Garland Says GOP Allegations About Hunter Biden Case Have No Basis In Reality

[aubiefifty 17,108]

Merrick Garland Says GOP Allegations About Hunter Biden Case Have No Basis In Reality

Arthur Delaney

Wed, September 20, 2023 at 12:05 PM CDT·3 min read

1.8k

Scroll back up to restore default view.

WASHINGTON ― The nation’s top law enforcement officer said Wednesday that Republican allegations of a two-tiered justice system favoring the president’s son are a fantasy.

During a House Judiciary Committee hearing with U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, Republicans said Garland’s Department of Justice has gone easy on Hunter Biden while throwing the book at former President Donald Trump.

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, a Texas Democrat, asked if the rhetoric regarding the Hunter Biden case had “any basis in reality.”

“No, it does not,” Garland replied.

It was a more direct answer than Garland gave to numerous Republican questions about the investigation, which this month resulted in a grand jury indictment against the president’s son for illegally owning a gun and could lead to more charges.

Despite Hunter Biden’s legal peril, Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) declared Wednesday that “the fix is in” at the Justice Department. He alleged that top brass had interfered with an IRS probe into Hunter Biden’s taxes and that other officials had hobbled Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss’ pursuit of the case.

Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.) said the American public doesn’t trust the Justice Department. “They see the DOJ, of course, aggressively prosecuting President Biden’s political rival, Mr. Trump, while at the same time, they see slow-walking and special treatment given to the president’s son,” he said at the hearing.

Garland stressed that he wasn’t meddling with Hunter Biden’s case, repeatedly noting that Weiss had been tasked with the investigation during the Trump administration and that President Biden left him in his position to finish the case.

Weiss initially reached a plea agreement with Hunter Biden, but the deal collapsed in August amid a disagreement between prosecutors and Biden’s legal team over the scope of his immunity from further prosecution. Garland then elevated Weiss to special counsel status upon his request.

Republicans cited testimony from two IRS whistleblowers who said Justice Department officials blocked some of their efforts to pursue the case, such as by disapproving certain search warrants and by alerting the Secret Service to plans to approach Hunter Biden for an interview. More recent testimony from FBI officials has cast doubt on some of their claims.

While insinuating there were efforts to shield the Biden family, Republicans faulted Garland for not being more involved in the case. Rep. Dan Bishop (R-N.C.), for instance, asked Garland if he was aware prosecutors had not filed certain tax charges against Hunter Biden before it was too late under federal law to do so, citing a complaint from the IRS whistleblowers. Garland said prosecutorial decisions were up to Weiss.

“I have intentionally not involved myself in the facts of the case, not because I’m trying to get out of responsibility, but because I am trying to pursue my responsibility,” Garland said at one point.

The message was lost on Republicans. Earlier, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) asked Garland if he knew about certain cash transfers connected to Hunter Biden’s business, which Garland said he did not.

“It’s like you’re looking the other way on purpose,” Gaetz said.

[aubiefifty 17,108]

Garland grilled by House Republicans on Hunter Biden, Trump investigations

ALEXANDER MALLIN and LUKE BARR

Wed, September 20, 2023 at 2:46 PM CDT·7 min read

438

Scroll back up to restore default view.

Attorney General Merrick Garland testifyied before the House Judiciary Committee Wednesday in a high-stakes hearing where Republican lawmakers lambasted him over his department's handling of criminal probes into former President Donald Trump, President Joe Biden's son Hunter Biden, the events of Jan. 6 and other high-profile investigations.

"The fix is in," chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said as he kicked the hearing off. "Even with the face-saving indictment of Hunter Biden last week, everyone knows the fix is in."

Jordan accused Garland several times of "slow walking" the Hunter Biden investigation to benefit President Biden.

But Garland, in his opening statement, took criticism of his tenure head-on -- arguing that some Republicans' efforts to target career officials is "dangerous" at a time when threats against public servants are on the rise.

"We will not be intimidated," Garland said. "We will do our jobs free from outside interference. And we will not back down from defending our democracy."

