Word to the Weiss: Why the Delaware U.S. Attorney is Still Calling People Before a Grand Jury on Hunter Biden

For over two years, Weiss has been investigating tax and financial issues connected to Hunter Biden’s foreign dealings. Biden has engaged in some of the most open and raw influence peddling schemes in history. That itself is “wrong,” to use his father’s standard, but not necessarily criminal. The Biden family has long been accused of such influence peddling generating millions in windfall payments. Even diplomats complained that his actions during the Obama/Biden Administration were setting back anti-corruption efforts in Ukraine.

The problem is not that Hunter Biden allegedly shook down foreign countries and companies for millions. The problem is that he may not have reported or paid taxes on all of that largess.

Weiss is calling witnesses to testify on Hunter’s lavish lifestyle and spending habits, including a former stripper who Hunter impregnated. Lunden Roberts spent years fighting to get child support, even as Joe Biden was running for president. A court finally forced Hunter to support his child.

Also called was ex-girlfriend, lingerie entrepreneur Zoe Kestan. She testified for five hours on Tuesday, the New York Post reported. Kestan reportedly detailed how Hunter would withdraw thousands of dollars and spend wildly during their relationship.

What is striking about these witnesses is that they are the type of witnesses that poison both grand juries and trial juries against a defendant. Such lavish spending details were used by the Justice Department against figures like Paul Manafort. More importantly, the testimony appears directed at showing that Hunter had far greater income than reported. That is a curious effort if Biden has “come clean” on simple reporting errors for taxes.

None of this means that Biden will clearly be indicted. Moreover, Attorney General Merrick Garland has thus far refused to appoint a Special Counsel despite the clear basis for such an appointment.

Weiss clearly has Hunter’s laptop, which details millions in foreign payments as well as lavish gifts and expense accounts. What is not known is whether Weiss has pursued other possible crimes, including potentially criminal financial transactions or being an unregistered foreign agent. Much depends on the scope of the investigation. The uncertainty is precisely why some of us have called for a special counsel. President Biden’s family is not only implicated in these dealings but shared accounts with President Biden are discussed in emails.

In the meantime, the Weiss investigation chugs along. It is a curious approach if, as suggested by some supportive legal experts, this is a relatively minor tax reporting investigation.

209 thoughts on “Word to the Weiss: Why the Delaware U.S. Attorney is Still Calling People Before a Grand Jury on Hunter Biden”

  1. When Russia invades Ukraine, it moves closer to the United States, Americans, and American freedom.

  2. More and more Americans are asking how Joe Biden can be trusted to exercise independent judgment in the Ukrainian situation given his family’s deep involvement in Ukrainian corruption. Crack-addled Hunter Biden profited handsomely from his ‘work’ for a Ukrainian energy company at the same time VP Joe was in charge of American anti-corruption efforts there. Yet they hide the ball. Transparency is never more important than now, when our nation is at the brink of war and Biden is the ultimate authority for Ukrainian policy. Americans need answers.

  3. How you view the current situation depends on how much history you know, and where you begin your ‘narrative.’
    The current Ukrainian state dates from 1991, when Gorbachev’s confederation of Russia, White (Belo) Russia, and Ukraine dissolved. So Ukraine is the result of the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Before then it was a part of the Polish-Lithuanian Empire and the Russian and Soviet empires. In 2013-2014, the government of Ukraine, which had been elected in a ‘free and fair’ election (according to the OSCE) was violently overthrown by nationalists and others, apparently, if Nuland is to be taken seriously, funded by the US. The first measures of the ‘revolutionary’ government were to ban the Russian language, spoke by about 40 percent of the population, and offer the lease on the port of Sevestapol to the US, breaking Ukraine’s 99-year lease with Russia. Russia then backed the Russian-speaking rebels in Luhansk and Donestk and seized Crimea. For someone familiar with diplomatic history, none of this is particularly extraordinary; it has happened repeatedly in the history of Europe and the world. It is not about ideology, it is about geopolitics.
    Only by beginning the narrative with the seizure of Crimea and ignoring the failure of Kiev to implement the Minsk Agreements, which would have given Luhanks and Donestk autonomy and made it impossible for Ukraine to join NATO (since two of its provinces would have opposed joining) is it possible to view Russia as the “aggressor.” In reality, everything Russia has reacted to Western initiatives, as Peter Hitchens noted in the Dail Mail and Mary Dejevsky did on Spiked!’s website. If I can post two links, here you go, for anyone who wants to understand why this is happening.
    If you begin with Crimea, Putin is an unhinged dictator intent on conquering Europe. If you begin in 1991 and examine NATO’s expansion since then in light of promises made to Moscow and the actual events of 2013-2014 and since, then Putin is merely reacting to Western initiatives which are calculated to ‘contain’ Russia, a strategy that any Russian leader who is not drunk half the time would react to in a similar manner.
    As for the cost, only arm-chair warriors want war. It is not something anybody who cares about their fellows advocates for any reason, but the one thing that even the magicians of conflict resolution cannot resolve is a disput over territory, and they at least admit that they cannot do so.

    1. What does the statement tell us? Tucker could be right or wrong on many things, but the poster doesn’t have the slightest idea what he is talking about.

