Garland shocks GOP lawmaker with answer over simple question about Hunter Biden probe — then he gets defensive

[rebelmouse-proxy-image,6,0,101 crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//" expand=1]

Attorney General Merrick Garland claimed Wednesday that he cannot "recollect" whether he discussed the Hunter Biden investigation with FBI leadership.

At an intense House Judiciary Committee hearing, Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.) asked Garland if he has contacted FBI headquarters about the investigation. The question is important because Garland has repeatedly promised not to interfere in the Hunter Biden probe.

"Have you had personal contact with anyone at FBI headquarters about the Hunter Biden investigation?" Johnson asked.

After hemming and hawing, Garland finally responded, "I don't recollect the answer to that question."

Garland's answer — the vague language and the claim that he allegedly cannot remember such a significant detail — left Johnson astonished.

"I'm sorry. I'm sorry. You don't recollect — you don't recollect whether you talked to anyone at FBI headquarters about an investigation into the president's son?" the Republican lawmaker followed up.

"I don't believe that I did," Garland answered.

— (@)

Garland, instead, repeated his previous assertions: that he has told Congress that he will not interfere in the investigation. He refused, however, to say much about what he has done. In fact, when Johnson pressed him about conversations with special counsel David Weiss, Garland got defensive.

"Under oath, my testimony today is that I promised the Senate I would not intrude in his investigation. I do not intend to discuss internal Justice Department deliberations, whether or not I had them," Garland said.

While Garland refused to provide substantive and clear answers to most of Johnson's question, Garland did choose one to answer definitively.

When asked if the IRS whistleblowers are lying, Garland — without calling them liars — described their under-oath testimony that political interference hamstrung the Hunter Biden investigation as "an opinion."

Still, Garland appeared to confirm their claim that Weiss did not have authority to charge Hunter for any crime in any jurisdiction.

Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R) asked Garland about claims that other U.S. attorneys in Washington, D.C., and the Central District of California blocked Weiss from charging Hunter in their jurisdictions. In response, Garland talked out of both sides of his mouth — denying and appearing to confirm the claim.

"No one had the authority to turn him down," Garland claimed. "They could refuse to partner with him."

"You can use whatever language — 'refuse to partner' is [the same as] turning down," Jordan fired back.

— (@)

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

'Don't fall for it': Hunter Biden indictment raises serious concerns — especially about what is missing so far

[rebelmouse-proxy-image,0,0,0 crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//" expand=1]

Hunter Biden was indicted on three felony gun charges on Thursday. The development, a far cry from the prior sweetheart plea deal, drew scrutiny and raised more questions than answers.

Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, for instance, called the indictment a "fig leaf" and urged Americans not to "fall for it."

"Don't fall for it," Ramaswamy said. "This is a fig leaf designed to deflect attention away from the real problem: the Biden family is selling out U.S. foreign policy for their own family’s private financial gain. That's really what’s wrong, and we must hold politicians in both major political parties when they use our foreign policy to enrich their family members."

— (@)

Former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy raised similar concerns.

Speaking on Fox News, McCarthy called the gun charges the only criminal charges "that this prosecutor could've brought against Hunter in which Hunter's father is not implicated."

"Everything else, the most important conduct in the case, all involves the sale of Joe Biden's political influence," he explained. "That is still out there, hasn't been brought, and ... it's been slow-walked so that even if he started to bring tax cases now, [Weiss] made sure that the three years in which Joe Biden was vice president in the Obama administration, those years are no longer open to be prosecuted. Charges arising out of that have now been time-barred."

Constitutional law scholar Jonathan Turley agreed that what special counsel David Weiss is not pursuing — at least from the public's perspective — is more important than what he has charged thus far.

"It's conspicuous ... as to what was not charged. They were giving out [Foreign Agents Registration Act] charges against Trump officials with great speed and alacrity. You know, they hit Paul Manafort with charges based on the same facts," Turley said on Fox News.

He explained:

What the media is ignoring is these uncharged crimes do have one common possible motive: When you don’t declare yourself a foreign agent, when you don’t declare income, when you create these questionable international transfers, all of them can effectively succeed in hiding that trail.

If you declare income, you got to say where the income came from. If you declare yourself a foreign agent, you have to explain what you’re doing for foreign governments. And if you create this labyrinth of accounts through different shell companies and through different banks, it makes it harder for people to see those transfers. All of that fits a unified theory of an influence peddling scheme that did involve potential criminal acts so I think it’s rather obvious that the one outlier, the gun charge, is the only thing that has been charged.

Attorney Mike Davis, a former law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, also urged Americans, "Don’t be fooled."