PHOTO: U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland testifies before a House Judiciary Committee hearing on 'Oversight of the U.S. Department of Justice' on Capitol Hill in Washington, Sept. 20, 2023. (Evelyn Hockstein/Reuters)

Trump investigations

The appearance is Garland's first time sitting before lawmakers since special counsel Jack Smith indicted Trump for both his handling of classified documents after leaving the White House as well as his efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

Rep. Jerry Nadler, the Democratic ranking member of the committee, in his opening statement countered "extreme MAGA Republicans have poisoned our vital oversight work" in an effort to distract from the legal troubles the former president is facing.

MORE: Special counsel seeks 'narrowly tailored' gag order against Trump, citing 'disparaging and inflammatory attacks'

Garland said Wednesday he wasn't instructed to charge Trump after being pressed on the former president's comments this past weekend that Biden directed the attorney general to act.

"No one has told me to indict," Garland said, "and in this case, the decision to indict was made by the special counsel."

Trump has pleaded not guilty to all charges against him and has denied any wrongdoing.

Hunter Biden and President Biden investigations

Garland's testimony comes nearly a week after special counsel David Weiss, also appointed by Garland, indicted Hunter Biden on felony gun charges after a plea deal between Weiss and Hunter Biden's lawyers fell apart in court in July.

Garland was peppered with questions about the timeline of the Hunter Biden investigation. In one exchange, Rep. Jordan levied several allegations about Hunter Biden and Burisma -- the Ukrainian gas company on which Hunter Biden was a board member, accusing the DOJ of letting prosecutors "slow walk" the probe.

PHOTO: House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan speaks as Attorney General Merrick Garland appears before a House Judiciary Committee hearing, Sept. 20, 2023, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP)

The attorney general emphasized he gave Weiss authority and independence to bring the case as he saw fit.

"One more fact that is important, and that is that this investigation is being conducted by Mr. Weiss, an appointee of President Trump," Garland responded. "You will, at the appropriate time, have the opportunity to ask Mr. Weiss that question and he will no doubt address it in the public report that will be transmitted to the Congress."

Garland also pushed back against Republicans' claims that the Justice Department is seeking to tilt political scales in Democrats' favor leading up to the 2024 election -- and vehemently denied he has taken any directives from President Biden or the White House with respect to any criminal investigation.

"Our job is not to take orders from the president, from Congress, or from anyone else, about who or what to criminally investigate," Garland said. "As the president himself has said, and I reaffirm today: I am not the president's lawyer. I will add that I am not Congress's prosecutor. The Justice Department works for the American people. Our job is to follow the facts and the law, and that is what we do."

MORE: How Trump has pushed House Republicans to go after Biden: 'They did it to me'

Several Republicans on the committee, including Jordan, have previously threatened to initiate impeachment proceedings against Garland over the department's handling of the criminal probe into Hunter Biden.

Jordan has cited testimony before Congress from IRS whistleblowers who have claimed the president's son received preferential treatment from investigators, and that Garland's past testimony before Congress claiming Weiss was given ultimate authority to make charging decisions was inaccurate.

Both Garland and Weiss, in letters to Congress, have disputed the whistleblower's claims.

Garland has argued his appointments of all three special counsels represents a commitment to ensure the integrity and independence of each of their investigations, and repeated that assertion in fielding questions from Republicans who have sought to portray them as evidence of politicization by the Justice Department.

"Our job is to pursue justice, without fear or favor," Garland said. "Our job is not to do what is politically convenient."

A third special counsel appointed by Garland, Robert Hur, continues to examine circumstances surrounding documents with classified markings that were found in President Biden's home in Delaware as well as a post-vice presidency think tank in Washington.

Hunter Biden has not yet entered a plea as part of his case, though his attorneys have said they will fight the charges brought last week. President Biden has denied wrongdoing in his handling of classified materials and vowed to fully cooperate with special counsel Hur's investigation.

White House spokesperson Ian Sams called the hearing a "distraction" and said House Republicans have "cranked up a circus of a hearing full of lies and disinformation with the sole goal of baselessly attacking President Biden and his family."

