from WND:
Multiple times rejected requests for charges to move forward
Merrick Garland, Joe Biden’s hand-picked attorney general, repeatedly has claimed that the investigation of – and case against – Hunter Biden was done independently of political influence.
He said, just days ago, “As I said from the moment of my appointment as attorney general, I would leave this matter in the hands of the United States attorney who was appointed by the previous president, and assigned to this matter by the previous administration, that he would be given full authority to decide the matter as he decided was appropriate. And that’s what he’s done.”
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
But doubt now is being cast on the accuracy of his opinion, given this week’s “resolution” of a long list of serious potential counts against Hunter Biden, regarding tax and gun violations, that could have sent him to prison for years. He gets a “diversion” and apparently will plead to a couple of misdemeanor counts.
It’s because whistleblowers have charged that, multiple times, the Department of Justice denied permission for the investigator, David Weiss, to bring charges.
The Washington Examiner explained the details were released by Rep. Jason Smith, R-Mo., chief of the House Ways and Means Committee.
The information is that Weiss “tried to bring charges in the District of Columbia around March of 2022 and was denied” permission to do that.
Then, the reports say, “Weiss sought to bring charges in the Central District of California in the fall of 2022 and had that requested denied in January 2023.”
The details come from whistleblower testimony discussed in a closed-door executive session of the committee Thursday, the report said.
Finally, Weiss “sought special counsel status from the DOJ in the spring of 2022” but saw the request rejected.
The Examiner explained, “Attorney General Merrick Garland had repeatedly vowed to ensure that Weiss would be insulated from any political interference. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) pressed Garland in March about this, suggesting that Garland’s testimony last year ‘could be misleading because without special counsel authority, he could need the permission of another U.S. attorney’s office in certain circumstances to bring charges’ beyond Delaware.”
