump appointee,â but heâd become acting US attorney under President Barack Obama; Trump merely went with the guy already in the job. Heâs a Delaware insider, not a Trumpie.
"Six witnesses can reportedly back up claims that the federal prosecutor investigating Hunter Biden lacked the full authority to prosecute the First Son outside of Delaware, contradicting testimony stating otherwise from Attorney General Merrick Garland."
What does Weiss have to say? Why is the Daily Caller (a really, really crappy source, btw) relying on six unnamed witnesses to pass on what Weiss supposedly said?
The Justice Department probe into Hunter Biden was opened in November 2018, and was codenamed âSportsman.â According to Shapleyâs testimony, federal investigators knew as early as June 2021 that there were potential venue-related issues with charging Hunter Biden in Delaware. Under federal law, charges must be brought in the jurisdiction where the alleged crimes occurred.
If the potential charges couldnât be brought in Delaware, then Weiss would need help from his fellow US attorneys. He looked to Washington, DC, where some of Hunter Bidenâs tax returns were prepared, and the Central District of California, which includes the Los Angeles area where Hunter Biden lives.
But Shapley told the committee that the US attorneys in both districts wouldnât seek an indictment.
A second whistleblower, an IRS case agent who also testified to the committee but hasnât been publicly identified, also told lawmakers that this is what happened. He agreed that Weiss was âwas told noâ when he tried to get the cooperation of the US attorneys in in DC and Los Angeles, who are Biden appointees.
Hunter Bidenâs eventual plea agreement was filed in Weissâ jurisdiction, in Delaware.
Neither the NY Post nor CNN appears to have sought out US attorneys in Central District, CA and Washington, DC to determine why they allegedly would not pursue the matter at Weiss's request.
CNN in the same article linked to above add this:
"After the transcripts were released Thursday (6/22/23), spokespeople for the US attorneyâs offices in DC and Los Angeles issued near-identical statements reiterating that Weiss âwas given full authority to bring charges in any jurisdiction he deemed appropriate.â The Justice Department echoed those comments in a statement saying Weiss âneeds no further approvalâ to bring charges wherever he wants."
"It isnât uncommon for there to be internal disagreements among investigators over which charges to file against the target of an investigation, much like the disagreements that the IRS whistleblowers described. CNN reported last year that some FBI and IRS investigators were at odds with other Justice Department officials over the strength of the case, and that there were discussions over which types of charges were appropriate and whether further investigation was needed.
Sources familiar with the criminal probe told CNN in April that prosecutors were still actively weighing a felony tax charge against Hunter Biden. And it is common for prosecutors to strike deals with defendants where they plead guilty to a small subset of the possible charges they couldâve faced."
While Shapley's notes from an October 7, 2022 meeting indicate that Weiss said âHe is not the deciding person on whether charges are filedâ ( https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/22... ), Weiss himself stated in a public letter dated June 7, 2023 to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan that he does have that authority.
"...I want to make clear that, as the Attorney General has stated, I have been granted ultimate authority over this matter, including responsibility for deciding where, when, and whether to file charges and for making decisions necessary to preserve the integrity of the prosecution, consistent with federal law, the Principles of Federal Prosecution, and Departmental regulations."
On June 23, 2023 AG Garland has also denied claims that he interfered with the investigation, repeating that Weiss has ultimate authority on the matter. Garland refuted the claim that he had denied Weiss special counsel status, which would have given Weiss more autonomy:
"He (Garland) scoffed at the idea that Mr. Weiss, a veteran prosecutor would have wanted to be designated as a special counsel, given the authority he already possessed as a U.S. attorney.
âThe only person who has the authority to make someone a special counsel, or refuse to make them a special counsel, is the attorney general,â Mr. Garland said, adding: âMr. Weiss never made that request.â "
The same NYT article also notes this:
"Mr. Weiss was named U.S. attorney in Delaware by President Donald J. Trump and eventually took control of the investigations into Hunter Biden during the Trump administration. He was kept on by Mr. Garland to allow him to complete the investigation. Mr. Garland and Mr. Weiss have both made public statements that Mr. Weiss had full authority over the case."
More from the Times, noting that Weiss had no comment on the plea deal Biden reached with DOJ:
"Mr. Weiss had no comment. But in announcing the agreement in the Hunter Biden case on Tuesday, he said, to the surprise of all parties, that the investigation was âongoing.â
It is not clear what he meant, but the declaration will likely have the effect of preventing Mr. Weiss from speaking publicly about the investigation until it is officially closed. Mr. Garland said he would not stop Mr. Weiss from testifying before Congress once the case was closed. "
So to recap: Shapley and another whistleblower claim that Weiss said he was "not the deciding person on whether charges are filed" and that US attorneys in other districts refused to cooperate with Weiss's pursuit of the matter. Yet Weiss has publicly stated he does have full authority and independence in the matter. AG Garland has repeatedly said the same. The US attorneys offices in Central District CA and DC have said the same.
