Was Garland Lying? New York Times Confirms Weiss was Blocked from Bringing Additional Charges

I recently wrote a column entitled “Who is Lying? Merrick Garland or the Whistleblowers?” after the allegations of IRS whistleblowers and the categorical denial of Attorney General Merrick Garland on the Hunter Biden investigation. I noted that it would not be a difficult question to answer given the highly specific account of the whistleblowers of meetings, including witnesses. Now the New York Times has confirmed one of the key allegations. While the newspaper buried the major fact in the 21st paragraph of the story, it confirmed that U.S. Attorney David Weiss did attempt to bring additional charges in California and D.C. but was blocked.

Many have observed that the placement of the disclosure in the Times is a classic example of “burying the lede.” If this were Bill Barr, the confirmation of the story would have been a banner headline. Instead, the confirmation is found in with the baggage 21 cars down the train. That is where you will find this bombshell:

“But in mid-2022, Mr. Weiss reached out to the top federal prosecutor in Washington, Matthew Graves, to ask his office to pursue charges and was rebuffed, according to Mr. Shapley’s testimony. A similar request to prosecutors in the Central District of California, which includes Los Angeles, was also rejected, Mr. Shapley testified. A second former I.R.S. official, who has not been identified, told House Republicans the same story. That episode was confirmed independently to The New York Times by a person with knowledge of the situation.”

If the New York Times is confirming that the “episode” was the repeated blocking of Weiss, Garland stands contradicted in statements that he has made for months, including just days ago. Garland appeared irate at the suggestion that Weiss was denied any opportunity to bring charges anywhere:

He stated

“As I said at the outset, Mr. Weiss, who was appointed by President Trump as the U.S Attorney in Delaware and assigned this matter during the previous administration, would be permitted to continue his investigation and to make a decision to prosecute any way in which he wanted to and in any district in which he wanted to… I don’t know how it would be possible for anybody to block him from bringing a prosecution, given that he has this authority.

He also denied the allegation that Weiss asked for special counsel status.

I am not sure what is worse: that Garland was clueless or duplicitous. Despite my support for his nomination, Garland has not been a success at Justice. Indeed, from the start, he seemed to shrink from view.

There is also a danger of willful blindness on the part of Garland in avoiding such knowledge as underlings undermined Weiss. We simply do not know, but we need to know.

In speaking with people at Justice, Garland does not appear to be a hands-on manager in the model of Bill Barr. While he cannot be called a figurehead, he is certainly not someone who conveys operational or active control of the department.

If Weiss was refused the ability to charge in two other jurisdictions, the key question is whether he did in fact ask for special counsel status. If so, Garland could be facing serious consequences, even an impeachment effort.

The coverage by the New York Times suggests that the media may be forced to cover this story albeit reluctantly. For Democratic members, it is now becoming even more embarrassing. Democrats unanimously opposed the release of the recent evidence and have opposed efforts to investigate the Biden corruption scandal.

What is clear is that Congress now has ample basis to pursue these answers fully and aggressively. With both potential criminal and impeachable questions, the authority of Congress is at its apex in using subpoenas to get to the bottom of this scandal.

177 thoughts on “Was Garland Lying? New York Times Confirms Weiss was Blocked from Bringing Additional Charges”

  1. “On the contrary, advancement comes because what’s in their dossier ensures they will be a reliable member of the corruption class”

    Olly, you hit the nail on the head. There are two pathways. One is job oriented, and the other is politically oriented. The latter leads you to top positions at the FBI. It isn’t all that different in the corporate world, where even highly trained engineers are asked if they wish to take the executive path. The big difference is the politically oriented group became corrupt.

  2. If the Left were honest, here’s how it would describe Weiss:

    Appointed by Trump; handcuffed by Garland and Biden.

    1. Appointed by Trump with approval the Senators from Delaware, both democrats, then handcuffed by Garland and Biden.

  3. Professor, it has certainly not escaped your attention that AG Barr was of influencing the ’20 election in favor of Biden because he

    1) sent in 1/20 CHS “bribe accusations” FBI gathered in 2017 (!!) to USA Brady, Pittsburgh, PA (a member of AG’s Advisory Committee, that regularly consult on policy and management issues) though an investigation is ongoing [see also one of SEN Graham’s cumbersome letters to AG Garland [1] ,
    2) didn’t make public this information and let it slow-walked, and
    3) didn’t clarify Biden’s claim in 1st Presidental debate referencing 50+ former intel letter that “Laptop from Hell” is “Russian Disinformation”

    among others. “Sportsman” investigation starts at 11/18. In his opening statement [2] for “Ways and Means” on 5/26/23 IRS Supervisory Special Agent Shapley confirmed “decisions included slow-walking investigative steps, not allowing enforcement actions to be executed, limiting investigators’ line of questioning for witnesses, misleading investigators on charging authority, delaying any and all actions months before elections to ensure the investigation did not go overt well before policy memorandum mandated the pause.” (p 12):

