“Preferential Treatment”: IRS Whistleblower Claims Political Influence and Possible Perjury Related to the Hunter Biden Investigation

Below is my column in Fox.com on the disclosure of a letter from counsel for an IRS whistleblower alleging political influence with the criminal investigation of Hunter Biden. There is much that we still do not know, including the credibility and evidence of the whistleblower. However, false statements to Congress are criminal acts and the allegations have to be taken seriously.

Here is the column:

“No one f**ks with a Biden.” That statement by President Joe Biden last year to a Florida mayor seems more than just a boast this week after a whistleblower at the Internal Revenue Service surfaced. The Wall Street Journal reported that a career IRS Criminal Supervisory Agent has alleged preferential treatment given to Hunter Biden in tax investigations. The whistleblower also alleges that he or she has information that contradicts the testimony of “a senior Biden political appointee.”

The timing of the letter itself was notable. For years, the Democratically controlled committees blocked any investigation into allegations of corruption and influence peddling by the Biden family. Before the takeover by the Republicans in the House, this whistleblower would have had little reason to seek protection from a Committee with demonstrably little interest in such allegations.

In fairness to the Democrats, both parties have used their power to shield presidents or political allies. However, the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability has now uncovered an array of new facts that are shedding light on what could be one of the largest influence peddling efforts in history.  For a city where influence peddling is a virtual cottage industry, that is saying a lot. Even in this premier league of corruption, the Biden family is the G.O.A.T.

Just this week, Chairman Comer revealed that new financial documents show six additional Biden family members may have benefited from foreign payments. That brings the total to nine Biden family members who appear on suspicious transactions or bank records. The identity of these family members and the underlying payments remain unclear, but the past disclosures of alleged influence peddling by Hunter Biden and his uncle James warrant full investigation.

The Bidens have long counted on an enabling media to tamp down coverage of corruption allegations. The most remarkable effort was successfully burying the Hunter Biden laptop story before the election. The Bidens were able to get the media to buy into the effort. For many reporters, even the acknowledgment of this corruption would be a self-indictment of their own lack of curiosity and integrity.

Yet, there has also been a notable lack of perceptible movement in any of the investigations of the Bidens.  Take the investigation of David Weiss, the U.S. attorney for the District of Delaware. Weiss is looking into an array of possible crimes, including tax violations, unlawful work as a foreign agent, unlawful foreign transactions and other offenses. Many of these crimes are relatively easy to investigate but the investigation has moved at a glacial pace.

There is ample evidence of Hunter working for foreign entities without registering as a foreign agent — a crime that the Justice Department used liberally against other defendants like Trump’s former campaign chair, Paul Manafort. There are also clearly false statements used by Hunter in relation to his possession of a handgun that appear undeniable. 

However, years have passed without any indictment from Weiss or any state counterpart. At the same time, Attorney General Merrick Garland has steadfastly ignored the obvious basis for the appointment of a special counsel despite repeated references to the President as an intended recipient of influence peddling proceeds.

That history has fueled concerns over whether federal investigations are being manipulated or misdirected.

The allegation of political influence at the IRS could add an additional potential criminal element to the mix. Section 7212 of the Internal Revenue Code makes it a felony for anyone “corruptly” to attempt to “obstruct or impede the due administration of” the Internal Revenue Code.

Notably, Hunter recently called for the IRS to investigate his critics and potentially strip groups of their tax exempt status.

The use of the IRS to target political enemies or protect political allies has long been a concern for Congress. Protections against political influence were ramped up after the Nixon Administration. In one of the recorded conversations from the Oval Office, Nixon explained his  expectations for the next commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service:

“I want to be sure he is a ruthless son of a bitch, that he will do what he’s told, that every income tax return I want to see I see, that he will go after our enemies and not go after our friends. Now it’s as simple as that. If he isn’t, he doesn’t get the job.”

Nixon’s infamous enemies list with hundreds of names were sent to the IRS for action. Even with the Nixon reforms, allegations of political manipulation of the IRS have continued. During the Obama Administration, former IRS official Lois Lerner and others were accused of targeting conservative groups. Lerner later refused to testify in Congress and was found in contempt.

More recently, there were similar concerns raised by a house visit of the IRS to the home of journalist Matt Taibbi — on the same day that he testified on the censorship efforts of the Biden Administration.

The sensitivity over the possible use of the IRS for political purposes runs deep with the public. The IRS is the one federal agency that requires every citizen to annually disclose information on the income, expenses, and family arrangements. Perhaps for that reason, the IRS has long been the least popular agency,according to polls.

