Wednesday, June 28, 2023

War of Words: AG Garland vs. Whistle-blower Shapley vs. Fed. Prosecutor Weiss

 

Three in GOP's hunt for entire Biden family
(One helpful, one questionable, one unknown)

The NY POST headline clearly shows what AG Merrick Garland faces as the GOP seeks to indict the entire Biden family or so it seems:

“AG Merrick Garland denies the DOJ is corrupt saying: Nothing could be further from the truth”

On June 23, AG Garland contradicted IRS Whistleblower Gary Shapley’s testimony, stating:As I said at the outset, David Weiss was appointed by President Trump as the U.S. Attorney in Delaware and assigned this matter during the previous administration and 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.”

This tracks with Garland’s earlier unequivocal testimony before the Sen. Judiciary Committee on March 1, 2023, when Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) sought clarification on whether Federal Prosecutor in DE, Davis Weiss, had the authority to bring charges outside the DE district, by asking: The U.S. Attorney in Delaware has been advised that he has full authority to bring cases in other jurisdictions if he feels it’s necessary, and Attorney General Garland replied, stressing that he would ensure Weiss would be able to do that.” 

The AG reiterated that point when Grassley inquired whether Weiss had … independent charging authority over certain criminal allegations against the President’s son outside the district of Delaware.

AG Garland said:He would have to bring the case in another district, but as I said, I promised to ensure that he is able to carry out his investigation and that he be able to run it and if he needs to bring it in another jurisdiction, he will have full authority to do that.”

That Garland March 1 testimony directly conflicted with what Weiss had told investigators during the meeting on October 7, 2022, and as an email from IRS whistleblower, Gary Shapley, sent after that meeting indicates that he believed Weiss’s statement that he lacked the authority to file charges against Hunter Biden in another district also conflicted with what Garland had previously told Congress.

Before Grassley quizzed Garland on Weiss’s authority, Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-TN) had asked Garland on April 26, 2022:Have you been briefed on the Hunter Biden investigation.”

Garland stated:Hunter Biden’s investigation … is being run by and supervised by the United States attorney for the District of Delaware. He is supervising the investigation. He is in charge of that investigation, and there will not be interference of any political or improper kind.”

Shapley’s testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee counters Garland’s claims that there would be no political or improper interference. 

But more significantly, the whistleblower’s testimony and the email he provided the House cannot be reconciled with Garland’s clarifying testimony to Grassley on March 1, 2023.

The Weiss letter to the House Judiciary Committee on June 7, 2023 states:I want to make clear that, as the Attorney General has stated, I have been granted ultimate authority over this matter, including responsibility for deciding where, when, and whether to file charges and for making decisions necessary to preserve the integrity of the prosecution, consistent with federal law, the Principles of Federal Prosecution, and Departmental regulations.”

The POST seems to imply that in signing that letter Weiss entangled himself in what appears to be a possible lie by Garland to Congress, or that Weiss deceived the senior-level officials responsible for the Hunter Biden investigation when he told them last October 7 that he was not the “deciding person” on filing any charges or not, so why then would he mislead DOJ’s team?

My 2 Cents: Talk about a complex issue as stated above about who lied? Wow...

So, is there a lie and liar? Is is AG Garland, DE Federal Prosecutor Weiss, or the IRS Whistleblower Shapley

Or are three right and simply mixing up or confusing the facts on purpose, or by accident? 

So, who will decide those questions on this critical issue? Stay tuned. 

Thanks for stopping..

No comments: