Garland appoints/elevates Wiess to Special Counsel Role

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is almost comical watching people fall over themselves to say that someone that Trump appointed and who was *asked for by name* by the GOP to be appointed social counsel is all of a sudden a lackey of the Biden administration and is now unqualified to do the job. Maybe, just maybe this guy knows a little more about the situation than you do.

Garland did exactly what the right has been clamoring for. So sit down.

Yea, I'm confused why the Rs are upset about Weiss being appointed **WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR HIM TO BE APPOINTED**. I try not to get into the Rs heads too much these days, but this one is a real head scratcher.

Can a R explain why now Weiss is unfit when he was appointed by Trump and Rs wanted him?

1. They didn't.
2. A special prosecutor should have been appointed YEARS ago because of the conflict of interest. We have Biden's DOJ investigating a member of Biden's family in which Biden himself could be implicated. If this doesn't scream conflict of interest, I don't know what does.
3. It should have been someone from OUTSIDE the government BECAUSE of the conflict of interest.
4. Weiss has demonstrated through his actions... letting the statute of limitations lapse, agreeing to a sweetheart deal, not allowing investigators do a complete investigation.... that he should not continue in this role.

Are you saying that Trump’s DOJ didn’t investigate any of the Bidens? Why not?

I am saying that Weiss has spent 5 years obstructing and slow walking this case. He did NOT properly investigate this case, as the whistleblower testimony indicates. Whether he was handcuffed by Biden's DOJ or part of a coverup remains to be seen.
You cannot possibly look at the plea deal that was proposed by Weiss and claim he did an effective job. It was a joke. He thought he would pull something over on the court. Fortunately, he got a decent judge who asked the right questions.

The whistleblowers specifically have stated that they have no knowledge of illegality. How is this hard to understand?

You must not have listened to the IRS whistleblowers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is almost comical watching people fall over themselves to say that someone that Trump appointed and who was *asked for by name* by the GOP to be appointed social counsel is all of a sudden a lackey of the Biden administration and is now unqualified to do the job. Maybe, just maybe this guy knows a little more about the situation than you do.

Garland did exactly what the right has been clamoring for. So sit down.

Yea, I'm confused why the Rs are upset about Weiss being appointed **WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR HIM TO BE APPOINTED**. I try not to get into the Rs heads too much these days, but this one is a real head scratcher.

Can a R explain why now Weiss is unfit when he was appointed by Trump and Rs wanted him?

1. They didn't.
2. A special prosecutor should have been appointed YEARS ago because of the conflict of interest. We have Biden's DOJ investigating a member of Biden's family in which Biden himself could be implicated. If this doesn't scream conflict of interest, I don't know what does.
3. It should have been someone from OUTSIDE the government BECAUSE of the conflict of interest.
4. Weiss has demonstrated through his actions... letting the statute of limitations lapse, agreeing to a sweetheart deal, not allowing investigators do a complete investigation.... that he should not continue in this role.

Are you saying that Trump’s DOJ didn’t investigate any of the Bidens? Why not?

I am saying that Weiss has spent 5 years obstructing and slow walking this case. He did NOT properly investigate this case, as the whistleblower testimony indicates. Whether he was handcuffed by Biden's DOJ or part of a coverup remains to be seen.
You cannot possibly look at the plea deal that was proposed by Weiss and claim he did an effective job. It was a joke. He thought he would pull something over on the court. Fortunately, he got a decent judge who asked the right questions.

Or, maybe he has spent 5 years investigating and hasn't found anything illegal. You realize that is an option here right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is almost comical watching people fall over themselves to say that someone that Trump appointed and who was *asked for by name* by the GOP to be appointed social counsel is all of a sudden a lackey of the Biden administration and is now unqualified to do the job. Maybe, just maybe this guy knows a little more about the situation than you do.

Garland did exactly what the right has been clamoring for. So sit down.

Yea, I'm confused why the Rs are upset about Weiss being appointed **WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR HIM TO BE APPOINTED**. I try not to get into the Rs heads too much these days, but this one is a real head scratcher.