"Weiss, handpicked by both Democrat home-state senators in Delaware, let the statute of limitations expire on serious tax charges, buried evidence deemed credible by the Pittsburgh U.S. Attorney of the Bidens' alleged foreign bribery schemes, and attempted to give Hunter a sweetheart deal with secret, broad immunity that protected President Biden," Davis said.

"[W]here are Hunter's charges related to foreign corruption, acting as an unregistered foreign agent, tax evasion, wire fraud, and other criminal charges that could implicate President Biden?" Davis asked.

— (@)

The indictment came two days after House Republicans launched an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden over allegations of corruption. Republicans allege that Biden, as vice president, was engaged in a "criminal bribery scheme" that involved "an exchange of money for policy decisions."

Biden denies any wrongdoing, and the White House is working with the media to ramp up scrutiny of the allegations themselves — not scrutiny of those with power, the Bidens.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Hunter Biden indicted on felony gun charges, faces up to 25 years in federal prison

[rebelmouse-proxy-image,0,159,0 crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//" expand=1]

Special counsel David Weiss has secured an indictment against Hunter Biden on three counts of felony gun charges.

Court documents show that a grand jury indicted Biden on two felony charges for allegedly lying on an ATF Form 4473 when he purchased a Colt Cobra revolver in October 2018. That is the same firearm that Hallie Biden, the widow of Hunter's older brother, allegedly discarded in a trash dumpster.

The third count alleges that Biden illegally possessed the firearm while being the user of illegal narcotics.

If convicted, Biden faces a maximum sentence of 25 years in federal prison.

Last week, Weiss filed court documents indicating that an indictment was forthcoming. That itself was significant news because less than three months ago, Weiss had announced a sweetheart plea deal for the first son. That deal included a pretrial diversion agreement with Biden for the gun charge. That agreement would have allowed Biden to avoid prosecution if he abided by its stipulations.

But that deal fell apart in late July when a federal judge questioned the constitutionality and unusual nature of the deal, which included a broad immunity agreement.

And what makes the indictment significant is that it encompasses both crimes that Biden allegedly committed.

Initially, Weiss only accused Biden of being the user of a controlled substance in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S. Code § 922(g)(3). Now, however, Weiss asserts that Biden not only broke that federal statute but also alleges he broke 18 U.S. Code § 922(a)(6) when he allegedly lied on the ATF form.

Meanwhile, the indictment is likely to set off a new legal battle between Weiss and Biden's attorneys, who claim the diversion agreement remains in effect. Prosecutors, on the other hand, say it never took effect because a U.S. probation officer never signed it.

And the indictment is likely not the last of Biden's legal troubles.

After the plea deal collapsed in July, a federal court agreed to vacate the tax charges that Weiss had filed against Biden as part of the original deal. Weiss told the court he planned to refile criminal charges against Biden in other jurisdictions, likely the venues where the alleged crimes took place: the Central District of California and the District of Columbia.

A court date has not yet been set for Biden. The court has issued a summons.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

IRS whistleblower's handwritten notes are released, corroborating explosive claim at heart of Hunter Biden investigation

[rebelmouse-proxy-image,0,45,0 crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//" expand=1]

Lawyers for IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley released on Wednesday his personal handwritten notes from a critical meeting with U.S. Attorney David Weiss last October.

Shapley, a senior supervisory agent who worked the Hunter Biden investigation, testified to Congress that Weiss admitted in a meeting on Oct. 7, 2022, that he was not the "deciding official on whether charges are filed" against the first son. Senior FBI agent Thomas Sobocinski, who also attended that meeting, has challenged Shapely's testimony, telling House investigators that he did not remember Weiss saying what Shapely claims.

Importantly, Sobocinski did not memorialize the meeting with notes or emails — but Shapely did.

"Weiss stated — He is not the deciding person," Shapely wrote in notes taking during the Oct. 7 meeting.

— (@)

The handwritten notes also corroborate another key allegation: that Weiss could not bring charges in other jurisdictions without receiving outside approval despite Attorney General Merrick Garland claiming that Weiss had ultimate authority to bring any charges against Hunter in any jurisdiction.

"USA CA — [Martin] Estrada in charge of authorizing these charges in that jurisdiction," Shapley noted. "Weiss requested Special Counsel status in D.C. + Main DOJ said 'no' — follow the process."

That Estrada, a Biden nominee, blocked Weiss from bringing charges against Hunter in the Central District of California was independently corroborated by the New York Times. Weiss' decision to vacate charges against Hunter in Delaware — with the intention of refiling them in at least one of the other two jurisdictions — also strongly suggests that Weiss did not possess unilateral charging power, just as Shapley claimed.

Shapley's handwritten notes are backed up by an email he sent to his IRS supervisor on Oct. 7, 2022, after the meeting. That email, which was released by the House Ways and Means Committee, is a transcription of the notes that Shapley took during the meeting.