The expanding investigation of the House Oversight Committee could also make things more difficult for the Administration.

previously wrote how the Weiss investigation could be used to defuse the Hunter Biden scandal by producing some relatively limited charges and a favorable plea bargain. President Biden and the media could then go into the 2024 election by saying that the matter is closed. More importantly, with the closure of the investigation, most of the information reviewed by Weiss would ordinarily remain undisclosed.

The problem is that, while the delay worked to the advantage of the Bidens before the 2020 election, it may now work against them. With the House turnover, committees are uncovering far more information. Recently, Republicans pressured Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen to lift long-standing bars on disclosing suspicious activity reports (SARs) related to Hunter Biden.

A plea will no longer have the advantage of keeping evidence from the public. With the public disclosure of information, the basis for possible criminal charges will also be made public. It then becomes more difficult to scuttle or minimize criminal charges against Hunter Biden.

The most recent spin of Democrats is that influence peddling is legal. That is technically true but the means used for influence peddling can often prove criminal, including false statements to investigators. However, regardless of whether this is a crime, it is most certainly a form of corruption.  We should want to know if the Biden family received millions from foreign sources to influence national policies or priorities.

For Democrats, this should not be the hill to die on. The party has already embraced censorship. It should not now embrace corruption.

132 thoughts on ““Preferential Treatment”: IRS Whistleblower Claims Political Influence and Possible Perjury Related to the Hunter Biden Investigation”

  1. “It only needs to self-destruct once.” Your argument was that history supports you rather than me. In the US that is FALSE. “Then, it exists no more, and it is the end of the discussion.” Separate issue – though you are still not likely correct. The US has had long periods of time where one… Continue reading Untitled

    “Your argument was that history supports you rather than me. In the US that is FALSE.”

    John, you are scraping the bottom of the barrel. You are setting up a strawman by trying to narrow the field to absurdum. That is the only way you believe you can prove yourself right. The Russia example stands. If you insist world history doesn’t help one function in today’s world, throw out Thucydides and everything else of value. Your narrow view is not commendable.

    “The democratic party will not be obliterated – only weakened.
    I do not want it so weak that Republicans can do whatever they please.”

    I have no desire to see a uni party of Republicans. You should know that. My point is that we cannot twiddle our thumbs while a power grab is underway to destroy our republic. Your theories though admirable, do not function in real life the way you think they do.

    “through to Venezeula
    But that has not happened here before.”

    That it hasn’t happened here before only means that, up to the present, we avoided that fate. World history, however, tells you sitting on your hands doesn’t work.

    “Europe has been corrupted by the Left”

    More proof favoring my argument.

    “Every successful left wing revolution of the type you describe involved the manipulation and mobilization of the underclasses.”

    Did you bother to look at the specific people that led the revolutions? They vary, but invariably most are led by educated and relatively upper class people. I’m skipping the rest of the post.

  2. Darren, I wonder if you can check what is happening to this series of posts between John Say and me. If we did something wrong, let us know. Fortunately I wrote my last response and have a copy that I will post under this if permitted.


    1. S. Meyer

      I checked for deleted or moderated comments from you and John Say and I did not find anything today in either trap, or anything else that was evident to me with regard to other users, at least within this article. (Preferential Treatment….) as to why you are having difficulty.

      Wish I had a better answer but I didn’t see anything apparent.

      1. I do not know what SM is refering to.

        But I did notice yesterday that for several hours I was completely unable to post.
        Everytime I hit POST I got a mesage about not being able to reply to unapproved comments.

        I do not beleive that occured responding to SM. But it did repeatedly to others.
        I lost about 6 posts.

        At the same time

        c’est la vie

        I am just responding with my input – not complaining.

        Despite the constant ranting of some here that You/Turley are hypocrites running this mass censorship factory
        I have seen no evidence of that.

        The most horrible and indefensible acts of Censorship I have seen here are the loss of posts that are replies to posters who posted something that clearly was offensive.

        And I demand that You and Turley rewrite all the WordPress code to make that impossible – by midnight.

        Keep up the good work. for my .02

        The lightest touch is best. I would rather let offensive people show us who they are than ban or censor them.

        But this is your site, and I know that far more goes into decisions than than on the surface. Practicality and time management matter too.