Can a R explain why now Weiss is unfit when he was appointed by Trump and Rs wanted him?

1. They didn't.
2. A special prosecutor should have been appointed YEARS ago because of the conflict of interest. We have Biden's DOJ investigating a member of Biden's family in which Biden himself could be implicated. If this doesn't scream conflict of interest, I don't know what does.
3. It should have been someone from OUTSIDE the government BECAUSE of the conflict of interest.
4. Weiss has demonstrated through his actions... letting the statute of limitations lapse, agreeing to a sweetheart deal, not allowing investigators do a complete investigation.... that he should not continue in this role.

Are you saying that Trump’s DOJ didn’t investigate any of the Bidens? Why not?

I am saying that Weiss has spent 5 years obstructing and slow walking this case. He did NOT properly investigate this case, as the whistleblower testimony indicates. Whether he was handcuffed by Biden's DOJ or part of a coverup remains to be seen.
You cannot possibly look at the plea deal that was proposed by Weiss and claim he did an effective job. It was a joke. He thought he would pull something over on the court. Fortunately, he got a decent judge who asked the right questions.

The whistleblowers specifically have stated that they have no knowledge of illegality. How is this hard to understand?

You must not have listened to the IRS whistleblowers.

I listened to their words and read their testimony. I am not taking the liberty of inferring facts as many who believe there was malfeasance are doing.

[Anonymous]

Weiss let many of the charges lapse by slow rolling the investigation.

Then, he gave a sweetheart deal on the things he did charge.

No one could get away with failing to register as a foreign agent, tax evasion, running 20M through shell companies to hide foreign payments, lying on a background check for firearms, and all the minor kiddy stuff on Hunter's laptop that make it unreleasable. Please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is almost comical watching people fall over themselves to say that someone that Trump appointed and who was *asked for by name* by the GOP to be appointed social counsel is all of a sudden a lackey of the Biden administration and is now unqualified to do the job. Maybe, just maybe this guy knows a little more about the situation than you do.

Garland did exactly what the right has been clamoring for. So sit down.

Yea, I'm confused why the Rs are upset about Weiss being appointed **WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR HIM TO BE APPOINTED**. I try not to get into the Rs heads too much these days, but this one is a real head scratcher.

Can a R explain why now Weiss is unfit when he was appointed by Trump and Rs wanted him?

1. They didn't.
2. A special prosecutor should have been appointed YEARS ago because of the conflict of interest. We have Biden's DOJ investigating a member of Biden's family in which Biden himself could be implicated. If this doesn't scream conflict of interest, I don't know what does.
3. It should have been someone from OUTSIDE the government BECAUSE of the conflict of interest.
4. Weiss has demonstrated through his actions... letting the statute of limitations lapse, agreeing to a sweetheart deal, not allowing investigators do a complete investigation.... that he should not continue in this role.

1) the GOP most certainly asked specifically for Weiss, whom trump appointed to investigate Hunter Biden.
2) Hunter Biden is a private citizen who doesn't warrant a special counsel. To date, there is not a single shred of evidence implicating Joe in any of Hunter's business dealings.
3) Durham was not outside the government and he was just fine with you. How is this any different?
4) Weiss is following the facts where they take him, which to date is a tax charge that usually ends up in penalties and interest, not a pleas deal, and a gun charge that the 5th circuit has ruled is unconstitutional. D

Face it, if there were facts that would lead to more and serious charges, we would see them. As someone who voted for Joe, i can plainly state that if Hunter did something illegal he should be charged and tried for it. Same with Jared, Ivanka, Donald etc.

1. And, he has demonstrated he is not up to the job.
2. You have to be joking. This is Biden's DOJ investigating HIS son. Conflict of interest. I don't care if he is a private citizen.
And, you have to be ignorant not to see the connections to Joe.
3. With Durham, there was no conflict of interest.
4. Weiss allowed the most serious tax charges go away per statute of limitations. He is not following the facts. These investigators were told - specifically - not to look at "the Big Guy" and they were not allowed to investigate leads they had. They were specifically prevented.
When the DOJ prosecutor was asked if there was any precedence for such a plea deal, they said no. Because none exists.

