6 Key Points About Hunter Biden Special Counsel Appointment Ignored by Mainstream Media

Friday’s news dump featured​ an announcement by ‌Attorney General Merrick ‍Garland that he had named Delaware U.S.‌ Attorney David Weiss as special counsel to continue ⁣the ‌investigation into⁢ Hunter Biden “as ⁢well as any​ matters⁤ that arose from ⁣that ⁤investigation or may arise from the⁣ Special⁤ Counsel’s investigation.”

While the official ‍appointment order ‌barely filled a page and the attorney general’s accompanying ‍comments provided ‍little additional texture, the ‌news is​ hugely ‌significant. Here’s how.

1. Why⁢ Now?

When news broke that ​Garland‌ had named Weiss as special counsel,‍ Republicans jumped on the ​appointment as‍ further proof of a cover-up to protect the‌ Biden family. After all, the House had finally succeeded ⁣in‌ uncovering and exposing⁣ massive evidence of corruption reaching all ⁤the way to the Big Guy, and whistleblowers continue‍ to provide Sens. Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson further⁢ material, including evidence that implicates the Department of Justice in obstructing the investigation.

However, court filings in United States v. Biden from ⁤Friday indicate the collapse of ⁢Weiss’s plea deal with Hunter Biden spurred the request for special ‍counsel status. The president’s son had appeared before Judge Maryellen ‍Noreika on July 26, 2023, ‌ready⁢ to enter ​a guilty plea on two misdemeanor tax counts. ‍But after questioning by the federal⁤ judge⁢ on the interaction between the plea agreement⁤ and a separate pretrial diversion agreement⁣ the ​parties entered⁢ on a‌ gun offense, Hunter Biden pled⁢ not guilty and the‍ court‌ continued the hearing, ordering the parties to provide‌ supplemental briefing. Noreika was ‌particularly concerned that the ‍pretrial diversion agreement related to⁢ the⁤ gun offense‌ included a provision granting ‌wide-ranging immunity ​to Hunter ⁤Biden,⁣ whereas normally that provision would be included in the plea agreement.

On Friday, the Delaware​ U.S. attorney’s office filed a ‌motion ​with Judge Noreika stating that following the ⁢late-July hearing, the parties had‍ entered⁣ additional plea⁤ negotiations but had ⁤“reached an impasse” and that the government ⁤now believes the‍ case will not resolve short of trial. ‍And because “venue,” meaning the proper location for a trial, does not lie in⁣ Delaware⁢ but⁣ rather Washington, ​D.C., or the central⁤ district of California,⁣ Weiss’s office moved to dismiss the charges against ‍Hunter Biden ⁢“without prejudice,” meaning ⁤charges could be refiled elsewhere. In fact, in his motion, Weiss noted prosecutors⁤ are “considering what tax charges to bring in another district…”

While ‌Hunter Biden had agreed⁣ to​ waive any objection to ​venue in Delaware⁤ as part​ of the plea agreement, ⁣once that‌ deal fell apart, Weiss⁤ needed authority ‌to bring ​charges in D.C. or California because as a Delaware​ U.S. attorney, his power was limited to that federal district. In naming Weiss special ⁤counsel, Garland authorized Weiss to bring criminal charges in any federal district court.

These circumstances ⁢best explain the timing‌ for the appointment — but they also​ expose the impropriety of Weiss handling the investigation ⁢of Hunter ⁢Biden to this point without special counsel status.​ The regulations governing the appointment of a special counsel​ provide⁣ that the attorney general “will appoint a ​Special Counsel”⁢ if ⁢a criminal investigation “is warranted” and the investigation or⁤ prosecution⁣ “would present a conflict of interest for the Department or⁤ other extraordinary circumstances.”

But there was nothing about the ⁣collapse of the plea agreement that ⁤should ⁤have triggered the ⁣appointment of a special counsel:⁤ It neither created a​ conflict of interest nor constituted “extraordinary circumstances” because ‍Weiss could have filed‍ charges ‍in D.C. or California by virtue of another federal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 515. In fact, Weiss had ‌previously ‌ discussed with Garland obtaining authority under Section 515 to charge‌ Hunter in another district, with Weiss saying he “was‌ assured that ⁤ [he] would be ‍granted this authority ⁤if it proved necessary.”