        1. John Say,

          There is a possibility that yesterday when you were given the message of being unable to reply to unapproved posts it might have been the case where the comment you saw on the site, and was cached or still visible within your browser, was later deleted by the site administration, your reply to that comment caused WordPress to retun the Unable To Post to Unapproved comments. I do not believe these were SM’s but were others’.

          For what you described above in that replies to comments that are later deleted is shortcoming of the software WordPress, or at least the Theme, that is used. An example of two comments. “Parent” is the first comment and “Child” is the reply (2nd). If the admin deletes Child then Parent is unaffected. But if Parent is deleted then Child and all grandchildren are no longer visible to the general user. They are still in the db but are effectively orphaned to the outside world. It is a bad threading model in my opinion. A better solution would be if Parent is deleted then Child is promoted up one level and all the grandchildren will go up one level recursively. Unfortunately there is nothing I know of that we can do about this since it is effectively a black box to us. It’s one of those “Won’t Fix” type of things that later gets described as not being a bug, but a feature. Another unfortunate casualty is the decent comment author who gets caught in the middle. In a lengthy, multi-layered conversation, where engaging people are talking reasonably, if the bad actor Parent author’s comment is removed the good conversations go with it. The realpolitik of the system means that replying to anonymous users or ones with shaky credentials, who are often previously banned users or those who habitually refuse to play by obvious rules of decorum, carries a higher degreee of risk of loss of visiblity due to the threading bug/feature I mentioned. Some have tried to avoid this by making an initial, Parent type comment as a reply. This does become a bit cumbersome in that it is not threaded from the original conversation.

          Adapting to this rather broken model can have the effect of regular users not investing time in replying to those having a propensity to have their comment removed. One can ask themselves if it truly is worth this investment. The users who engage in uncivil behavior or are banned for being abusive toward the blog or its users have consistently demonstrated that they will never be convinced of an opposing argument and will without fail return to being difficult and hostile. Their credibility will remain a femtokelvin above absolute zero and their inflence is minimal with the general public. So we have to ask ourselves, for our own benefit, are they truly worth the trouble in trying to converse with them? That is of course for each guest here to decide for themselves.

          1. Darren,
            Thanks for the explanation.
            Personally I did not need it. But there is a narrative from others here that the curating process is somehow tilted politically. I have seen no evidence of that.
            And I have looked for that evidence, and I have asked others to provide it.
            If I felt that left wing, right wing or any other viewpoint was being singled out for supression – I would be speaking out. Even if it was a perspective I think is WRONG. Turley.org allows posts that are ad hominem attacks on you or JT – that is amazing. Hosting a forum where participants sometimes visciously attack you without basis, and allowing it.

            The problems with WP are annoying – as they result in the supression of comments that do not violate any rules because they are linked to ones that do.
            But despite my sarcasm I am not stupid enough to expect you or Turley to rewrite the blog software to correct these problems.

            I said I did not need your explanation – that is a compliment, not an insult.
            It means that based on the evidence I have seen I TRUST your curating of this blog.

            That echos a theme I have posted on many times.

            trust is unbelievably important, and it is something we are not entitled to – we must earn.

            We do not buy things from those we do not trust. Most people do not think about that but it is true.
            Our institutions have lost peoples trust.

            regardless, I trust you and Turley with this blog.

            Not because I always agree, but because of your track record of conduct.

            1. John Say,

              Thank you for your words. I got a laugh out of the irony of wanting us to fix the code by midnight. As that is the essence of some people’s demands.

              1. One of the great problems today is the fight against those who think that all problems are solvable, that perfection is attainable – though they would not express is quite that way.

                I just finished an excellent Barri Weis podcast about the story of Micheal Laudor. But it is a much bigger story. It is the never ending story of one of many related problems that in age after age we were sure that we had the answer, and that those who came before us were primitive unenlightened and possibly evil Dolts.

                This story is specifically about Schitzophrenia, but more generally about mental illness. But it is also the story of homelessness, Drug addiction, Mass shootings, Transgenderism, ….

                It is the story of problems that we have sought to solve, often been certain we had solved in whatever generation we belong to, That clearly we have not solved.
                And that we may not solve for a long long time – if ever.


                How does this relate to curating blog posts ? It relates because there is no perfect objectively correct answer. Because even if there was – in the real world the time and resources often do not exist to implement that solution.

                I am optimistic about the future – but we will not get there by trying to force shallow answers to complex problems.

                You do a thankless job well. Those haranguing you for falling short of their personal conception of perfection would spend their time better cleaning their rooms.

