Garland appoints/elevates Wiess to Special Counsel Role

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. Special counsel is supposed to be "outside" government. Weiss is not.
2. This is a day late and a dollar short.
Statute of limitations is almost up. Stall tactic.

+1000 All they need is a good forensic account to put the dots together. But it might be too late to unravel all the transactions.

Ultimately, there were no transactions to Joe Biden. His income and reporting is fully accounted for, unless you believe he was committing tax fraud on the eve of his presidency.

Really? According to who?

According to his publicly available tax filings that go back several decades.

Um, maybe he didn’t report that income?

[Anonymous]

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.........

The GOP has been asking for this since January. Now they got it, and are upset about it. This is another "dog catches car" moment.

In between Weiss gave Hunter a sweetheart deal, and tried to hide it from the public and the judge in a manner that has never been done before.
They tried to give Hunter immunity while not requiring the judge to sign off on the deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, Special Counsel is supposed to be from OUTSIDE the government. Weiss remains US Attorney. Doesn't qualify.

You mean the way Durham was outside of government? Or Horowitz? You didn't complain about them, now , did you?

Horowitz was not a special counsel, and thus could not conduct a full investigation. Durham was not a legitimate appointment, and Barr covered it up by having Durham quit. He also hid the special counsel appointment itself. I'm surprised none of the defendants tried that angle.
Manafort tried a similar argument with Mueller.

Mueller had a similar problem. He was from outside government, but all his other people were the same people doing the investigation before.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, Special Counsel is supposed to be from OUTSIDE the government. Weiss remains US Attorney. Doesn't qualify.

Yep. It's a sham. You would think Garland would know the rules:

§ 600.3 Qualifications of the Special Counsel.

(a) An individual named as Special Counsel shall be a lawyer with a reputation for integrity and impartial decisionmaking, and with appropriate experience to ensure both that the investigation will be conducted ably, expeditiously and thoroughly, and that investigative and prosecutorial decisions will be supported by an informed understanding of the criminal law and Department of Justice policies. The Special Counsel shall be selected from outside the United States Government. Special Counsels shall agree that their responsibilities as Special Counsel shall take first precedence in their professional lives, and that it may be necessary to devote their full time to the investigation, depending on its complexity and the stage of the investigation.

Hmm, pray tell, what was Durham’s job right before he was appointed SC? And what other job did he have for the first 8 months of his SC tenure?

You can ask the same about Mueller.

Fact is.... Weiss is part of the DOJ. This is not a special counsel, but a DOJ investigation and it stinks to high heaven.

You didn't complain about Horowitz or Durham being DOJ employees. How is this any different?

Durham was retiring and giving up all other cases. Will Weiss?

The GOP House letter calling for a special counsel specifically asks for Weiss. Garland did so, and the right is STILL complaining, proving they will make EVERYTHING an issue.

Is this true? Can you post it? The GOP is such a set of hysterical nincompoops these days. Bring back the old GOP!!!!

Nevermind - it *is* true. I found it. How do these people sleep at night with their lies???

https://www.cornyn.senate.gov/news/cornyn-32-senate-republicans-call-for-hunter-biden-prosecutor-to-be-given-special-counsel-authority%EF%BF%BC/

Well well well. Hoisted by their own petard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, Special Counsel is supposed to be from OUTSIDE the government. Weiss remains US Attorney. Doesn't qualify.

Yep. It's a sham. You would think Garland would know the rules:

§ 600.3 Qualifications of the Special Counsel.

(a) An individual named as Special Counsel shall be a lawyer with a reputation for integrity and impartial decisionmaking, and with appropriate experience to ensure both that the investigation will be conducted ably, expeditiously and thoroughly, and that investigative and prosecutorial decisions will be supported by an informed understanding of the criminal law and Department of Justice policies. The Special Counsel shall be selected from outside the United States Government. Special Counsels shall agree that their responsibilities as Special Counsel shall take first precedence in their professional lives, and that it may be necessary to devote their full time to the investigation, depending on its complexity and the stage of the investigation.