That's a lot reputation on the line to keep Hunter Biden out of more legal trouble. If Shapley's claims are correct and there was an all-hands-on-deck effort throughout DOJ to keep Hunter from facing felony charges, that kind of coverup could bring down the entire Biden administration. So I'm very skeptical.
Remember also that Biden is still facing possible felony charge concerning taxes.
So how come whenever the deeds of the Biden's are brought up (in the Biden thread no less), the first response is to say something about Trump instead of Biden as a response ?
Or attack the poster who dared to mention Biden in anything other than a positive light ?
Most likely because the impotent swings at the President via his private citizen son pale in comparison to the real thieves, the ones who - via unquestioned nepotism - had literally no history or training to be White House âsenior advisorsâ and yet still profited (making more in those few years than most of us will earn in our lifetimes). And the people crying that Hillary/Hunter/whoever are horrible horrible people, with very little substance to back their garment-rending, are weirdly silent when it comes to talking about the log in their own eye.
So how come whenever the deeds of the Biden's are brought up (in the Biden thread no less), the first response is to say something about Trump instead of Biden as a response ?
Or attack the poster who dared to mention Biden in anything other than a positive light ?
Incurious. Fear of encountering cognitive dissonance. Reflexively and defensively skeptical of anything that might fatally damage a Dem, let alone their guy in the WH. Reliant on whataboutism, 'attack the messenger' and character assassination as their default defense.
So how come whenever the deeds of the Biden's are brought up (in the Biden thread no less), the first response is to say something about Trump instead of Biden as a response ?
Or attack the poster who dared to mention Biden in anything other than a positive light ?
If you never stop being a crazy conspiracy theorist, or posting misinformation, I'll never stop calling you out on it
(I will get tired now and then and take a break, but I'll be back).
Slacker.
Oh, just so you will feel useful and have accomplished something, I'll go back over in the Covid thread and address your remark there which I ignored. Because you just don't pay proper attention to context.
VV wins. I still have the google page open with all of those references and more that I looked at before posting that remark, knowing that something like this would happen here at RP, speaking of predictability ... For years, and long before RP and the Internet for that matter, and not knowing the origins, I have said in writing and conversation that consistency is a mark of excellence, until I heard the rejoinder ... and the refuge of the mediocre. Such as in the phrase ... that's a deep subject. And then comes the rejoinder ... for a shallow mind. There are other examples which escape my mind at the moment. But, as usual, you all are thinking way too hard and being totally predictable.
Wait, you have the nerve to complain about me posting the actual reference to the quote you attempted while in a different forum you were trying to roast me for a typ-o in my post?
Now that's rich. Where's your kettle pic? I need to insert it here < >.
I wasn't complaining about what you said, at all in this instance. I gave you credit for being closest to my intent. Sheesh.
Now as for roasting you over a typo ... you've done more with less ...
I'll delete it if it really bothers you that much.
VV wins. I still have the google page open with all of those references and more that I looked at before posting that remark, knowing that something like this would happen here at RP, speaking of predictability ...
For years, and long before RP and the Internet for that matter, and not knowing the origins, I have said in writing and conversation that consistency is a mark of excellence, until I heard the rejoinder ... and the refuge of the mediocre.
Such as in the phrase ... that's a deep subject. And then comes the rejoinder ... for a shallow mind. There are other examples which escape my mind at the moment.
But, as usual, you all are thinking way too hard and being totally predictable.
Wait, you have the nerve to complain about me posting the actual reference to the quote you attempted while in a different forum you were trying to roast me for a typ-o in my post?
Now that's rich. Where's your kettle pic? I need to insert it here < >.
That's not what was said. The quote from Emerson is "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
Actually, it was a little less slightly butchered... I think this was what was being referred to: "Consistency is the last refuge of the unimaginative." Oscar Wilde has received credit for this saying.
VV wins. I still have the google page open with all of those references and more that I looked at before posting that remark, knowing that something like this would happen here at RP, speaking of predictability ...
For years, and long before RP and the Internet for that matter, and not knowing the origins, I have said in writing and conversation that consistency is a mark of excellence, until I heard the rejoinder ... and the refuge of the mediocre.
Such as in the phrase ... that's a deep subject. And then comes the rejoinder ... for a shallow mind. There are other examples which escape my mind at the moment.
But, as usual, you all are thinking way too hard and being totally predictable.
It has been said that consistency is the refuge of the mediocre ...
Speaking of teeing them up...
If you never stop being a crazy conspiracy theorist, or posting misinformation, I'll never stop calling you out on it (I will get tired now and then and take a break, but I'll be back).