      2. .Darren, I went dumpster diving in my Trash file to see what happened. I don’t think it is importantenough to waste time on. I found another posting that did not appear on the net today and didn’t look further, but I also found that some of the postings missing earlier returned. At that time, I searched based on name, and multiple postings were missing. I assume the WordPress computers had a glitch you have no control over.

        I saw something like that before. Due to time restraints I didn’t take a thorough look. I have also seen “unapproved comments” on occasion. I bring this to the blog’s attention partly so you know and partly to show that deleted postings that appear appropriate are deleted even if no parent post was.

        Computers are not perfect. My wife’s first career was in computer engineering, system design. Her training was the second year such a specific degree existed at only three universities. ( Babies interfered, so she gave up that career for another one.) Just a couple of years later, we had a problem with a bill from a major corporation. The billing manager said, the bill had to be correct because it wasn’t made by a human, it was made by a computer. My wife responded, knowing the program really well, that she knew that errors could occur because she had written parts of the code. Garbage in = garbage out.

        Thanks for your attention and your time.

        1. “…that deleted postings that appear appropriate are deleted even if no parent post was.”
          The most probable cause of this type of deletion was that a previously banned user posted a comment and it was summarily deleted.

          1. Thanks Darren. I don’t think so because it involved one John Say’s and my lengthy discussions that goes over more than one day. When I searched I couldn’t find the posts, but today I found some not present on the look yesterday. I haven’t dumped my trash so I might be able to find some and check them out if that helped you, but I don’t think it is worth your time.

            Thank you again for what you do. I wish people would offer respect to those who make this blog possible, but …

  3. I am waiting to see if in the next few weeks Pres. Biden announces his run for Re-Election.
    Be patient, That move will make ‘a statement’ regarding the disposition of the DNC.
    The rest is just fodder for the Media Tabloids.

  4. The democrat party has embraced crime since before I was born. Now they do it openly and often and in bigger and more costly schemes, get caught red handed, and nothing happens to them, while their millions of minions spin up big lies and declare them innocent and bring up Nixon or some other ancient lie and spin they cooked up and repeated ten millions times until their lie became their truthyfraud spew.
    They will embrace all the corruption they can possibly swindle and deceive from and with, and they will get away with it 100% while they punish the innocent with excessive cruelty that don’t waddle and bow to demoncrat totalitarian ideology.

  5. When IRS is accused we hear only the allegation. The outcome is always hidden. I have no inside knowledge of the IRS today but as a retired IRS exeutive I can respond to the other accusations mentioned here. (1) Nixon’s Enemies List: Yes there was such a list but the IRS Commissioner refused to do anything with it and he was supported by Secretary of the Treasury George Schultz. 2. Lois Lerner: Lerner in fact was the one who stopped an unthinking and naive IRS group in Cincinnati from overzealous enforcement. The Treasury Inspector General found her innocent of all charges and the FBI, after an investigation lasting one year, concurred. (3) IRS visits a journalist’s home. So what? Tell us more! The IRS visits taxpayer’s homes tens of thousands of times each year, usually to collect delinquent tax and for other reasons. The IRS is prohibited by law from disclosing people’s tax affairs but if the Congress wished to investigate this incident IRS would be free to talk. Why isn’t Congress investigating?

    1. On 3/26/22 NYP published an interview with House GOP conference chair Elise Stefanik (R-NY): “House Republicans will subpoena Hunter Biden” [1]

      1. “If the GOP retakes control of Congress, Hunter Biden will be hauled before the House of Representatives and forced to reveal the identity of “the big guy” […] ”
      2. “The story of the laptop was falsely dismissed by much of the media as Russian propaganda and censored on Facebook and Twitter at the behest of the Democratic party.”
      3. “It should concern every American that they did this for the Biden family’s financial gain, which came at the cost of our national security,” Stefanik said of the laptop evidence.


  6. Fifth graders have a better sense of justice than the “elite” Ivy League educated (boys club) politicians and government officials in the Washington D.C. “Beltway.” Young students do well in a structured environment and usually do not mind strict teachers so long as the teachers and administrators apply the rules fairly. I have witnessed on many occasions, a child whispering, “Yes!” under their breath when they see a fellow student get punishment if they did not follow the rules, especially if it is the bully who gets it. There is no such sense of justice in our corrupt government.

    The lunatics (who are now running the asylum) have no such sense. These entitled bullies who are in charge smirk at anyone who would dare challenge them or bring them under a justified, legitimate investigation. There will be, I suspect, a giant chorus of “Yes!” come from the public when they (one day) will see the smirk wiped off their faces when they are given punishment for their crimes.