Under Judge Maryellen Noreika’s questioning, DOJ prosecutor Leo Wise confirmed he was “not aware” of precedent for an agreement that agrees not to prosecute future crimes unrelated to the case or diverted charges, according to the hearing transcript.

Moreover, the judge saw from the beginning that the deal was unusual, noting early on that there are “some provisions in those agreements that are not standard and are different from what I normally see.”

“So have you ever seen — I think I just asked you this, but have you ever seen a Diversion Agreement where the agreement not to prosecute is so broad that it encompasses crimes in a different case?” the judge asked.

“No,” Wise replied. “And I would say, Your Honor, I don’t think it is broad in the sense that — ”

“We’re going to talk about that. You can sit down,” the judge interjected.

https://dailycaller.com/2023/07/27/doj-hunter-biden-deal-precedent/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is almost comical watching people fall over themselves to say that someone that Trump appointed and who was *asked for by name* by the GOP to be appointed social counsel is all of a sudden a lackey of the Biden administration and is now unqualified to do the job. Maybe, just maybe this guy knows a little more about the situation than you do.

Garland did exactly what the right has been clamoring for. So sit down.

Yea, I'm confused why the Rs are upset about Weiss being appointed **WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR HIM TO BE APPOINTED**. I try not to get into the Rs heads too much these days, but this one is a real head scratcher.

Can a R explain why now Weiss is unfit when he was appointed by Trump and Rs wanted him?

1. They didn't.
2. A special prosecutor should have been appointed YEARS ago because of the conflict of interest. We have Biden's DOJ investigating a member of Biden's family in which Biden himself could be implicated. If this doesn't scream conflict of interest, I don't know what does.
3. It should have been someone from OUTSIDE the government BECAUSE of the conflict of interest.
4. Weiss has demonstrated through his actions... letting the statute of limitations lapse, agreeing to a sweetheart deal, not allowing investigators do a complete investigation.... that he should not continue in this role.

Are you saying that Trump’s DOJ didn’t investigate any of the Bidens? Why not?

I am saying that Weiss has spent 5 years obstructing and slow walking this case. He did NOT properly investigate this case, as the whistleblower testimony indicates. Whether he was handcuffed by Biden's DOJ or part of a coverup remains to be seen.
You cannot possibly look at the plea deal that was proposed by Weiss and claim he did an effective job. It was a joke. He thought he would pull something over on the court. Fortunately, he got a decent judge who asked the right questions.

Or, maybe he has spent 5 years investigating and hasn't found anything illegal. You realize that is an option here right?

Good God you are dense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is almost comical watching people fall over themselves to say that someone that Trump appointed and who was *asked for by name* by the GOP to be appointed social counsel is all of a sudden a lackey of the Biden administration and is now unqualified to do the job. Maybe, just maybe this guy knows a little more about the situation than you do.

Garland did exactly what the right has been clamoring for. So sit down.

Yea, I'm confused why the Rs are upset about Weiss being appointed **WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR HIM TO BE APPOINTED**. I try not to get into the Rs heads too much these days, but this one is a real head scratcher.

Can a R explain why now Weiss is unfit when he was appointed by Trump and Rs wanted him?

1. They didn't.
2. A special prosecutor should have been appointed YEARS ago because of the conflict of interest. We have Biden's DOJ investigating a member of Biden's family in which Biden himself could be implicated. If this doesn't scream conflict of interest, I don't know what does.
3. It should have been someone from OUTSIDE the government BECAUSE of the conflict of interest.
4. Weiss has demonstrated through his actions... letting the statute of limitations lapse, agreeing to a sweetheart deal, not allowing investigators do a complete investigation.... that he should not continue in this role.

Are you saying that Trump’s DOJ didn’t investigate any of the Bidens? Why not?