PHOTO: U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland stands for the Pledge of Allegiance prior to testifying before a House Judiciary Committee hearing on the 'Oversight of the U.S. Department of Justice,' on Capitol Hill, Sept. 20, 2023, in Washington. (Evelyn Hockstein/Reuters)

Fiery exchange over Catholic memo

In one particularly animated exchange, Garland and Rep. Jeff Van Drew, R-N.J., clashed over a memo written by an analyst in the FBI's Richmond field office about "radical traditional" Catholics within the bureau. Both FBI Director Christopher Wray and Garland both immediately recalled the document and called it not representative of the department's feelings on Catholics.

Garland pushed back on Van Drew's questions about the memo, at times raising his voice.

"The idea that someone with my family background would discriminate against any religion is so outraged us is so absurd," Garland said. In his opening statement Wednesday, Garland got choked up as he spoke about his how his family fled religious persecution in Eastern Europe and why it influences his work as a public servant.

Calls to defund the FBI

Democrats on the committee asked Garland about the impact of threats to federal agents and calls from some Republican lawmakers and presidential candidates to defund the FBI.

"Defunding the FBI would leave the United States naked to the malign influence of the Chinese Communist Party, to the attacks by Iranians on American citizens and attempts to assassinate former officials up to the Russian aggression, to North Korean cyber attacks, to violent crime in the United States, which the FBI helps to fight against, to all kinds of espionage, to domestic violent extremists who have attacked our churches, our synagogues, our mosques and who have killed individuals out of racial hatred," he said. "I cannot imagine the consequences of defunding the FBI, but they would be catastrophic."

Jan. 6 and Ray Epps' charge

Rep. Victoria Spartz, R-Ind., said a lot of Americans are "afraid" of being prosecuted by the department.

"This is a big problem when people are afraid of their own government," she said.

She said that while there were "probably" some people who came to D.C. on Jan. 6, 2021, with "bad intent," there were "a lot of good Americans" who were "sick and tired of this government not serving them" -- including some in her district.

"They came with strollers and the kids, and there was a chaotic situation because the proper security wasn't provided," Spartz said.

Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., questioned Garland on the misdemeanor charge against Ray Epps announced Tuesday by the DOJ. Epps, a former Oath Keeper, became the subject of conspiracy theories around Jan. 6 -- including Republican claims he was an undercover federal agent. Massie called Epps' charge a "joke" compared to others indicted for their participation in the Capitol attack, and asked Garland how many assets of the government were present on that day.

"In the cases that were filed with respect to Jan. 6, the Justice Department prosecutors provided whatever information they had about the question that you're asking," Garland responded, after stating he had no personal knowledge of the issue of whether federal agents were in the crowd. "With respect to Mr. Epps, the FBI has said that he was not an employee or informant of of the FBI."

ABC News' Alexandra Hutzler and Sarah Beth Hensley contributed to this report.

Garland grilled by House Republicans on Hunter Biden, Trump investigations originally appeared on abcnews.go.com

[AU9377 5,137]

House Republicans aren't serious about finding truth.  They have one motive and that is to cloud the water.

[aubiefifty 17,108]

i also think they are privately embarrassed by trump so they want to find anything they can to make us look crooked so they look better because of it. well, some kind of twisted logic. maga folks on here were cruel and mean and supported lie after lie. now they do not want you to even bring trump up because it reminds them of how dumb many of them are.

[CoffeeTiger 5,228]

Congressional Republicans looked like jokers in this hearing. 

Just peppered Garland with Conspiracy theory after Conspiracy theory with no more facts or nuance than a typical opinion talk show host on Fox News. 

Some didn't even ask Garland any questions or allowed him to speak and just used their time to yell at him about wild theories and berate him, assumedly hoping their tirade would make headlines on right wing News programs. 

[Mikey 16,777]

17 hours ago, aubiefifty said:

The nation’s top law enforcement officer said Wednesday that Republican allegations of a two-tiered justice system favoring the president’s son are a fantasy.

Now there's a real knee slapper! What planet is Garland on?