    1) DL-USA Office, DOJ Tax, and DOJ “provided preferential treatment and unchecked conflicts of interest” (p 10). “[T]he criminal tax investigation of Hunter Biden […] has been handled differently than any investigation I’ve ever been a part of for the past 14 years of my IRS service.” (p 11)
    2) After FBI verified the evidence of Laptop from hell in 11/19, “they notified the IRS that it likely contained evidence of tax crimes”, a month later (p 12).
    3) “As early as March 6th, 2020, I sent a sensitive case report up through my chain of command at IRS reporting that by mid-March the IRS would be ready to seek approval for
    physical search warrants in California, Arkansas, New York, and Washington, D.C.” (p 13)
    4) On 6/20/20 he and FBI case agent raised concerns that “DOJ Tax has made a concerted effort to drag their feet concerning conducting search warrants and interviewing key witnesses in an effort to push those actions to a timeframe” using DOJs 60/90 day rule as an excuse to postpone investigations (p 17)
    5) In 8/20 we obtained “sitting next to my father” WhatsApp message from 7/30/17 (p 14)
    6) On 9/3/20 AUSA Wolf stated that a search warrant for the emails for Blue Star Strategies was being sat on by [Office of Enforcement Operation]” (p 15).
    7) On 9/4/20, DAG “Donoghue issued a cease and desist of all overt investigative activities due to the coming election” (p 15).
    8) On 10/22/20 meeting, according to AUSA Wolf “because prosecutors decided to keep it from investigators”, IRS has not been given access to laptop (p 16).
    9) On 10/22/20 AUSA Wolf stated that “they wouldn’t allow a physical search warrant”, after USA Weiss “had reviewed the affidavit for search warrant of Hunter Biden’s residence and agreed that probable cause had been achieved” (p 17)
    10) On 11/10/20 USA Weiss stated “that the primary focus was to protect the integration of the investigation which meant it concealed from public (p 17-18)
    11) After USA Weiss agreed to execute a search warrant at Owasco storage unit in Northern Virgina on 12/14/20 “we heard AUSA Wolf had simply reached out to Hunter Biden’s defense counsel” (p 21)
    12) My memo to chain command on 5/3/21 “Through interviews and review of evidence obtained, it appears there may be campaign finance criminal violations. AUSA Wolf stated on the last prosecution team meeting that she did not want any of the agents to look into the allegation.” (p 22)

    During his testimony, Shapley denied that “any FBI agent ever make [him] aware of a form 1023 related to Hunter Biden or any of his family members” (p 52).This is remarkable because there are several “1023” im play. One of them was created on 6/30/20 after USA Brady’s team interviewed a CHS resource. All those who know little about “sportsmen” will wonder why Pittsburgh, PA worked on this matter: AG Barr decided in 1/20 that a CHS information retained by FBI results in another “1023” in 2017(!!) – and therefore unrelated to Mr Giuliani’s input. It is not possible to determine with reasonable effort when and how Barr got his hands on this material. Barr wanted to protect the integrity of USA Weiss’ ongoing investigations in creating a clearinghouse in PA to set up an intake process in the field to receive information related to Ukraine which avoided geographically proliferating investigations in an election year. After USA Brady sent back his closed investigation to sender, Barr claimed he sent it to USA Weiss for further investigation. It’s a pity that Shapley never met a “1023”. Perhaps the “clearinghouse” idea served also for other purposes…

    Shapley told Baier” that critical steps in the federal investigation into Hunter Biden were put ‘on the back burner’ as the 2020 presidential election approached”. AG Barr (R – recommended from “W” clan) and FBI Director Wray [R – recommended from former Govenor Christie (R-NJ)] have played a critical role: They are responsible that Biden false “Russia disinformation” claim wasn’t challenged and that important information were concealed. These election interferences may have influenced the daily lives of millions of Americans because of a possibly compromised president rules by Marxist programs like the “Biden/Sanders manifesto” . For this patriots, this is the scandal and not a miscommunication between AG Garland and USA Weiss that may or may not have influenced Hunters plea deal what your eruption on twitter suggests.,

    [1] https://twitter.com/alexsalvinews/status/1674148956811476993/photo/2
    [2] https://waysandmeans.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Whistleblower-1-Transcript_Redacted.pdf (p 8-32)

    1. Charlotte Kingsdale: I feel like you’ve got something important to say, but your note above is so filled with confusing grammar, missing words, and incomplete thoughts I can’t follow it. Please edit carefully to be more persuasive!