  4. There’s nothing wrong with civilians wanting soldiers to fight a just war, if that is what the soldiers want to do. Should military children be willing to fight in a war if they want their parents to defend the rights and freedoms of the children? What is it to Tucker Carlson? What does he lose? He is the one doing the lecturing. If people sign-up to defend freedom, then let them. He might as well go on a crusade to make everyone where motorcycle helmets or something, if he’s so concerned about saving lives.
    He has become the nanny state. Soldiers who knew what they were getting into don’t need a lecture from Tucker Carlson.

    1. “If people sign-up to defend freedom, then let them.”
      They won’t find it in corrupt Ukraine where former funny man, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, had the opposition leader and former president, Petro O. Poroshenko, first thrown in jail and then placed under house arrest for being … well … the oposition leader or treason or tax evasion or anything else he could think up. Zel is a riot isn’t he? Just not a democrat. He would make a fine big “d” Democrat, however.

  5. Illegal aliens don’t have a nuclear arsenal like Russia does. That was the point of ICBMs, to make distance irrelevant. Russia would put missiles in Ukraine, extending its reach over Western Europe. It’s a small world, after all. Surely, Tucker is smart enough to realize this.

  6. Ukraine should launch missiles at the Russian vehicles where they are parked, in a preemptive strike.
    Who cares about optics and appearances when survival is at stake?
    It’s a joke that a wrong-doer like Russia would accuse Ukraine of wrong-doing.

  7. I think a lot of money came into Canada when wealthy folks from Hong Kong fled seeking a safe harbor.

    Now that the harbor is not so safe I wonder where that money is going now? Probably not into Canadian banks.

    Trudeau! What have you done to your country and its reputation and its economy. Nobody can trust Canada.

      1. It hung on under Roman law and institutions until the Turks used Viennese canon to hammer the walls and break in. If memory serves the last Roman Emperor died fittingly fighting on the walls to defend the last flickering light of that civilization. Amusingly, DNA tests done recently tend to show that the Turks aren’t really Turks but mostly Greeks and Armenians, the peoples originally subjected. Erdogan says it’s all lies.

        1. Young, I linked to the Wikipedia page in the prior post. The point behind 1204 is that after that there was very little there there.

          1. There was enough there to last more than 200 years to May 29, 1453, and I didn’t need wikipedia to know that.

            Yugoslavia didn’t last that long. Nor the Third Reich. Nor many other countries.

          2. Benson – Wikipedia is unreliable, The generally accepted date for the end of the Western Empire is 476.

      1. 410 might be better; that’s when the legions left Britain on it’s own. You would think the Britons would have learned something about immigration after inviting Hengist and Horsa to come in. But apparently not.

            1. But it was still Rome. Theodosius was the last emperor to rule the entire empire and he died in 395 in Milan.

  8. If it’s okay for Tucker and Gutfeld not to care about Ukrainians, then is it also okay not to care about Holocaust, slavery, and Uiygurs?

  9. Jordan Peterson said Canadians should get their money out of Canadian banks. A contact he had in the military said things are worse than they seem.

    Meanwhile a woman arrested during the protest met with her lawyers. She said she went to a secret location and was told to not bring her cellphone.

    What a mess. Himmler would have loved this setup.


    1. I seriously am worried that this is a set-up to institute digital currency. Not good. Talk about a surveillance state.

  10. Tucker Carlson has a new nick name: “German porn star’s mouth”. He is always full of shit.

    1. Aninny:

      Not sure what that crude and unsurprising from you comment means but you couldn’t carry Tucker’s trash. Like Trump, he’s smarter, richer and has a better family than you. Envy is a bad look.

  11. Tucker fails again. Tucker Carlson made the either-or fallacy. It’s not so much what people have done. It is also about what they COULD do. What they could do could be much worse than what they have done.
    Justin Trudeau doesn’t have nuclear weapons, and Canada isn’t about to dominate the world.
    Just because something is far away doesn’t mean it is of no concern to us.

  12. NATO should be lead by someone who projects more strength and confidence, someone more Pattonesque.

  13. If Ukraine invites Americans and not Russians, then Americans should have more of a right to be in Ukraine than Russians. Invitation was the justification for Russians being in Syria. There is an inconsistency there. Invitation can’t be the justification for Russians being in Ukraine, but it COULD be the just justification for Americans being in Ukraine. So why don’t Americans accept the justified invitation from the Ukrainian government that is legally authorized to grant it?

  14. If the Ukrainians invite American forces before they invite Russian forces, then what’s the problem with American forces being there? And what if Ukraine invites American forces AFTER the invasion, just like France’s government-in exile-invited American forces into France, despite being occupied by Germans.

  15. If Ukraine can be supplied with ammunition and Javelins, then why not go for broke and loan them some nuclear weapons?

  16. I wonder what Herr Trudeau [or is it Comisar Trudeau] will do if a number of truckers decide that they will deliver nothing to Ottawa, not even the truckloads of snazzy SS uniforms he ordered?

    1. Maybe I missed it but I would have thought Prof Turley would have said some & been all over the fact that the Truckers & those that gave funds through Give Send Go , etc., where given no Due Process Rights that were even available to Canadians.

      The Canadian lawyer Viva Frei , out in it, & at times Robert Barnes have been following a lot of the Canadian stuff.

Comments are closed.