Apparently Garland is not aware of the sweetheart deal the Biden Family Facilitator had set up for Hunter. Also unaware of other stuff.... I guess Garland, being so unaware, earns the description "Clueless".

[aubiefifty 17,108]

14 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Now there's a real knee slapper! What planet is Garland on?

Apparently Garland is not aware of the sweetheart deal the Biden Family Facilitator had set up for Hunter. Also unaware of other stuff.... I guess Garland, being so unaware, earns the description "Clueless".

we shall see.

[AU9377 5,137]

50 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Now there's a real knee slapper! What planet is Garland on?

Apparently Garland is not aware of the sweetheart deal the Biden Family Facilitator had set up for Hunter. Also unaware of other stuff.... I guess Garland, being so unaware, earns the description "Clueless".

Republicans would be well advised to listen to Ken Buck.  He has warned over and over against over reaching when it comes to impeachment.  Why would he be so sure about that?  He and Garland worked together prosecuting the Oklahoma City bombing years ago.  They have remained close friends.  You think he knows that there is nothing there? Likely.

[Mikey 16,777]

12 hours ago, AU9377 said:

Republicans would be well advised to listen to Ken Buck.  He has warned over and over against over reaching when it comes to impeachment.  Why would he be so sure about that?  He and Garland worked together prosecuting the Oklahoma City bombing years ago.  They have remained close friends.  You think he knows that there is nothing there? Likely.

So, in your mind over reaching was OK when Trump was being harassed, but it's bad when poor old defenseless Joe is the target? The Democrats asked for this and now they've got it.

[AU9377 5,137]

10 hours ago, Mikey said:

So, in your mind over reaching was OK when Trump was being harassed, but it's bad when poor old defenseless Joe is the target? The Democrats asked for this and now they've got it.

Trump wasn't being harassed when the first impeachment took place.  There was an over abundance of evidence that he did exactly what he was accused of doing.  Republicans in the Senate simply refused to hold him accountable for his actions.  Those are two separate things altogether. 

Had Biden done the exact thing that Trump did, Republicans would be out of their minds.

[Mikey 16,777]

1 minute ago, AU9377 said:

Trump wasn't being harassed when the first impeachment took place.  There was an over abundance of evidence that he did exactly what he was accused of doing.  Republicans in the Senate simply refused to hold him accountable for his actions.  Those are two separate things altogether. 

Had Biden done the exact thing that Trump did, Republicans would be out of their minds.

Harassing Trump for over four years was fine, but bothering the Bungler in chief isn't fine? Again, the Democrats asked for it and they got it.

[alanevans 66]

49 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Harassing Trump for over four years was fine, but bothering the Bungler in chief isn't fine? Again, the Democrats asked for it and they got it.

Trump was unfir from the day he was elected.

Both impeachments, and the current crimes pending trial, are for a range of egregious conduct even Nixon never dreamed of doing 

[AU9377 5,137]

2 hours ago, Mikey said:

Harassing Trump for over four years was fine, but bothering the Bungler in chief isn't fine? Again, the Democrats asked for it and they got it.

Trump's hand picked NSA advisors knew what he was doing was illegal and unethical.  That is hardly harassment.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/bolton-wanted-white-house-lawyers-alerted-ukrainian-efforts-called-it-n1066141

[AUFAN78 3,943]

Spinning the Press on Hunter Biden

Speaker Kevin McCarthy, announcing that the House of Representatives will pursue an impeachment inquiry, suggested that the probe will hinge in part on deceiving the American public about Hunter Biden’s foreign business ventures.   

“President Biden did lie to the American people about his own knowledge of his family’s foreign business deals,” McCarthy said at a press conference. GOP lawmakers, he added, have “uncovered credible allegations into President Biden’s conduct.” 

Yet the White House is still hoping it can still instruct journalists on how to cover the story. Shortly after McCarthy’s impeachment inquiry announcement, President Biden’s White House staff circulated a memo, instructing media outlets on how to cover the news. In bold type, the memo claimed that the entire Hunter Biden conflict of interest scandal had been “refuted” and “debunked” – language that was adopted in media reports about the inquiry in Vox, NBC News and CNN.   