  4. Oh my: “During his hours-long testimony, Shapley told congressional investigators that a meeting on Oct. 7, 2022, with Weiss and senior-level managers from the IRS, FBI, and U.S. attorney’s office, was his “red-line” meeting. According to the whistleblower, Weiss was present for the meeting and surprised the team by stating, “I am not the deciding person on whether charges are filed.”

    Shapley said Weiss further explained that the Biden-appointed U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, Matthew Graves, would not allow Weiss to charge Hunter Biden in the D.C. district, where certain of the alleged crimes needed to be filed based on Hunter Biden’s residency during the relevant time. Shapley noted, “Weiss stated that he subsequently asked for special counsel authority from Main DOJ at that time and was denied that authority.” “Instead,” Shapley recounted, Weiss “was told to follow the process, which was known to send U.S. Attorney Weiss through another President Biden-appointed U.S. Attorney,” that one in California, the second locale relevant to the proposed criminal charges.

    Without the cooperation of Biden-appointed U.S. attorneys, Shapley explained, Weiss made clear he could not bring charges outside the Delaware district. Consequently, the statute of limitations on felony tax charges against the president’s son for the 2014 and 2015 tax years expired.

    The IRS whistleblower then shared with the House committee an email thread Shapley initiated following the meeting with Weiss. In his email on Oct. 7, 2022, Shapley summarized the substance of the meeting: “Weiss stated that he is not the deciding person on whether charges are filed” (bold in original). Shapley then commented that he “believe[s] this to be a huge problem—inconsistent with DOJ public position and Merrick Garland testimony.”

    The email then recounted that Weiss said he had gone to the U.S. attorney in D.C. “in early summer to request charge there,” but the Biden-appointed U.S. attorney “said they could not charge in his district.” Weiss then said he “requested Special counsel authority when it was sent to D.C.,” but “Main DOJ” denied the request.

    The special agent in charge of the FBI D.C. field office, Darrell J. Waldon, who had been present during the Oct. 7 meeting, responded to the email summary, stating: “Thanks Gary. You covered it all.”


    1. Turns out not only has Garland been lying, but Weiss has been too. See link above. There’s a lot more.
      All the names from the meeting where Weiss revealed he couldn’t bring charges outside Delaware are there, later the next year Weiss denied that in a letter to Congress, and apparently suspicion there was pressure for him to sign it.
      They all lied and covered up, and they still are, and now the BUSTED issue is on the forward. Witnesses, emails confirming the meeting minutes with response, all the names present at the shocker meeting that moved the whistleblower into action, so Three other names to pull in for testimony on the meeting.
      Prison time. Put them in prison. Do us a solid for once.

      1. But Garland explained all this: “The U.S. attorney has full authority over the case, but he doesn’t actually have full authority over the case.”

        Very straightforward really.

  5. OT – but an illustrative story about how modern left-coast cities are killing themselves:

  6. Someone else pointed out your reading comprehension.
    Seems to me the title does NOT say what you say, i.e., that “GARLAND BLOCKED the prosecution;” -indeed, it verbatim says, “New York Times Confirms Weiss was Blocked from Bringing Additional Charges”

    1. Anonymous does it again. He was blocked from bringing additional charges she says. The question that should arouse Anonymous’ curiosity is who blocked him from bringing additional charges. Why were charges blocked if Weis was supposed to have complete autonomy. We have a real problem if the head of the DOJ doesn’t know what’s happening in such a prominent investigation. Garland is either completely incompetent or he knew exactly what was happening. I’m going with he knew. Thank you Anonymous for pointing out that Weiss was prohibited from doing a complete investigation. Your insight is greatly appreciated. Just when I think it can’t get anymore stupid it he she they them does.

  7. O T – the next time you hear someone say that Republicans are hard-hearted bigots for opposing the illegal inflow of “migrants” from Central America, direct them to today’s story in the Daily Mail, concerning the indictment of 4 Mexican nationals for allowing 53 “migrants”, including 6 children, from Central America to suffocate in the back of their truck. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12243749/Four-men-indicted-Americas-deadliest-human-smuggling-event.html The people who encourage illegal entry into this country are morally to blame for these deaths.

  8. “burying the lede.” I would have spelled it “lead” and been wrong. Learn something every day.

    1. https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/bury-the-lede-versus-lead

      Although evidence dates the spelling to the 1970s, we didn’t enter lede in our dictionaries until 2008.