The supervisor — D.C. IRS Special Agent in Charge Darrell Waldon — also attended the Oct. 7 meeting and told Shapley his notes "covered it all."

House investigators have interviewed Waldon, and his testimony could be released as early as this week, CBS News reported.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Media desperately spin new FBI agent testimony to discredit IRS whistleblowers. But there's more to the story.

[rebelmouse-proxy-image,5,0,27 crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//" expand=1]

Democrats and prominent media outlets claimed Tuesday that a senior FBI official has undermined the credibility of two IRS whistleblowers. But upon closer examination, that's not what happened at all.

Last week, Thomas Sobocinski, the FBI special agent in charge of the Baltimore Field Office, testified before the House Judiciary Committee in a closed-door meeting. Transcripts of his testimony then leaked, and Hunter Biden's top defenders — Democrats and the legacy media — tried hard to spin it.

  • The New York Times: "F.B.I. Agent Undercuts Claims of Political Interference in Hunter Biden Inquiry
  • The Washington Post: "Senior FBI agent disputes some whistleblowers’ claims about Hunter Biden probe"
  • Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.): "Only hours after Republicans launched their impeachment stunt it's already falling apart as the stories of two of their 'whistleblowers' start to unravel."

Sobocinski, according to the Post and Times, denied that Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss — now a special counsel — told investigators he lacked authority to charge the first son outside of his jurisdiction.

Specifically, IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley alleges that Weiss told FBI and IRS investigators in a meeting last October that he was not the "deciding official on whether charges are filed." Sobocinski, who attended that meeting, told House investigators he did not remember Weiss saying that.

Sobocinski admitted there was a "bureaucratic administrative process" that Weiss needed to follow to bring charges outside Delaware, but Sobocinski said he always felt that Weiss "had the authority to bring whatever he needed to do." However, Sobocinski also admitted he did not take notes of the meeting during or afterward, whereas Shapley did memorialize the meeting with notes and emails.

What neither the Post nor the Times included in their stories is the fact that two attorneys accompanied Sobocinski to his testimony, one from the FBI and another from the DOJ (the Post disclosed the DOJ attorney). According to the Federalist, those attorneys were not representing Sobocinski — but the government.

That's an important fact when you learn that under questioning about Weiss' authority, one of the government lawyers paused the testimony to speak with Sobocinski off the record. And when Sobocinski returned, he began hedging on his assertion that Weiss had the authority to charge Hunter Biden whenever and wherever.

Here is what Sobocinski said, according to the Federalist, which obtained a copy of his testimony:

So for us, when it comes to charging decisions, that’s not an FBI role. I always assume that the U.S. Attorney’s Office that I am working with has some authority to do it in their venue. And if they don’t, there are administrative ways in which cases are brought to other districts in the U.S. That’s something I’ve worked with regularly throughout my career. There are various ways that happens. We can transfer a case. I have a general sense that David could go to — Mr. Weiss could go to another district. He could ask to have that joined. If it’s not, then he goes back for an administrative authority to bring the case on his own. But it’s administrative in nature. At no point did I think he did not have that authority to do all of those steps with all that we were looking at.

Remember: Even the New York Times independently corroborated the claim that Weiss could not charge Hunter Biden in any jurisdiction he wanted. Couple that with the fact that on the same day that Attorney General Merrick Garland announced Weiss as a special counsel, Weiss filed court documents requesting that the charges against Hunter Biden in Delaware to be vacated so that he could refile them in other jurisdictions, the two in which he was reportedly blocked.

Two important questions are thus raised: Why would Weiss need special counsel powers if he already had the authority to do what he needed? And why would he move the charges to different jurisdictions if he wasn't initially blocked?

Meanwhile, the Times suggested that Sobocinski's testimony exonerates the investigation of claims of "political interference." But the question the Times cited referred to whether Sobocinski believes President Joe Biden himself interfered. No one is arguing that.

Rather, the allegation is that career DOJ officials slow-walked the investigation. To that point, the Post reported that Sobocinski agrees with that claim.

"Sobocinski ... agreed with the IRS whistleblowers that Weiss had moved slowly in making a charging decision," the Post reported.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

If Barr had the opportunity to appoint a special counsel to investigate Hunter Biden, then WHY didn’t he?

[rebelmouse-proxy-image,0,0,0 crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//" expand=1]

President Donald Trump fired Bill Barr when he thought the then-attorney general wasn’t doing enough to investigate illicit campaign activity. According to Mark Levin, this is why Barr is now “on a seek-and-destroy mission.”

“So much so that he has defended the documents case against Trump, even though if you step back and say to yourself: ‘You’re prepared to put this man in prison for the rest of his life so he dies in prison over the documents case?’ Are you kidding somebody?” Levin asks.