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2023/09/19/spinning_the_press_on_hunter_biden_980044.html

[AUFAN78 3,943]

What We Must Believe to Believe Biden Is Innocent

Is it plausible that the real rainmaker of Biden, Inc. was the only one who didn’t get paid?

 

This operation generated at least $20 million that was doled out to nine Biden family members, yet we are asked to believe that the “Big Guy” didn’t get a cut?

CNN, for example, insists there is no evidence that he “personally received any money.” The network’s fact-checkers evidently need to see a cancelled check made out to “Joe Biden” by an Oligarch who has helpfully written “bribe” on the memo line. 

 

https://spectator.org/what-we-must-believe-to-believe-biden-is-innocent/

Edited September 22, 2023 by AUFAN78

[AUFAN78 3,943]

Did Hunter Biden Lie to His Own Memoir?

In a raft of glowing reviews, Hunter Biden’s 2019 memoir “Beautiful Things” was celebrated as an “unflinchingly honest” (Entertainment Weekly), “confession and an act of contrition” (Guardian), that was “candid” and “doesn’t hold back details” (New York Times) of his substance abuse and broken relationships.  

While describing the book as an “unvarnished confessional,” the Washington Post exalted it as a “harrowing, relentless and a determined exercise in trying to seize his own narrative from the clutches of the Republicans and the press. 

 

In the years since, testimony from a former business partner, Devon Archer, and newly disclosed emails indicate that the president’s son’s memoir was an exercise in spin rather than truth-telling, especially concerning his father’s role in his foreign business dealings, which are now the subject of a House impeachment inquiry. That evidence shows how the Biden's used the memoir to create a politically charged narrative – one largely embraced by the mainstream media – that distorted the truth to protect the family.  

[Mikey 16,777]

22 hours ago, alanevans said:

Trump was unfir from the day he was elected.

 

You have a strange user name for someone who is posting on an Auburn fan site.

[alanevans 66]

24 minutes ago, Mikey said:

You have a strange user name for someone who is posting on an Auburn fan site.

Maybe. 

But I sure have a reality based opinion about Donald Trump’s crimes and impeachments.

[DKW 86 7,481]

So, let me get this straight:

Yall know about FARA, the Foreign Agent Registration Act. It REQUIRES you to register as a foreign agent if you are conducting business for foreign agencies, especially those known to be wholly owned by foreign govts, a la the CCP.

HB was doing so, even he admits this now and so does the WH. He never registered under FARA and is therefore absolutely guilty of breaking the law. 

But no one on this board will EVER admit what the facts are in this case. HB broke the damn law openly. He is of course never going to be held accountable for any of it. 

He is the President's son and is therefore untouchable by the laws that govern the other 329,999,999 of us.

 

[alanevans 66]

13 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

So, let me get this straight:

Yall know about FARA, the Foreign Agent Registration Act. It REQUIRES you to register as a foreign agent if you are conducting business for foreign agencies, especially those known to be wholly owned by foreign govts, a la the CCP.

HB was doing so, even he admits this now and so does the WH. He never registered under FARA and is therefore absolutely guilty of breaking the law. 

But no one on this board will EVER admit what the facts are in this case. HB broke the damn law openly. He is of course never going to be held accountable for any of it. 

He is the President's son and is therefore untouchable by the laws that govern the other 329,999,999 of us.

 

He’s an embarrassing presidential relative. There have been a lot dating back to George Washington’s stepson!

Prosecute away but thinking this ties to the president is contrived.

It is also pretty clear that in this particular instance it’s been over prosecuted due to who he is.

[DKW 86 7,481]

7 hours ago, alanevans said:

He’s an embarrassing presidential relative. There have been a lot dating back to George Washington’s stepson!

Prosecute away but thinking this ties to the president is contrived.

It is also pretty clear that in this particular instance it’s been over prosecuted due to who he is.

So sweetheart deals = over-prosecution? Strange world you live in...

The only thing he was able to be of use to any foreign entities as a crackhead was BECAUSE of who his father was. If you cannot connect the dots its because you intellectually refuse to connect the dots.