      William Safire, who knew a thing or two about newsrooms, wrote in his New York Times “On Language” column in 1990, “Wouldn’t it be easier if the noun for the metal were spelled the way it sounded (led, to rhyme with dead) and the noun for the beginning of a newspaper story were spelled the way it is pronounced (lede, or leed, to rhyme with deed)?”

  9. What I want to know about all of these investigations that go nowhere is, who the Big Dog Puppeteers are pulling the strings on all these small fish being investigated and all the corrupt politicians blowing smoke up our tailpipes?

  10. Turley’s piece is deliberately misleading: the title claims that it is “confirmed” that Weiss was “blocked”, but the body of the piece says that Weiss asked two prosecutors to bring charges, which they didn’t–this does not prove that he was “blocked” much less that Garland is responsible. Of course, since this is for the disciples, they won’t notice.

    1. Reading comprehension is difficult for some of our friends on the left, to be surw.

      1. Quote to me the proof that GARLAND BLOCKED the prosecution, which is what the title of this piece says, but not what the FACTS say. Where does Turley’s piece say GARLAND BLOCKED the prosecution? It doesn’t. The people Turley discusses do not SAY that that GARLAND said to drop the matter.

        1. Someone else pointed out your reading comprehension.
          Seems to me the title does NOT say what you say, i.e., that “GARLAND BLOCKED the prosecution;” -indeed, it verbatim says, “New York Times Confirms Weiss was Blocked from Bringing Additional Charges”

          1. Where’s the proof he was “blocked”? He requested that 2 prosecutors bring charges–they didn’t–how does this constitute being “blocked’? Maybe they didn’t agree that charges were warranted, but that isn’t the same as being “blocked”–which implies that a superior commanded them not to bring charges that SHOULD have been brought because they were valid. All the NYT “confirmed” was that someone else told the same story. The story doesn’t prove anyone “blocked” a valid prosecution, an assumption Turley tries to create, using his usual tactic of innuendo without actual facts.

        2. Gigi — What’s your over/under that some of these Democrat criminals are actually prosecuted and serve prison time?

          1. Where’s your proof that any Democrats are “criminals”? What specific crimes were committed, and by which Democrats? I want to see proof–not innuendo.

        3. Gigi — Watch this video of President Biden literally falling on his face, down on all fours, unable to get up by himself, on stage at one of our premier military academies. Symbolic? You bet it is. THIS is what it looks like when one of the most corrupt, treasonous, traitorous, illegitimate occupiers of the Oval Office is about to be found out for exactly the traitor he is and the scumbag he has always been.
          IMPEACH the MF’er. That is the sentiment of more than HALF the country right now.

          1. Liars like Joe Biden cannot stand in the face of truth and honor.

            Joe Biden is a sellout and traitor to his country and this is why he literally collapsed on stage, in front of our newest grads who are true patriots who love, honor and intend to serve this country.

            What Joe Biden has done is called treason. An impeachable high crime. Do it now, Congress.

            1. Joe Biden did NOT collapse–he tripped over a sandbag, which could happen to anyone. The sandbag was there to weight down something on the stage. Falling has nothing to do with mental or even physical competence, and people who think it does are stupid. What, exactly, has JOE Biden done that constitutes “treason”, and, most importantly, where is the proof?

          2. The fact that he WAS helped doesn’t mean he NEEDED help, and the fact that he fell doesn’t mean he lacks mental competence. I help people who have fallen get up, but they probably could do so on their own. He tripped over a sand bag that had been placed there to weight down something on the stage. Where is the proof that Biden is the “most corrupt, treasonous, traitorous, illegitimate occupiers of the Oval Office”? That actually describes Trump to a “T”. There is absolutely NO proof that JOE Biden committed any crimes, no matter how many times Mark Levin and/or Jon Turley say so. There is ample proof that Trump has committed multiple crimes, which we have all seen. He has been indicted twice–by grand juries.

        4. Garland is the Attorney General. He is responsible…..because he has repeated often that he is the the one making the decision.

  11. Professor, the last few columns give the impression that you expected in AG Garland an impartial DOJ leader. This is comes as surprise because DEMs use power while REPs took office.

    Here are “Sportsman’s” case facts, not fiction:

    1) On recommendation of DL-Senators Tom Carper (D) and Chris Coons (D), President Trump announced his intent to appoint David Weiss (R) to USA-DL on 11/17/17 [1] (confirmed on 2/15/18). Weiss had previously served as 1st AUSA [’07 to ’09 (Bush) and ’12 to ’18 (Obama/Trump)], and as acting USA [’09 to ’11 (Obama).