Hmm, pray tell, what was Durham’s job right before he was appointed SC? And what other job did he have for the first 8 months of his SC tenure?

You can ask the same about Mueller.

Fact is.... Weiss is part of the DOJ. This is not a special counsel, but a DOJ investigation and it stinks to high heaven.

You didn't complain about Horowitz or Durham being DOJ employees. How is this any different?

Durham was retiring and giving up all other cases. Will Weiss?

The GOP House letter calling for a special counsel specifically asks for Weiss. Garland did so, and the right is STILL complaining, proving they will make EVERYTHING an issue.

Is this true? Can you post it? The GOP is such a set of hysterical nincompoops these days. Bring back the old GOP!!!!

Nevermind - it *is* true. I found it. How do these people sleep at night with their lies???

https://www.cornyn.senate.gov/news/cornyn-32-senate-republicans-call-for-hunter-biden-prosecutor-to-be-given-special-counsel-authority%EF%BF%BC/

Well well well. Hoisted by their own petard.

Look at the date. Things change, my friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, Special Counsel is supposed to be from OUTSIDE the government. Weiss remains US Attorney. Doesn't qualify.

Yep. It's a sham. You would think Garland would know the rules:

§ 600.3 Qualifications of the Special Counsel.

(a) An individual named as Special Counsel shall be a lawyer with a reputation for integrity and impartial decisionmaking, and with appropriate experience to ensure both that the investigation will be conducted ably, expeditiously and thoroughly, and that investigative and prosecutorial decisions will be supported by an informed understanding of the criminal law and Department of Justice policies. The Special Counsel shall be selected from outside the United States Government. Special Counsels shall agree that their responsibilities as Special Counsel shall take first precedence in their professional lives, and that it may be necessary to devote their full time to the investigation, depending on its complexity and the stage of the investigation.

Hmm, pray tell, what was Durham’s job right before he was appointed SC? And what other job did he have for the first 8 months of his SC tenure?

You can ask the same about Mueller.

Fact is.... Weiss is part of the DOJ. This is not a special counsel, but a DOJ investigation and it stinks to high heaven.

You didn't complain about Horowitz or Durham being DOJ employees. How is this any different?

Durham was retiring and giving up all other cases. Will Weiss?

The GOP House letter calling for a special counsel specifically asks for Weiss. Garland did so, and the right is STILL complaining, proving they will make EVERYTHING an issue.

Is this true? Can you post it? The GOP is such a set of hysterical nincompoops these days. Bring back the old GOP!!!!

Nevermind - it *is* true. I found it. How do these people sleep at night with their lies???

https://www.cornyn.senate.gov/news/cornyn-32-senate-republicans-call-for-hunter-biden-prosecutor-to-be-given-special-counsel-authority%EF%BF%BC/

Well well well. Hoisted by their own petard.

You do know that a lot has changed since this was requested:
1. Close to a year ago that letter was written.
2. Hunter was given (at least that is what they told us) a plea deal that fell through when the judge questioned the terms.
3. Whistleblowers have come forward and spoken publicly with valid accusations.
4. Since #2 fell through, administration is scrambling.

It is a day late and a dollar short to appoint a Special Counsel now. Especially one who cannot keep the story straight and who allowed prosecution to propose a plea deal earlier--that was exposed.

Again, It was September of 2022 when Cornyn wrote that letter.

[Anonymous]

I thought hunter was going to have to go to trial on the tax charges?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. Special counsel is supposed to be "outside" government. Weiss is not.
2. This is a day late and a dollar short.
Statute of limitations is almost up. Stall tactic.

+1000 All they need is a good forensic account to put the dots together. But it might be too late to unravel all the transactions.

Ultimately, there were no transactions to Joe Biden. His income and reporting is fully accounted for, unless you believe he was committing tax fraud on the eve of his presidency.