I am saying that Weiss has spent 5 years obstructing and slow walking this case. He did NOT properly investigate this case, as the whistleblower testimony indicates. Whether he was handcuffed by Biden's DOJ or part of a coverup remains to be seen.
You cannot possibly look at the plea deal that was proposed by Weiss and claim he did an effective job. It was a joke. He thought he would pull something over on the court. Fortunately, he got a decent judge who asked the right questions.

Or, maybe he has spent 5 years investigating and hasn't found anything illegal. You realize that is an option here right?

Good God you are dense.

I follow the fact and do not listen to wild conspiracy theories. How about going on evidence presented and not conjecture and circumstantial BS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is almost comical watching people fall over themselves to say that someone that Trump appointed and who was *asked for by name* by the GOP to be appointed social counsel is all of a sudden a lackey of the Biden administration and is now unqualified to do the job. Maybe, just maybe this guy knows a little more about the situation than you do.

Garland did exactly what the right has been clamoring for. So sit down.

Yea, I'm confused why the Rs are upset about Weiss being appointed **WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR HIM TO BE APPOINTED**. I try not to get into the Rs heads too much these days, but this one is a real head scratcher.

Can a R explain why now Weiss is unfit when he was appointed by Trump and Rs wanted him?

1. They didn't.
2. A special prosecutor should have been appointed YEARS ago because of the conflict of interest. We have Biden's DOJ investigating a member of Biden's family in which Biden himself could be implicated. If this doesn't scream conflict of interest, I don't know what does.
3. It should have been someone from OUTSIDE the government BECAUSE of the conflict of interest.
4. Weiss has demonstrated through his actions... letting the statute of limitations lapse, agreeing to a sweetheart deal, not allowing investigators do a complete investigation.... that he should not continue in this role.

Are you saying that Trump’s DOJ didn’t investigate any of the Bidens? Why not?

I am saying that Weiss has spent 5 years obstructing and slow walking this case. He did NOT properly investigate this case, as the whistleblower testimony indicates. Whether he was handcuffed by Biden's DOJ or part of a coverup remains to be seen.
You cannot possibly look at the plea deal that was proposed by Weiss and claim he did an effective job. It was a joke. He thought he would pull something over on the court. Fortunately, he got a decent judge who asked the right questions.

The whistleblowers specifically have stated that they have no knowledge of illegality. How is this hard to understand?

This is the OPPOSITE of what they said. They said the HB should have been charged with FELONIES, not misdemeanors.
And, they weren't allowed to investigate any connections to Joe. They made that abundantly clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is almost comical watching people fall over themselves to say that someone that Trump appointed and who was *asked for by name* by the GOP to be appointed social counsel is all of a sudden a lackey of the Biden administration and is now unqualified to do the job. Maybe, just maybe this guy knows a little more about the situation than you do.

Garland did exactly what the right has been clamoring for. So sit down.

Yea, I'm confused why the Rs are upset about Weiss being appointed **WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR HIM TO BE APPOINTED**. I try not to get into the Rs heads too much these days, but this one is a real head scratcher.

Can a R explain why now Weiss is unfit when he was appointed by Trump and Rs wanted him?

1. They didn't.
2. A special prosecutor should have been appointed YEARS ago because of the conflict of interest. We have Biden's DOJ investigating a member of Biden's family in which Biden himself could be implicated. If this doesn't scream conflict of interest, I don't know what does.
3. It should have been someone from OUTSIDE the government BECAUSE of the conflict of interest.
4. Weiss has demonstrated through his actions... letting the statute of limitations lapse, agreeing to a sweetheart deal, not allowing investigators do a complete investigation.... that he should not continue in this role.

Are you saying that Trump’s DOJ didn’t investigate any of the Bidens? Why not?