    2) Shortly after his confirmation DOJ [AG: Sessions (R) FBI: Wray (R)] appointed him to lead prosecutor in “Sportsman Case”. Although it was known at this time that Hunter was involved in a global corporate conglomerate: As Weiss neither got/asked for “Special Counsel” status or written authorization (28 USC 515a) he had never “complete authority”. Therefore he was limited to prosecute in DL. Barr didn’t authorized either.

    3) Weiss’ primary goal was to abstain from interfering elections (2 1/2 years ahead) and quietly investigate the “matters” (as it was done with Clinton who unplanned waited 20′ on PHX tarmac to ask Lynch about the wellbeing of their grandchildren the time “Midyear” was in endgame).

    4) That team members don’t care about “Oath of Office” and “Hatch Act” and independent if DEM/REP leads DOJ/FBI (eg “Midyear”, “Crossfire Hurrican”, “Sportsman”).

    5) Weiss was confirmed by Garland as USA-DL after party switch. That shows he was satisfied with his three years’ work.

    6) IRS Supervisor Gary Shapley was deeply shaken by the outcome of 10/7/22 meeting. The memo (exhibit 10 after p. 148) raises more questions than answers, such as:
    * What was the purpose of this meeting with six IRS/FBI participants?
    * Indicates “I’m not the deciding official” that he has to report to someone else before he communicate his decision or that someone else dictates him what he had to decide?
    * As Weiss has neither “Special Counsel” status nor or written authorization (28 USC 515a) he had never “complete authority”. Why didn’t he asked between 2018 and 10/7/22?

    7) Shapley identified a discrepancy was Weiss said on 10/7/22 and Garland answered to Grassley’s five questions on 3/1/23 [2], which is likely to amount to a communicative misunderstanding:
    * DOJ Information on Hunter Biden: “I promised to leave the matter of Hunter Biden in the hands of USA-DL who is appointed in the previous administration so any information like that should had gone to USA-DL and FBI squad working with him. I have pledged not to interfere with that investigation and I have carried through to my pledge.” (2:57 – 3:21)
    * Delaware U.S. Attorney Independence: “USA-DL has been advised he has full kind of authority to prosecute outside DL and I will assure that if he does he will be able to do that (condensed for clarity reasons; 3:55 – 4:20)
    * Special Counsel authority: “He had bring it to me under the regulations (28 USC 515a) and I have to authorize it. And that is was I promised here already” (condensed for clarity reasons; 4:55-5:26 )
    * If denied in DC, CA: “He has to be advised that he is not to be denied, anything that he needs I take care that USA can do what he wants to do” (condensed for clarity reason; 5:40-6:05)
    * Payments to Political Figures: “Yes that is a national security problem (condensed for clarity reason” 7:05 -7:18)

    8) According the AG, DOJ don’t intervene if Weiss agrees to testify before Congress.

    9) The fact that the outstanding taxes from ’14 and ’15 are now time-barred is in the interest of the government (and REP leader) for sure: Should the whole learned in detail how Hunter earned his money the time his father was VP?

    [1] https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/president-donald-j-trump-announces-ninth-wave-united-states-attorney-nominations-third-wave-united-states-marshal-nominations/
    [2] https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-questions-attorney-general-at-doj-oversight-hearing

    1. @Charlotte Kingsdale,

      Sorry, you have some things wrong…

      Garland couldn’t touch Weiss.
      Since the investigation started under Trump of Hunter… had Garland dismissed Weiss, you would have a massive fight in Congress along w a huge PR problem.
      It would be easier for Garland to contain Weiss than to dismiss him. (Which he did. )

      By not giving Weiss independence (special counsel), Garland could control what happened. Hence forcing Weiss to not be able to bring certain charges or any charges without his approval.

      That’s big.
      No matter how others want to spin it… that is why Weiss wasn’t replaced.

      On the flip side… Barr not giving special counsel status to Weiss occurred for the same reason. Because of the politics… (Former Sen and Former VP ‘s son) If Barr did give special counsel, the Dems would have crucified him and called the investigation a political witch hunt. Note that it wasn’t until Garland was in charge that Weiss had enough evidence to go forward w charges. (Which leads back to Joe)

      If you consider what I wrote… you’ll start to understand why the whistle blower’s testimony makes sense.


        1. Thank you for the nearly three year old CNBC article. It is quite revealing, but not for reasons Biden apologists can or should rely upon.

          “To the extent that there’s an investigation, I think that it’s being handled responsibly and professionally within the department,” Barr said at a news conference, two days before his resignation from the Department of Justice.
          Reality check: Barr believed then that the investigation was being handled responsibly, but what does he think now in light of all that has developed since?

          “And to this point I have seen no reason to appoint a special counsel, and I see no reason to do so before I leave,” Barr said. Effect: Barr believed a special counsel was not necessary then, but what might he think now given what has occurred?