Is trump family guilty of the same? Sure. Have at them. Hope you get the DOJ to take them down.

I want what is best for the nation, not some crap-for-nothing party of corruptophiles.

Edited September 24, 2023 by DKW 86

[AU9377 5,137]

On 9/21/2023 at 10:43 AM, Mikey said:

Now there's a real knee slapper! What planet is Garland on?

Apparently Garland is not aware of the sweetheart deal the Biden Family Facilitator had set up for Hunter. Also unaware of other stuff.... I guess Garland, being so unaware, earns the description "Clueless".

You love doing the Trump thing where you call someone a silly Fox "News" name and then pretend that the basis of your opinion is sound based on how you have defined their character.  Have you ever considered that you just may be wrong about some of this? 

[AU9377 5,137]

3 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

So sweetheart deals = over-prosecution? Strange world you live in...

The only thing he was able to be of use to any foreign entities as a crackhead was BECAUSE of who his father was. If you cannot connect the dots its because you intellectually refuse to connect the dots.

Is trump family guilty of the same? Sure. Have at them. Hope you get the DOJ to take them down.

I want what is best for the nation, not some crap-for-nothing party of corruptophiles.

You won't find a prosecutor in the country that actively pursues this type of gun charge independent of other charges.  The only reason it is being pursued here is that they have statements HB made in his book that support the charge.  It still won't be easy to prove.  We both know he is guilty of the crime, but can a jury be convinced that he was using on the day he signed the document?  Will the Federal courts rule that the charge is unconstitutional like they have in the 5th circuit?  There are tons of questions and the end result will most likely be a plea.  As a first time offender, he isn't likely looking at serious jail time for this charge alone.  Should he be treated differently than others in a justice system that we claim applies laws equally?

[DKW 86 7,481]

11 hours ago, AU9377 said:

You won't find a prosecutor in the country that actively pursues this type of gun charge independent of other charges.  The only reason it is being pursued here is that they have statements HB made in his book that support the charge.  It still won't be easy to prove.  We both know he is guilty of the crime, but can a jury be convinced that he was using on the day he signed the document?  Will the Federal courts rule that the charge is unconstitutional like they have in the 5th circuit?  There are tons of questions and the end result will most likely be a plea.  As a first time offender, he isn't likely looking at serious jail time for this charge alone.  Should he be treated differently than others in a justice system that we claim applies laws equally?

The sweetheart deals were just the beginning. Now we have slamdunk FARA Charges looming. But of course, all of this and more will be swept under the rug by dad and Garland.

Edited September 25, 2023 by DKW 86

[AU9377 5,137]

10 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

The sweetheart deals were just the beginning. Now we have slamdunk FARA Charges looming. But of course, all of this and more will be swept under the rug by dad and Garland.

What has been swept under the rug?  Nothing.  Nobody gets serious jail time for a FARA charge when there are legitimate questions as to whether or not it is even applicable.  Proving that he acted as agent of a foreign principal is not a slam dunk.  From the statute itself................

(c) Expect [Except] as provided in subsection (d) of this section, the term "agent of a foreign principal" means--

(1) any person who acts as an agent, representative, employee, or servant, or any person who acts in any other capacity at the order, request, or under the direction or control, of a foreign principal or of a person any of whose activities are directly or indirectly supervised, directed, controlled, financed, or subsidized in whole or in major part by a foreign principal, and who directly or through any other person--

(i) engages within the United States in political activities for or in the interests of such foreign principal;

(ii) acts within the United States as a public relations counsel, publicity agent, information-service employee or political consultant for or in the interests of such foreign principal;

(iii) within the United States solicits, collects, disburses, or dispenses contributions, loans, money, or other things of value for or in the interest of such foreign principal; or

(iv) within the United States represents the interests of such foreign principal before any agency or official of the Government of the United States; and

(2) any person who agrees, consents, assumes or purports to act as, or who is or holds himself out to be, whether or not pursuant to contractual relationship, an agent of a foreign principal as defined in clause (1) of his subsection.