I am saying that Weiss has spent 5 years obstructing and slow walking this case. He did NOT properly investigate this case, as the whistleblower testimony indicates. Whether he was handcuffed by Biden's DOJ or part of a coverup remains to be seen.
You cannot possibly look at the plea deal that was proposed by Weiss and claim he did an effective job. It was a joke. He thought he would pull something over on the court. Fortunately, he got a decent judge who asked the right questions.

Or, maybe he has spent 5 years investigating and hasn't found anything illegal. You realize that is an option here right?

Good God you are dense.

I follow the fact and do not listen to wild conspiracy theories. How about going on evidence presented and not conjecture and circumstantial BS.

One thing is for damned sure... you didn't listen to, or are completely ignoring the testimony of the whistleblowers if you think there was nothing illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is almost comical watching people fall over themselves to say that someone that Trump appointed and who was *asked for by name* by the GOP to be appointed social counsel is all of a sudden a lackey of the Biden administration and is now unqualified to do the job. Maybe, just maybe this guy knows a little more about the situation than you do.

Garland did exactly what the right has been clamoring for. So sit down.

Yea, I'm confused why the Rs are upset about Weiss being appointed **WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR HIM TO BE APPOINTED**. I try not to get into the Rs heads too much these days, but this one is a real head scratcher.

Can a R explain why now Weiss is unfit when he was appointed by Trump and Rs wanted him?

1. They didn't.
2. A special prosecutor should have been appointed YEARS ago because of the conflict of interest. We have Biden's DOJ investigating a member of Biden's family in which Biden himself could be implicated. If this doesn't scream conflict of interest, I don't know what does.
3. It should have been someone from OUTSIDE the government BECAUSE of the conflict of interest.
4. Weiss has demonstrated through his actions... letting the statute of limitations lapse, agreeing to a sweetheart deal, not allowing investigators do a complete investigation.... that he should not continue in this role.

Are you saying that Trump’s DOJ didn’t investigate any of the Bidens? Why not?

I am saying that Weiss has spent 5 years obstructing and slow walking this case. He did NOT properly investigate this case, as the whistleblower testimony indicates. Whether he was handcuffed by Biden's DOJ or part of a coverup remains to be seen.
You cannot possibly look at the plea deal that was proposed by Weiss and claim he did an effective job. It was a joke. He thought he would pull something over on the court. Fortunately, he got a decent judge who asked the right questions.

The whistleblowers specifically have stated that they have no knowledge of illegality. How is this hard to understand?

This is the OPPOSITE of what they said. They said the HB should have been charged with FELONIES, not misdemeanors.
And, they weren't allowed to investigate any connections to Joe. They made that abundantly clear.

They are also investigators and not prosecutors And the prosecutors determined to not have the evidence necessary to levy charges.

End of story.

[Anonymous]

DOJ did not just appoint Weiss as Special Counsel - they ALSO just filed to dismiss the misdemeanors in Delaware, the ONLY pending criminal charges against Hunter.
So this move does three things:
1. Clears existing charges against the First Crackhead.
2. Slows the roll of any prosecution with a reset, which conveniently gives them time to drag further and let the statute of limitations clock run on some more charges.
3. Give Weiss and DOJ in general cover to keep repeating the, "I cannot answer because there is an ongoing investigation," mantra.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is almost comical watching people fall over themselves to say that someone that Trump appointed and who was *asked for by name* by the GOP to be appointed social counsel is all of a sudden a lackey of the Biden administration and is now unqualified to do the job. Maybe, just maybe this guy knows a little more about the situation than you do.

Garland did exactly what the right has been clamoring for. So sit down.

Yea, I'm confused why the Rs are upset about Weiss being appointed **WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR HIM TO BE APPOINTED**. I try not to get into the Rs heads too much these days, but this one is a real head scratcher.

Can a R explain why now Weiss is unfit when he was appointed by Trump and Rs wanted him?

1. They didn't.
2. A special prosecutor should have been appointed YEARS ago because of the conflict of interest. We have Biden's DOJ investigating a member of Biden's family in which Biden himself could be implicated. If this doesn't scream conflict of interest, I don't know what does.
3. It should have been someone from OUTSIDE the government BECAUSE of the conflict of interest.
4. Weiss has demonstrated through his actions... letting the statute of limitations lapse, agreeing to a sweetheart deal, not allowing investigators do a complete investigation.... that he should not continue in this role.