Barr had also refused to appoint a special counsel in the Hunter Biden scandal — and it’s coming back to haunt him.

“By not appointing a special counsel, Bill Barr in effect limited the authority of the investigation,” Levin says, before playing a clip of Barr being called out on his decision by a news anchor.

“Do you believe a special counsel should be appointed now on the Hunter Biden matter, and do you regret not appointing one?” the anchor asks Barr.

Barr tells him no, he doesn’t regret it because “in order to appoint a special counsel, you have to have a conflict, or should have a conflict of interest. I had no conflict of interest.”

Levin isn’t buying it.

“He was appointed by Donald Trump. Hunter Biden is the son of the incoming president. That certainly creates an appearance of a conflict of interest,” Levin comments. “This is what we call bull crap,” he adds.

While Barr did not appoint a special counsel, Levin believes that as soon as a Republican is back in office, that person need to take things up a notch.

“They need to appoint a special counsel to investigate Joe Biden.”

Want more from Mark Levin?

To enjoy more of "the Great One" — Mark Levin as you've never seen him before — subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Send THIS to a Biden voter

[rebelmouse-proxy-image,0,200,0 crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//" expand=1]

Hunter Biden just might be the most irresponsible criminal of all time, and he isn't trying to hide it.

Leaving his laptop at a computer repair shop is among one of the self-defeating things he’s done, giving America all sorts of insights into what he — and his father — have been up to.

“You can say, ‘Oh, well, Joe Biden didn’t know any of this,’ but you can’t say there’s no evidence,” Stu Burgiere says.

And even the Washington Post is airing the receipts.

The Post brought attention to a contentious debate during which Joe Biden claimed his son made no money in China. The outlet then mentioned that in court last week, Hunter said he earned hundreds of thousands of dollars from Chinese business deals.

Then, the House GOP released bank records of the payments Hunter Biden received from Russian oligarchs and others, and the total cleared was $20 million.

Stu recalls that the response by the left and the media was to say something along the lines of, “They showed $20 million being transferred to all sorts of members of the Biden family, but not directly to Joe. Where’s the proof? Where’s the evidence of the transfer to Joe?”

“First of all, are we children here? The guy's vice president of the United States,” Stu continues. “He’s not going to get a Venmo from some Russian oligarch. That’s not how this works.”

Stu notes that while the media seems willing to sweep any foreign business dealings by the Biden Crime Family under the rug, they spent nearly all their airtime trying to take down Trump for supposedly colluding with Russia.

“This is the same media that spent years and years and years and years on Russia, with every little development every day being ‘the walls are closing in and evidence has finally come to prove all our accusations against Donald Trump,’ and that evidence never showed up,” Stu adds.

Want more from Stu?

To enjoy more of Stu's lethal wit, wisdom, and mockery, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Is this the END of the Biden dynasty?

[rebelmouse-proxy-image,0,200,0 crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//" expand=1]

The two IRS whistleblowers have been unwavering in their accusations, and it’s not looking good for the Bidens.

The House Oversight Committee just heard from Joseph Ziegler and Gary Shapley as they continue to claim that the Justice Department politicized the Hunter Biden criminal probe and that the Bidens have been making money under the table.

Ziegler is a 13-year IRS special agent with the Criminal Investigation Division, while Shapley is a 14-year IRS special agent as well as Ziegler’s supervisor.

At an IRS whistleblower hearing, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) praised their testimonies.

“You know whose story hasn’t changed? These two guys. Their testimony has been consistent throughout. Their testimony has been the same. And guess what? Two days ago, an FBI agent confirmed their testimony,” Jordan said.

“Who are you gonna believe?” he continued, adding, “The Justice Department can’t get their story straight. Changed three times in thirty-three days.”

“I think I’ll believe these guys,” Jordan said as he pointed to the whistleblowers. “They’re the ones telling the truth.”

Pat Gray agrees with Jordan.

“I believe it too,” he says, though he and his panel admit it's hard to be a fan of the IRS at times.

Ziegler, the most recent whistleblower to come out, explained how the case against Hunter Biden unfolded.

“While the impression has been conveyed by the U.S. attorney in Delaware that he has similar powers to that of a special counsel in this case, free rein to do as needed, that was not the case,” Ziegler said, adding that the U.S. attorney was “constantly hamstrung, limited, and marginalized by DOJ officials as well as other U.S. attorneys.”

Ziegler, who has self-described as a “gay Democrat,” testified that he still thinks a “special counsel is necessary for this investigation.”

Ziegler also mentioned that the DOJ’s public documents on action against Hunter Biden offer zero indication that the first son will be required to amend his false tax return for 2018.

Want more from Pat Gray?

To enjoy more of Pat's biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.