  7. Jonathan: Speaking of “preferential treatment” you haven’t said anything about Texas billionaire Harlan Crow’s outside influence on Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. The “personal hospitality” is just the tip of the iceberg!

    The Guardian is reporting (4/20/23) how Crow has exerted substantial influence on the conservative Justice. Crow says he has never discussed Court business with Thomas and has never directly been involved in cases before the Court. That may be true but doesn’t explain the whole story. Crow is a founding member of the Club for Growth that has long lobbied the Court in amicus briefs on behalf of conservative causes. Crow has given at least $425,000 to the Club. In 2003 the Club backed a legal challenge to the McCain-Feingold law the put limits on “soft money” corporation campaign spending. The Court upheld most of the law. Thomas wrote a scathing dissent siding with the anti-regulation position of the Club for Growth. His dissent came after his “best friend” relationship with Crow had already been forged.

    Crow had other ways of influencing Thomas’ decisions. Crow spent millions for a Pin Point, GA Heritage Museum–that just so happens to be Thomas’ home town. Crow also gave Ginni Thomas $500,000 to start her right-wing advocacy group that played a role in trying to overturn the 2020 election. Crow also gave Clarence a Bible belonging to Frederick Douglas. Crow has bestowed on Thomas “preferential treatment” not shown to any other Justice. Why? Because Thomas is the longest serving and most conservative member of the Court and can influence other Justices on issues important to Crow.

    Thomas has had to amend his financial disclosure statements several times. He omitted on one statement the $700,000 Ginni received from the conservative Heritage Foundation. Thomas says he “misunderstood” the reporting requirements of the law. And this excuse comes from a Justice who is supposed to understand the law? Crow has contributed millions to conservative orgs like the Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise and the Federalist Society–the latter having selected all of Trump’s appointees to the Court. Crow spends wisely to influence Court decisions.

    It is clear there is an incestuous relationship between Thomas and Crow. A kind of “preferential treatment” unheard of in the history of the Supreme Court. But you want us to be believe the real “preferential treatment” is that bestowed on Hunter Biden by the IRS. Kind of makes a mockery of your use of the term.

    Now if Abe Fortas was required to resign from the Court why not Clarence Thomas? When are you going to discuss the vast corrupting influence Harlan Crow is having on Clarence Thomas and the Court?

    1. First Hillary Clinton orchestrated a campaign against Russia and Trump using former intelligence officers (Steele among others) to distract from her email scandal, then Biden did the same to distract from his corruption scandal. In the first case, Jake Sullivan was the instigator, and in the second Anthony Blinken. Both were rewarded with the highest level foreign policy jobs.

      1. Steele is a Brit and former MI-6 spook. Not a US intelligence officer.
        She used a lawyer who claimed to have found this on his own and wasn’t working for anyone. He had ties into FBI.

        She should have gone to jail over emails.
        Biden… impeached and his kin (brother and son) in jail.

        You are correct about the jobs. They should be in jail as well.


        1. I never said he was US. Do you believe neither Sullivan nor Clinton knew that Steele had been engaged by the campaign through two cut-outs?

      2. You targeted three different “controversies”:

        1. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (2009-2013): Several Investigations about handling of classified information including FBI’s Midyear Investigation, opened on 7/10/15.
        2. FBI Crossfire Hurricane” investigation (opened on 7/31/16) because of links between officials of Russia and Trump Campaign including Election interference. On 5/17/17 Acting AG Rod Rosenstein (R) appointed Robert Mueller to serve as Special Counsel to investigate Russian Interference with ’16 Presidential Election.
        3. Refers whether VP Biden (2009-2017) was compromised by third-party business deals and/or personally benefited from them. NYPs Miranda Devine [1] sums it up (though a GOP Senate report shared similar sentiments in 9/20).

        [1] https://nypost.com/2023/04/20/biden-campaign-pushed-spies-to-write-false-hunter-laptop-letter/

  8. DO you see:

    Ben Stiller playing the part of Hunter Biden?

    H. Biden:

    Ben Stiller:


    Mark Hamill playing the part of Hunter Biden?

    H. Biden:

    Mark Hamill:

    In the Made-for-the-Masses Movie Thriller – Biden-2.0 Election 2028


    1. Here It comes again,

      You might not have been aware but this blog only permits two hyperlinks per comment. I edited yours by removing the protocol from the two extra links so that it would post. If you would like the readership to review more than two links, this can be accomplished by using multiple comments having two or fewer links each.