          “If I thought a special counsel was the right tool, I would name one, but I haven’t.”
          Looking back: Perhaps not the right tool then, but what would he think now?

          Barr also said that he hopes the Biden administration will handle the Hunter Biden probe “responsibly.”
          Reality update: Hopes are often dashed.

          1. Late today we learn that in September 2020 Barr had Weiss briefed on the FBI-generated FD-1023 form that implicates Joe and Hunter Biden involved in a bribery scheme. Having had Weiss briefed, it should come as no surprise that in the December 2020 CNCB article Barr would have thought then that the investigation was progressing as it should and would likely continue doing so after his departure.

        2. @Charlotte,
          Barr didn’t do it, but by the time Biden was POTUS he had to have it.
          Remember that once Biden is POTUS you have a conflict of interest. Not to mention during the election voters would consider having a special counsel to be prejudicial.

          There’s a lot of issues when politics gets involved. Not a simple decision.

          Based on what we know now… Biden and others should be charged. Joe should be impeached.

  12. Here’s another Garland line when responding to Grassly:

    “The U.S. attorney has been advised that he has full authority to make kind of those referrals you’re talking about or to bring cases in other jurisdictions if he feels it is necessary, and I will assure that if he does, then he will be able to do that.”

    So, the U.S. attorney has full authority to make referrals?

    There’s a phrase for this kind of talk: slippery when wet.

    Garland’s got problems.

  13. The former head of U.S. Justice Department’s tax division, 2001-07, has written an article for the WSJ, whereby she provides background info on what the FBI and IRS knew regarding Hunter’s laptop. The FBI confirmed to the IRS in Dec 2019 that it was Hunter’s laptop, and that the contents of Hunter’s laptop possibly contained evidence of tax crimes. The former head of U.S. Justice Department’s tax division also reports in the WSJ that prosecutors never allowed the IRS agents to examine the purported evidence of tax crimes on Hunter’s laptop. This all happened before the Big Guy Biden’s election campaign orchestrated the Big Lie that the laptop was Russian disinformation. cf: 50 former intelligence officials warn NY Post story sounds like Russian disinformation
    – The Hill, 10/20/20

    Huh, Democracy dies in darkness.

    Throw Hunter Biden’s Plea Deal in the Trash

    By June 2021, Mr. Weiss’s prosecution team had gathered enough evidence to understand that Delaware wasn’t the proper venue in which to prosecute Hunter Biden’s tax crimes. Crimes allegedly committed in 2014 and 2015 would have to be charged in the District of Columbia and those allegedly committed 2016-19 would have to be charged in the Central District of California. According to the whistleblowers’ testimony, the U.S. attorneys in the capital and Central California refused Mr. Weiss’s requests to charge Hunter Biden in their district


  14. Attorney General Merrick Garland should be invited back to sworn testimony before congress. Whereupon, pre-draw criminal charges can be served upon him by the sergeant at arms and he should be handcuffed and taken to the brig in the basement of congress until proceedings can establish arraignment through the US Supreme court.
    This man should be charged with high crimes and misdemeanors, and brought before a national trial in the US Supreme Court due to his elevated position as this nations highest ranking law enforcement officer.
    These are unpresented times in the course of US history and Mr. Garland, needs to face a trial of the highest order.

      1. good point, this would be a chance to get before the US Supreme Court. Merrick will finally get his opportunity before the court. Great

  15. Here’s the Garland statement according to CNN:

    Weiss, he reiterated at the time, had “full authority” to carry out the investigation and to bring in another jurisdiction if necessary.

    I don’t know what that statement means exactly.

    There are a couple of conflicting axioms here. One is never underestimate incompetence and sloppiness in Washington.

    The other is: when a lawyer of Garlands caliber does not speak clearly, he is doing so intentionally. Although I don’t know what the penalty is for fuzzy non-definitive statements.

    Suffice it to say Garland, and Weiss need to be subpoenaed for further testimony.

    1. Steven J – I gave you “full authority” to clean your room, mow the lawn, and take out the garbage.
      That’s all you had to do, but Nooo, You had to go out and play with David Weiss and Matthew Graves all day.
      Didn’t you!

