Advertisement

Latest News

August 14, 2023
|

The ‘Justice’ Department, at least for now, is behaving with impunity, like the sham court system of a police state.  Attorney General Merrick Garland and second-in-command Lisa Monaco must not care how obvious this is.  We’re just supposed to accept it.

It doesn’t even matter to Garland that with the simultaneous cases involving Presidents Trump and Biden --- especially the “classified documents” cases --- we have an A/B comparison that shows the dramatic inconsistencies in how the two are treated.  The two-tier ‘justice’ system could not be more clear.

We all know the mainstream media would be screaming bloody murder if the “Biden Inc.” stories being told now were about the Trump family.  Yet Hunter’s attorneys have actually praised Joe Biden’s emerging involvement in Hunter’s business as “the acts of a loving father.”  (This after Dad repeatedly lied about having any contact with his son about business at all.)  And the media repeat this with a straight face.  They must practice this every day in the mirror until they can do it.

Legal professor Jonathan Turley originally praised the selection of Merrick Garland as attorney general (I can’t imagine why --- what a bullet we dodged as a country when he didn’t make SCOTUS!), but he now says he has come to see Garland as a failure.  Garland’s decision to appoint David Weiss as special counsel to investigate the Biden finances “captures,” he said, “why I have lost faith in his leadership --- and why his department is at one of the lowest levels of public trust.”

But Garland had to think he could get away with appointing Weiss, even though Weiss headed an investigation that has been repeatedly trashed by IRS whistleblowers as essentially “fixed.”  Those agents say they were prevented from even asking about Joe Biden and that the Bidens were tipped off to planned searches.  And as his so-called investigation stretched ever longer, Weiss could have extended the statute of limitations on various financial crimes during a couple of key years but made the decision not to.

If we knew for sure Garland was deliberately TRYING to help the Bidens, what would he be doing differently?

Garland also worked with Biden’s attorneys on the “sweetheart” deal that even would have given Hunter immunity for yet-indicted crimes, such as failure to register as a foreign agent under the FARA law.  That would’ve sailed right on through if Judge Maryellen Norieka hadn’t read the tiny print.

“Garland’s failure of leadership has undermined key cases,” Turley says.  A Harvard-Harris poll conducted this summer showed that 55 percent said they view the Trump indictment as “politically motivated” and 56 percent believe that it constitutes election interference.  This is good news; it tells us that over half of Americans polled finally have a CLUE.  It should be more like 90 percent at this point, but still.

Recall that when John Durham was appointed special counsel, he was serving as U.S. attorney from Connecticut.  Since special counsels are supposed to come from outside government --- that’s what makes them “special” --- Durham resigned as U.S. attorney before taking that authority.  Weiss isn’t doing that; he’s setting a new precedent, as Garland has allowed him to violate the rule by continuing to serve as U.S. attorney while being special counsel.  (As we’ve discussed, the rule has no teeth.)  Garland has gone even farther by appointing Weiss, someone who stands accused of conflicts of interest and false statements that involve this very case.

Another problem:  Garland is apparently keeping the focus on Hunter Biden.  The ‘Justice’ Department, Turley says, is still refusing to respond to questions on the possible inclusion of Joe Biden in the investigation.

Turley says Garland has “virtually ensured” that Congress will pursue an impeachment inquiry, because it’s really the only avenue open to them.  Turley sees impeachment as a sort of “constitutional Kryptonite,” as “no court could seriously question the right and duty of Congress to get to the bottom of corruption allegations against the President without delay.”  (At first, we assumed Turley’s talking about impeaching Garland, but he obviously means the President.) Weiss, as special counsel in an “ongoing investigation,” can refuse to answer questions before Congress, but they’ll have authority to demand answers from fact witnesses, including Biden family members.

We’d add one note of caution:  California Rep. Darrell Issa, a former Director of National Intelligence, said over the weekend that a full investigation needs to be done and a powerful, unassailable case made before an impeachment is held in the House (I've been making the exact same point in media appearances for the past month.) Otherwise, the Senate will just acquit in about five minutes.  The evidence has to be so massive and so incontrovertible that even the Senate HAS to agree.  But in just the past few weeks, it seems we’re just about there.  More will break this week.

https://jonathanturley.org/2023/08/13/shoeless-joe-and-the-fixing-of-the-biden-scandal/#more-208434

Roger Kimball at AMERICAN GREATNESS has introduced a new concept that needs to catch on.  You’ve heard of contempt of court and contempt of Congress --- what about “contempt of public”?

“I think it should be added to our vocabulary if not our code of laws,” he says.  He’s making the same point we have in the last couple of days about more and more “norms” being trashed and institutions that were set up to provide checks and balances being stomped on with cleats.

“It names a grievous assault on the community,” he says. “By making a travesty of the rules and institutions that undergird our societal life, contempt of public threatens to undermine that essential if often hard-to-define societal lubricant:  trust.”

In this must-read piece, Kimball calls the appointment of Weiss as special counsel “a multifaceted act of public contempt.”  It’s entirely possible, he says, that with the boldness being used to pursue Trump, he might win the nomination, and then the election, from jail.  At least then, when he pardoned himself, most Americans would know his convictions had been politically based.

https://amgreatness.com/2023/08/13/introducing-contempt-of-public/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=act_eng&seyid=82720

Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin, ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, a man capable of saying absolutely anything his party wants him to say no matter how obviously untrue, had some tough sledding this Sunday on CNN, when even Jake Tapper acknowledged that what Joe Biden had said about Hunter not making money in China was untrue.  All Raskin could do was try to shift the conversation to Trump.  Pretty hilarious.

(NOTE:  We apologize for the use of the expression “the walls are closing in” that appears in the linked-to piece.  How many times have we all heard that one?  Even though the walls finally do appear to be...well, you know...we’d prefer it if news outlets didn’t copy each other’s verbiage quite so much.)

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2023/08/13/raskin-finally-forced-to-admit-a-little-reality-about-the-biden-scandal-n792135

Speaking of people like Raskin who will say anything, Hunter attorney Abbe Lowell spoke with Kaitlin Collins on CNN and blamed the failure of the plea agreement on “every MAGA right-wing fanatic.”  He blamed Trump, too, for “trying to use Hunter Biden to explain his own conduct.”  I didn’t say it had to make sense.

https://redstate.com/mccabe/2023/08/13/hunter-biden-lawyer-abbe-lowell-blames-every-maga-right-wing-fanatic-for-plea-deal-fail-n792050

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!
Captcha

More Stories

Hunter doesn’t take the stand; defense hopes jury won’t enforce law

Hunter on trial for gun charges, Day 3

Leave A Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!
Captcha

Comments 1-1 of 1

  • Patrick Canan

    08/16/2023 05:45 PM

    Weiss is NOT a Garland appointee, he IS a Trump/Barr appointee.
    Maybe I missed it... have you spoken out against threatening violence to judges and jury members?