That‍ Weiss sought, and⁣ Garland ⁣approved, the special ‍counsel ‍appointment now⁣ thus confirms that a conflict‌ of interest animated the U.S. attorney’s investigation into the president’s son. And⁢ since‌ nothing new happened to create that conflict (or ​extraordinary circumstances), it is clear Garland failed to fulfill⁤ his duties as attorney general by refusing to grant ⁢Weiss‍ that status years ago.

2. A Contradiction in Everything

Garland’s naming of Weiss ‍as special counsel‍ not only contradicts any earlier claims that there was no need ⁢for‍ such an appointment, but ‌it also ‌contradicts nearly​ everything we’ve been told about the investigation ⁣and the ⁣DOJ’s ‌role. We were told that Weiss was the ultimate decisionmaker — well, except that he obviously wasn’t or he wouldn’t have ​needed ⁢the appointment. We were told he could take any ‍steps and make any investigative decisions,⁣ having⁤ ultimate authority over this matter — except now we’re told he is‌ no longer subject to the day-to-day⁣ supervision of the Department of Justice.

Either Weiss had that ‌power, or⁢ he didn’t. Either he was in charge of the investigation, or he wasn’t. Naming Weiss ⁢special counsel ‍confirms everything⁤ we’ve been​ told until now was a ⁢farce. And it wasn’t just Garland telling us Weiss was totally in charge —⁣ it was ⁣also Weiss. Weiss even stuck with that ⁢story when contradicted⁣ by ⁢the IRS whistleblowers ​who had ⁤contemporaneous emails confirming⁤ the Delaware U.S. attorney had ⁤told upper-level‌ managers ⁣on ⁤the investigation that he ‌was not ⁣the ultimate decisionmaker.

That Weiss⁣ gave Garland cover, allowed ‍the DOJ to apparently interfere in the investigation, entered a sweetheart deal with Hunter ‌Biden, and removed the IRS whistleblowers from the investigation renders him⁣ incapable of serving as an independent‌ special counsel. The ‌regulations themselves so provide, stating that the “individual named as Special Counsel shall be a lawyer with a reputation for integrity and impartial decisionmaking.” The regulations also provide that the special counsel ​shall be selected from‍ outside the United States government, although there is no⁣ enforcement mechanism and John Durham was also appointed ⁤special counsel from⁢ within the government.

So while Garland touted the appointment of a special counsel as providing Americans confidence⁢ in the​ integrity of ⁣the​ investigation into Hunter⁣ Biden, putting Weiss in that role contradicted every assurance of independence he gave.

3. Weiss Is Just⁢ Part of the Problem

Weiss, however, is but part of the problem, as he wasn’t ⁢alone in slow-walking ⁤the investigation: According to the whistleblowers, others ⁢in the office impeded ​the normal investigative techniques, prevented them from interviewing witnesses and executing⁣ search warrants, kept them from asking pertinent questions, and did many ⁤other things to interfere in ⁣the probe of the president’s son. ⁣Weiss also axed⁣ the whistleblowers and their ​elite‌ team of experts who​ specialized in international money laundering and ‍tax evasion investigations,⁤ likely leaving inexperienced or less experienced agents‍ in their place.

So Weiss ‍being in charge is but part of the problem: Also concerning is who is still on ​his ⁢team and who isn’t.⁣ That Weiss ⁣is continuing ⁣to​ serve as the ⁤U.S.⁢ attorney for ‌Delaware also ​suggests he isn’t intending to ⁢ramp up the investigation. But even if Weiss plans to move forward‍ with a real investigation, the complexity of the‌ Biden family ⁤corruption investigation is likely far beyond ‌his and his local team’s skill ‍set.