      Kind of seems familiar when you put it that way 😉

  16. Jonathan: When we say Trump is acting like a Mafia crime boss there is further evidence in Trump’s personal attacks on Special Counsel Jack Smith. Here is Trump’s latest post on Truth Social that got a meager 5 thousand re-posts:


    In other posts Trump calls Smith a “cheater” and “thug”. Trump often uses all caps in his posts now–when he is fearful and desperate. And Jack Smith is the 500 lb gorilla that Trump fears. Speaking of being “DERANGED” Trump’s post has a number of fact-free assertions. First, Trump is no long the President of the United States. When he left the WH with all that classified material he was a private citizen–and he remains so to this day. Second, the “CLINTON SOCKS CASE” is a ruse. For those who don’t remember, that involved Bill Clinton’s use of his socks drawer to hold his personal notes and audio recordings to prepare a book of his memoirs. Tom Fitton, who is not a lawyer but head of the right-wing Judicial Watch and is currently Trump’s “Rasputin” told Trump about a case he filed in court, suing NARA and claiming Clinton’s notes should be turned over to NARA. A federal court slapped down Fitton’s claim and ruled Clinton’s personal notes were not covered by the PRA. But Fitton keeps whispering in Trump’s ear: “Keep telling everyone you are governed only by the PRA and you had every right to take all that material!” So Trump listens only to his non-lawyer guru. Bizarre in the extreme!

    What is clear from Trump’s above quoted post is that he is now threatening Jack Smith but also his family and friends. Trump has done this before with Alvin Bragg and other judges. Threatening federal law enforcement officials is a crime. At the least Smith should bring this post to the attention of Judge Cannon who should tell Trump’s lawyers to warn their client against making threatening statements. But in desperate times desperate people do desperate things. We will probably see more of this from the Trumpster as the criminal prosecutions keep piling up.

    1. Can anyone explain to me: why is it that whenever allegations of Biden’s family criminal activity are being discussed, a Troll has to pop up and try to distract from the facts of what the conversation is about? Oh yes, because that’s what Trolls do, they try to gaslight the gullible.

      1. Since you asked, this may help.

        Dissociative Identity Disorder was formerly called Multiple Personality Disorder, e.g. Peter Hill, Svelaz, Wally, Gigi, Dennis, bug, et al

        Dissociative Identity Disorder symptoms include:

        Identity shifts. DID involves switching between at least two identities, also known as personality states, alters, multiples, splits, or plurals.

        Amnesia. This is different from occasional forgetfulness; it refers to a gap in time during everyday events, the inability to recall personal information, or forgetting your activities, such as waking up somewhere and not being able to recall how you got there.

        Depersonalization. This is the feeling of being disconnected from your physical self or having an “out of body” experience, like observing yourself from a passenger’s perspective or watching a movie of yourself.

        Derealization. This is the sensation of being disconnected from your physical environment, experiencing your surroundings as dream-like, or feeling like people and events aren’t real.

        Identity confusion. This means you may have a difficult time pinning down your core interests, goals, style, opinions, values, and beliefs.


    2. Now do Maxine Waters in Minneapolis outside the courthouse where Derick Chauvin was tried of killing a person who died from a 4X fentanyl overdose.

  17. If you’ve ever wondered how anyone can write a defense of the blatant corruption within this administration, just rephrase the line from the character Melvin Udall in the movie As Good As It Gets: take away reason and accountability. Of course corruption in government has existed since its inception, but it didn’t capture an entire political party. Which begs the question; is there one moment in our political history when the entire Democratic party decided it was time (safe) to let their communist freak flag fly?

    1. Karl Marx To Abraham Lincoln – Written Between November 22 & 29, 1864


      The workingmen of Europe feel sure that, as the American War of Independence initiated a new era of ascendancy for the middle class, so the American Antislavery War will do for the working classes. They consider it an earnest of the epoch to come that it fell to the lot of Abraham Lincoln, the single-minded son of the working class, to lead his country through the matchless struggle for the rescue of an enchained race and the reconstruction of a social world.

      Signed on behalf of the Central Council:

      Karl Marx

      1. re: George

        Wow, you are saying the leader of the Communists, Karl Marx, sent a letter to the Founder of the Republican Party?

        This might explain George W. Bush adopting the tactics of East Germany during the Cold War. Bush blacklisted enemies creating a nationwide network of “Fusion Centers”, tried to purge “political” enemies from the U.S. Department of Justice (Monica Goodling) and initiated a warrantless domestic spying. Bush’s AG then illegally abused the federal “Material Witness Statute” to dish out punishments in secret.

        It all makes sense now!

        1. Anon – wait, a letter sent in 1864 explains a politician’s actions in 2004 based on tactics an country that didn’t exist until 1945? Wow….

        2. Lincoln was a republican and democrats were pro-slavery before the political pole shift. Karl Marx and Abraham Lincoln were “soul mates.” Lincoln espoused Marx’s pejoratives “capitalist” and “fleece the people” before Marx was 20 – he may have coined them for Marx, for all we know. The conservative Constitution provides freedom and free enterprise sans dictatorship, and free people are free to “fleece” themselves by their spending habits? Lincoln suffered paranoid delusions of compulsory consumption, one presumes. There is nothing sinister about capital, or the gross worth of a person or company. Communism and the “dictatorship of the proletariat” “fleece” the people in communist countries. Capitalists don’t dictate, they market.