Really? According to who?

According to his publicly available tax filings that go back several decades.

Um, maybe he didn’t report that income?

Yes. That’s very likely. People with lifetime careers in public service and scrutinized tax records are known to do that 🙄

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought hunter was going to have to go to trial on the tax charges?

No?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, Special Counsel is supposed to be from OUTSIDE the government. Weiss remains US Attorney. Doesn't qualify.

Yep. It's a sham. You would think Garland would know the rules:

§ 600.3 Qualifications of the Special Counsel.

(a) An individual named as Special Counsel shall be a lawyer with a reputation for integrity and impartial decisionmaking, and with appropriate experience to ensure both that the investigation will be conducted ably, expeditiously and thoroughly, and that investigative and prosecutorial decisions will be supported by an informed understanding of the criminal law and Department of Justice policies. The Special Counsel shall be selected from outside the United States Government. Special Counsels shall agree that their responsibilities as Special Counsel shall take first precedence in their professional lives, and that it may be necessary to devote their full time to the investigation, depending on its complexity and the stage of the investigation.

Hmm, pray tell, what was Durham’s job right before he was appointed SC? And what other job did he have for the first 8 months of his SC tenure?

You can ask the same about Mueller.

Fact is.... Weiss is part of the DOJ. This is not a special counsel, but a DOJ investigation and it stinks to high heaven.

You didn't complain about Horowitz or Durham being DOJ employees. How is this any different?

Durham was retiring and giving up all other cases. Will Weiss?

The GOP House letter calling for a special counsel specifically asks for Weiss. Garland did so, and the right is STILL complaining, proving they will make EVERYTHING an issue.

Is this true? Can you post it? The GOP is such a set of hysterical nincompoops these days. Bring back the old GOP!!!!

Nevermind - it *is* true. I found it. How do these people sleep at night with their lies???

https://www.cornyn.senate.gov/news/cornyn-32-senate-republicans-call-for-hunter-biden-prosecutor-to-be-given-special-counsel-authority%EF%BF%BC/

Well well well. Hoisted by their own petard.

You do know that a lot has changed since this was requested:
1. Close to a year ago that letter was written.
2. Hunter was given (at least that is what they told us) a plea deal that fell through when the judge questioned the terms.
3. Whistleblowers have come forward and spoken publicly with valid accusations.
4. Since #2 fell through, administration is scrambling.

It is a day late and a dollar short to appoint a Special Counsel now. Especially one who cannot keep the story straight and who allowed prosecution to propose a plea deal earlier--that was exposed.

Again, It was September of 2022 when Cornyn wrote that letter.

LOL try harder

[Anonymous]

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.........

The GOP has been asking for this since January. Now they got it, and are upset about it. This is another "dog catches car" moment.

In between Weiss gave Hunter a sweetheart deal, and tried to hide it from the public and the judge in a manner that has never been done before.
They tried to give Hunter immunity while not requiring the judge to sign off on the deal.

Tell us about all the other cases involving the same thing Hunter is accused of (taxes and guns) where the defendant was prosecuted and received a harsher sentence/deal than Hunter did.

[Anonymous]

Why hasn't the NRA taken up Hunter's cause with regard to the gun charges? Where are all you 2nd amendment nuts who are basically anti-any kind of gun regulation? Why do you want Hunter to be prosecuted for something no one else would be?

[Anonymous]

Not sure how any one “goes on trial” due to taxes, unless you’re disputing the IRS. It’s almost always a requirement to pay back taxes and interest/penalties.

The gun charge is now off the table, per the 5th Circuit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why hasn't the NRA taken up Hunter's cause with regard to the gun charges? Where are all you 2nd amendment nuts who are basically anti-any kind of gun regulation? Why do you want Hunter to be prosecuted for something no one else would be?

Maybe because they know that if they push too hard on Hunter's 4473 issues it opens them up to the millions of other gun-owning Americans who lied on their 4473 because of drugs and other things.