Moreover, even under ⁢the special ​counsel regulations, the bottom line⁤ is that Weiss still reports to Garland, and Garland’s boss is Joe Biden. Department‍ regulations, which Garland made clear during Friday’s press conference still ‌apply to the special counsel, also prohibit Weiss from investigating a presidential⁣ candidate (i.e., Joe Biden) without‍ permission.‌ Under these circumstances, even if Weiss has decided ⁤to dust off his reputation, there is no reason to believe he will‍ be free to‍ follow the ⁣facts where​ they lead — since ‌they likely lead to the Big Guy.

4. Impeachment⁤ Inquiries Are ‌More Vital Than Ever

Weiss’s ⁤appointment ⁤as ⁤special counsel ⁣quickly ⁢forced Democrats to change their narrative from “nothing⁢ to see here” ⁣to​ “this is all about Hunter‍ Biden and we need to let the process play out.” House Republicans, however, promised‌ to‍ push forward ⁢with their investigations and framed ⁤the appointment as a delay tactic and a⁢ cover-up.

Complaining​ won’t​ move the needle, however, and ‌neither will continuing the present ‌investigative trajectory. Rather, the clear conflict⁣ of interest prevents the executive branch, even‌ under the title of special counsel, from properly investigating‍ Joe Biden. And ⁣the evidence of the president’s ‌complicity in ⁢his son’s selling ‌of access overwhelmingly supports an investigation into ‍him.⁢ Further, the scandal isn’t just ⁢about the ⁢Biden ⁤family but about the DOJ ‌and ⁤FBI and their obstruction of‍ the investigation.

The House needs to launch an impeachment⁢ inquiry immediately for Joe Biden, Merrick Garland, and Christopher ​Wray. There’s a reason the Founding Fathers separated power among the three ​branches of government, and it’s time the legislative branch flexes its impeachment muscle to uncover⁢ the truth.

5. Kudos⁤ to Judge Maryellen Noreika

Speaking of the three branches of government,⁣ the ⁢judicial branch and specifically Judge Noreika deserves accolades for her handling of last​ month’s plea hearing. If ‍not for Noreika, who was rumored ⁣ to be on a​ short⁢ list to be named a circuit ⁢court judge by President Biden, ‍the Hunter Biden sweetheart plea agreement​ might have already been a done deal.

Instead ⁢of rubberstamping‌ the agreement, however, she quizzed both sides‍ on some of the puzzling aspects of it, such as why ‍the pretrial diversion agreement included the promise of immunity and why she‌ didn’t‌ need to approve ‍the plea agreement. In doing so, however, she never prejudged the case or ⁤stated her intent; rather,‌ she asked pointed questions to ensure Hunter Biden ‍was getting the deal he⁣ thought he was, and ​that the ‌government was proceeding appropriately.

That her questions caused ⁢the plea⁤ deal⁣ to blow up suggests there was something amiss, and while the U.S. attorney’s office had no problem trying to ‌push through the agreement, Noreika was a ​vital check​ on the ⁤executive branch. She may be ⁢regretting her approach, though, as she now ⁢has a mare’s ⁣nest, ⁢with Hunter ‍Biden arguing​ the‌ pretrial⁣ diversion agreement remains ⁣binding on the government⁣ and Noreika forced ⁤to ‍wade through​ some legal issues of first⁤ impression.

Her integrity, however, deserves recognition.

6. ​A Pox on the ‍Legacy Press’s House

On the⁤ other hand, the legacy press, ⁢which ignored the Biden family scandal for the last ⁢three‍ years, merits ridicule. No⁤ matter⁤ how much evidence the House provided, no matter how many whistleblower complaints Grassley revealed,​ the corrupt media refused to cover the scandal, other than to spin it as a Republican ⁤hoax.

Even ‌now, the press is providing‍ an assist​ to the president and Democrats by spinning the special counsel appointment as ⁤sufficient and the investigation only about Hunter Biden.

Weiss’s appointment is⁤ not sufficient, ⁢though, although he ⁤may very well be ⁢only investigating Hunter Biden. It is just further reason for the House to launch its impeachment inquiries⁢ stat.