RedState reported that AG Merrick Garland responded to questions regarding the sweetheart agreement given to Hunter Biden. The president’s child escaped jail with only two misdemeanors and pre-trial diversion despite five years of investigations and many other possible crimes including drug trafficking, sex fraud, false statements and tax fraud.
How did the situation get to this point? Garland called Gary Shapley, an IRS whistleblower who exposed the DOJ’s cover up of the case, a liar in a way that was not directly stated.
Garland responded to a question about whether the DOJ leadership intervened at any stage to prevent Weiss from accusing Hunter Biden of more serious crimes committed in other jurisdictions.
Garland’s choice to hedge when he had the opportunity to say “no” is incredibly telling. Garland may have been involved in the decision-making process, even though Weiss was the one who had the authority.
Shapley made this charge in his testimony before Congress, given under oath. Who’s telling it like it is? Shapley responded by issuing a statement through his lawyers, which can only be described in the same way as Garland calling Shapley’s bluff.
U.S. Attorney David Weiss informed six witnesses in a meeting held at the Delaware U.S. Attorney’s Office on October 7, 2022 that he had not been given authority to prosecute in other districts, and he therefore requested special counsel status.
Shapley has now, amazingly, named the six witnesses who were present at the meeting, including members of both the FBI and IRS investigation teams working on the Hunter Biden case. This certainly increases his credibility. Shapley’s credibility would certainly increase if he were telling the truth.
Garland, on the other hand, was at best coy, insisting Weiss was able to charge anywhere he wanted, but not answering if he had ever been stopped, even with “suggestions” from higher levels of the DOJ.
I find it more credible to believe a person who names names and is willing to testify under oath than a person who hides behind fanciful phrases, refusing to answer simple questions. It’s pretty clear that the DOJ intervened and set boundaries for Weiss.
It’s not surprising that Weiss plays along. Donald Trump’s appointment is often cited, but the former President was not known to do much research on mid-level appointments. Weiss could be protecting the DOJ, despite Trump’s nomination, from further backlash in a scandal that is entirely self-inflicted.
The questions won’t stop. Investigations into this case are not going to stop. Shapley may have the receipts, and Garland and Weiss need to buckle up.