They did ask for Weiss to be the special counsel.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/19/hunter-biden-probe-senate-republicans-seek-special-counsel-authority.html

More than 30 Senate Republicans asked Attorney General Merrick Garland on Monday to give the federal prosecutor [Weiss] who has been investigating Hunter Biden for several years “special counsel protections and authorities.”

The group, which includes Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, wrote in a letter to Garland that the move is warranted because the criminal investigation involves President Joe Biden’s son. They also contended it would “avoid the appearance of impropriety.”

Giving U.S. Attorney for Delaware David Weiss special counsel authority would also “provide additional assurances to the American people that the Hunter Biden investigation is free from political influence,” the letter argued.

Weiss was the special investigator, and Rs wanted him to be given "special counsel authority".


Once again, R revisionist history.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DOJ did not just appoint Weiss as Special Counsel - they ALSO just filed to dismiss the misdemeanors in Delaware, the ONLY pending criminal charges against Hunter.
So this move does three things:
1. Clears existing charges against the First Crackhead.
2. Slows the roll of any prosecution with a reset, which conveniently gives them time to drag further and let the statute of limitations clock run on some more charges.
3. Give Weiss and DOJ in general cover to keep repeating the, "I cannot answer because there is an ongoing investigation," mantra.

The charges were BS...they were only levied BECAUSE he is Hunter Biden. No average American gets charged with what Hunter did here.
If there are any crimes, they will be prosecuted.

Weiss will have to write a report just like Durham and Mueller did...if he ends up not charging anything else, it will be explained in that report.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is almost comical watching people fall over themselves to say that someone that Trump appointed and who was *asked for by name* by the GOP to be appointed social counsel is all of a sudden a lackey of the Biden administration and is now unqualified to do the job. Maybe, just maybe this guy knows a little more about the situation than you do.

Garland did exactly what the right has been clamoring for. So sit down.

Yea, I'm confused why the Rs are upset about Weiss being appointed **WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR HIM TO BE APPOINTED**. I try not to get into the Rs heads too much these days, but this one is a real head scratcher.

Can a R explain why now Weiss is unfit when he was appointed by Trump and Rs wanted him?

1. They didn't.
2. A special prosecutor should have been appointed YEARS ago because of the conflict of interest. We have Biden's DOJ investigating a member of Biden's family in which Biden himself could be implicated. If this doesn't scream conflict of interest, I don't know what does.
3. It should have been someone from OUTSIDE the government BECAUSE of the conflict of interest.
4. Weiss has demonstrated through his actions... letting the statute of limitations lapse, agreeing to a sweetheart deal, not allowing investigators do a complete investigation.... that he should not continue in this role.

2. So should the Small Man have appointed a SC or given Weiss SC status? Actually, what we had then was the Small Man's Justice Dept investigating his opponent's son. Perhaps, that was a conflict?? So, now, since Joe kept Weiss in place, he gets criticized for not giving him a SC status and now for giving him SC status. Hard to keep track of the changing criticisms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question.....

If Weiss has always had authority to decide when, where, and who to charge,(per Garland's comments) why does he need this status?

More important questions....

Why Weiss? It has been demonstrated that he was ineffective in handling this case so far. Not only through whistleblower testimony, but as evidenced by the appearance in court.

Is this to protect him from testifying before Congress?
Is this to ensure that charges will be minimal as we have seen thus far?
Is it an effort to protect Joe?

Time will tell.........

He was appointed precisely because he is ineffective.

Trump appointed an ineffective US Attorney?

I mean when did Trump have any great picks? He's distanced himself from the majority of people he hired for his administration. That seems to indicate poor judgment. Sounds like Republicans agree, which is good that we can all agree on something.

Does anyone know how the Senate works? And hence, where Weiss really came from?