          Capital: All of a person or company’s wealth or assets.

          “These capitalists generally act harmoniously and in concert, to fleece the people.”

          – Abraham Lincoln, from his first speech as an Illinois state legislator, 1837

          “Everyone now is more or less a Socialist.”

          – Charles Dana, managing editor of the New York Tribune, and Lincoln’s assistant secretary of war, 1848

          “The goal of Socialism is Communism.”

          – Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

          “The workingmen of Europe feel sure that, as the American War of Independence initiated a new era of ascendancy for the middle class, so the American Antislavery War will do for the working classes. They consider it an earnest of the epoch to come that it fell to the lot of Abraham Lincoln, the single-minded son of the working class, to lead his country through the matchless struggle for the rescue of an enchained race and the reconstruction of a social world.”

          – Karl Marx and the First International Workingmen’s Association to Lincoln, 1864

          Letter of congratulation and commendation from Karl Marx to Abraham Lincoln: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/iwma/documents/1864/lincoln-letter.htm

    2. That’s not what “to beg a question” means. That has to be one of the most misused idioms in the English language. The actual meaning is to avoid a question using circular reasoning. People started misusing it heavily in the early aughts because apparently they thought it sounded cool. Otherwise I agree with you.

      1. Denoluccia,

        Yes, it annoys me every time I see it, like using “I” when it should be ‘me’. “You can come with him and I.” Grating.

        1. Yeah, almost as grating as misspelling someone’s name while attempting to make a point about grammar. But hey, you do you.

            1. 😎 It was a week of construction on a cabin for a pastor’s retreat. That explosion is what nearly happened to my knee on day 1.

              1. Pffft. Here I had you delivering choice sermons on the hill, having retreat staff to study and discuss in small groups the US Constitution, the Founding Fathers personal diaries, the Federalist Papers, and then converting all of California to dump Gavin Newsom into the Pacific….to baptize him of course


                Hope your knee heals soon!

      1. JAFO, one thing we’ve learned about the Democrats is they have a tell and that is Projection. The Steele Dossier is a prime example. So consider this; what if the root cause of why we are living in that moment are dossiers? Strzok and Page described Steele’s as an insurance policy. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least to learn that every employee of the federal government has a dossier on them outside of their personnel record. I believe we’ve reached the point that no one advances in their careers because their dossier is clean. On the contrary, advancement comes because what’s in their dossier ensures they will be a reliable member of the corruption class in government. The bigger the dossier, the more reliable they become.

        No dossier is bigger than Hillary Clinton’s. Well, maybe Joe Biden’s. Their near fatal error wasn’t in nominating her to run for president. It was doing so before they figured out how to make her electable in a system that wasn’t rigged. The next biggest dossier then is Joe Biden’s. Their fatal error was nominating him, not because he’s a disaster as president, but because his corruption is inextricably tied to his crack addict son. My guess is everything is unraveling for the corruption class because the Biden Crime Family’s corruption will take them all out.

        1. Complete agree, Olly. Question is…has it always been this way? If not, when did the current wink-and-a-nod corruption become so rampant it’s no longer ignorable? (Mespo reminded everyone on this very message board of a very important point earlier, you know Garland is lying when you see his lips move.)

          Then, can this corruption be weeded out after so much time has passed? The answer is of course, “Yes”, in one of two ways: Lawfully, through the Court system or ‘the other way’.

          1. JAFO: Moreover, “when did the current wink-and-a-nod corruption become so rampant it’s no longer ignoble?

          2. Question is…has it always been this way?

            JAFO, it is an absolute truth that power corrupts. The founding generation revolted from a monarch who wielded absolute power. Our system of government was designed as a check on the corruption that would inevitably follow the powers they were granted. So yes, corruption is a feature, not a bug of our system. The end-users, the citizens of this system, have been ignorantly conditioned to believe corruption is a bug that can be identified and weeded out simply by not voting for a particular political party.

            I don’t see the corruption getting weeded out. If it were a lawn and you tried weeding it out, you might have a patch of grass left. And unless something is done to require civics literacy, it’s not going to change.

            The other way is likely the only option that may work.

            1. I agree we’ll never have a weed-free government garden but one can hope ‘the other way’ will not be needed soon.

              1. Agreed. …it is the right of the people to alter or abolish… There’s a lot of altering to try before the ‘other.’

Leave a Reply

Res ipsa loquitur – The thing itself speaks