  9. When RNC wins an Election, they Take Office; When DNC Gets Elected, they Take Power

    Professor, I can’t tell you how privileged I feel to be able to express my two cents on everything and everyone (thanks for lose moderation)! On the other hand, Professor you are to be regretted: A respected scholar is ordered to greet the groundhog again by writing about topics the.”Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government” was created for: Writing letters, memos, (interim) reports, “shocking” news included. My feeling is Until clock is running out, we will not know how to stop “Preferential “Treatment! One of many reasons: We don’t find a “wistleblower” as credible as CIA officer Eric Ciaramella (no “Wiki” page)!

    Or former CIA Acting Director Michael Morell, one of 50+ security cleared operatives who signed a “Public Statement on the Hunter Biden Emails” on 10/19/20 [1]:

    * […] emails […] has all the classic earmarks of a Russian informaton operaton.
    * We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails […] are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement —
    * just that our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case.

    Now Morell admitted that then Biden campaign foreign affairs adviser Anthony Blinken him in 10/20 to suggest the laptop was a Russian plant. Miranda Devine labeled this as “bias” [2], I call it turning a blind eye. It would be interesting to know Professors Turley’s take about this election interference.

    [1] https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000175-4393-d7aa-af77-579f9b330000
    [2] https://nypost.com/2023/04/19/left-ignores-real-biden-delaware-drama-to-satisfy-their-bias/

  10. “. . . preferential treatment given to Hunter Biden in tax investigations.”

    So the Biden administration weaponizes DOJ against its opponents, and defangs it for family and friends.

    So much for the idea that “justice is blind,” and for the bedrock principle: “a government of laws, not of men.”

  11. The left has clearly declared war on crooked Joe Biden. Although they still believe in the policies, they no longer believe in the man. The entertainment value in watching this unfold will be high.

  12. “For Democrats, this should not be the hill to die on. The party has already embraced censorship. It should not now embrace corruption.”

    Why not? Political parties exist to win elections and implement their agendas. If they can win as the party of censorship, graft and corruption, then they have every right to rule. The winning issue for the Democrats is Abortion. Abortion rights are non-negotiable for enough swing voters in enough states to hand the Democrats 2024 regardless of all other issues combined. And since Abortion is a religious issue, it is not susceptible to normal political compromise. It is all or nothing.

  13. As if people had any doubt that the Leftist Democrats would deflect, and adopt scorched Earth tactics, the NYT has provided the current DNC talking points without any evidence…naturally

    In response, Hunter Biden’s criminal defense lawyer, Christopher Clark, fired back on Thursday, claiming that the I.R.S. supervisor broke the law by disclosing confidential taxpayer information and called on the Justice Department to investigate the supervisor. Mr. Clark said that the only way it was known that the supervisor’s complaints could be linked to the Hunter Biden investigation would be if the supervisor or his lawyer disclosed it, either of which, he said, would have been improper.

    Donald Trump would likely reply, “bite me”

    Instead of sticking to facts, the Grey Lady Disinformation Kings editors, offered their narrative as well

    In any high-profile investigation, particularly those involving politically connected individuals, there are often disputes between agents, prosecutors, supervisors and senior Justice Department officials in Washington about how to conduct the inquiry and whether to bring charges.

    When Leftist Democrats are whistleblowers, they are Defenders of Democracy™
    Any other type of Whistleblower must be destroyed.

    The NYT cant help it if it keeps alive the journalistic standards of Walter Duranty who denied Joseph Stalin’s killing of millions during the Holodomor

  14. Typical of everything else in the imaginary Biden “scandal.” No specifics about who what when where or why. Just vague references of “political influence” which can be. No identification of what about tax infractions are. As always, Turley gets excited over the Emperor’s New Clothes.

  15. OT:
    TN GOP leader, who voted to expel Tennessee Three from the legislature, found guilty of sexually harassing interns.

  16. The Biden/Authoritarian trolls are out in force on this one, changing the focus and making spurious claims.
    Be thankful Garland isn’t on the Supreme Court, although he’s doing enough damage where he is. Biden family corruption runs deep.

    1. The Biden/Authoritarian trolls are out in force on this one,

      They are running behind, they had to wait for their handlers to tell them what to think. Get the right talking points. I guess they settled on deflection. The lies would be too outrageous, even for them.

Leave a Reply