Image 01 Image 03

“it’s the payoffs to the Biden family that really involve our national security” but DOJ is Running Interference

“it’s the payoffs to the Biden family that really involve our national security” but DOJ is Running Interference

My appearance on Newt Gingrich’s podcast yesterday, before the IRS Whistleblower transcripts were released: “the other payments that were funneled through Hunter and through other people to the Biden family need to be investigated…. [T]he issues that go to whether Joe Biden as vice president and as presidential candidate essentially sold his office, sold his influence to foreign entities and to foreign people who funneled money to the family.”

Yesterday I appeared on Newt Gingrich’s podcast, Newt’s World, to discuss Hunter Biden’s plea deals, prior to today’s revelations from IRS Whistleblowers.

On Tuesday, President Biden’s son, Hunter Biden agreed to plead guilty to two misdemeanor tax charges and accept terms that would allow him to avoid prosecution on a separate gun charge. The federal prosecutor who oversaw the investigation and signed off on the agreement is David Weiss, the U.S. attorney in Delaware. And while this plea agreement ends his legal troubles, it still does not address questions that many of us still have about Hunter Biden’s business dealings. Newt’s guest is William Jacobson. He is a Clinical Professor of Law and Director of the Securities Law Clinic at Cornell Law School.

Those plea deals, I discussed, appeared to be an attempt to paper over the deeper Biden family corruption. The release of Whistleblower transcripts today reinforces that view. DOJ appears to be running interference for the Biden family in what could be the greatest corruption scandal in recent political history.

We touched upon other topics as well, including the loss of institutional legitimacy and the collapse of education.

Partial Transcript (auto-generated, may contain transcription errors)(emphasis added)

Newt Gingrich (03:01):

Speaker McCarthy called Hunter Biden’s plea deal, a sweetheart deal. I’m curious, what’s your take on this whole thing?

WAJ (03:08):

Well, I think it is a sweetheart deal, particularly if you look at what the charges were and the decisions made at the prosecutorial level not to seek more serious charges. So misdemeanor tax violations normally would not result in prison time, so that’s not surprising. But why were they charged as misdemeanors? Why did they agree to lower them to misdemeanors when they were fairly sizable claims, clear intent, they could have been charged as felonies. The other one was lying on your gun permit application, your background check. And that is generally viewed as pretty serious, particularly in the Biden administration, which has made gun control one of its policy platforms. And so I think the issue here is not so much that what was charged got a lenient sentence is that they decided to charge at very low levels as part of the plea deal.

* * *

WAJ (06:46): Yes. And I think there were reports about that. I don’t remember the person, but there was somebody who I think helped him pay that off [the tax debt]. And I think that that needs to be investigated just like the other payments that were funneled through Hunter and through other people to the Biden family need to be investigated. The big concern here is that those more serious issues, the issues that go to whether Joe Biden as vice president and as presidential candidate essentially sold his office, sold his influence to foreign entities and to foreign people who funneled money to the family. That’s the big issue. And I think the concern here is that if the Department of Justice is going to say, oh, we’ve done what we need to do, we’re done with Hunter Biden closed the book on it, that’s the bigger concern because it’s the payoffs to the Biden family that really involve our national security.

Gingrich (07:40): It does seem to me also there’s some confusion because when the deal was announced, Chris, Chris Clarke Biden’s attorney said in a statement quote, with the announcement of two agreements between my client, hunter Biden and the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware, it is my understanding that the five-year investigation into Hunter is resolved. I think they figured out that would mean the Congress could then ask for all the information, cause Justice could no longer hide behind the ongoing investigation defense. And they promptly then issued a letter saying, oh no, no, we’re still investigating. But I’m now told, although I have not seen the document, that they’re actually filing an agreement that nothing that happened, the date of the agreement will be prosecutable

WAJ (08:24): If that’s going to happen. And if that is not limited in scope, if it’s not limited to the gun charge and to the tax charge, then that is very concerning because that would mean that Hunter Biden escapes responsibility for any of the payoffs that might have taken place, things that might be characterized as bribes to the Biden family, and that would lead the government to say case closed on that. So if that’s happening, that’s extremely concerning.

* * *

Gingrich (17:26): One of the side stories that’s beginning to bubble out is that there’s an IRS whistleblower who argues that the Biden administration was deliberately mishandling the Hunter Biden investigation. His told lawmakers that he had information that suggested that the Biden administration was deliberately mishandling it. Now since then, as I understand it, the FBI has convinced the r s to close down the entire investigation, which would be sort of, I think, extraordinary.

WAJ (17:55): It would, if you have a whistleblower, you would think that that person would be not just protected by the laws, but would be permitted to come forward. A whistleblower who is alleging political influence in favor of the son of the President who now just got a sweetheart deal from the Department of Justice. If these things are true, and hopefully these people will be able to come forward. That whistleblower’s obviously being very cautious because he doesn’t want to find himself or herself on the wrong end of a Department of Justice prosecution. So they’ve got to be very careful. But that needs to come out and it needs to come out soon. It needs to come out long before the 2024 election. Because we can’t have another situation like we did with Hunter Biden’s laptop, where it’s not just suppressed. It’s not just having people deplatformed or silenced on social media. We actually had 50 former intelligence officials mislead the public by saying that the laptop looked like Russian disinformation. When it’s been verified, nobody’s claiming that anymore. And it definitely influenced the election. So this needs to come out and it needs to come out soon.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Once more, all at the feet of Obama, who knew and approved by looking the other way. He did not care because it helped the transformation, the corruption. He still has his fingers in the pudding.

Yes, Biden is fundamentally dishonest and not above the sell-out. Of course, he’s not fully in control, but a willing participant. As he reverts to his pure self in his senility, his cruel heart screams. He deserves impeachment for trading his office for wealth, for stealing classified documents as far back as 1977, and now for abusing his office to protect his family and persecute opponents.

The Hunter Biden case, if he gets off free, should become the Dobbs decision of 2024.

henrybowman | June 23, 2023 at 1:31 am

If Trump had the talent to hire conservative zealots with the tenacity to guard his back 24/7/365, like Merrick and Wray do for Brandon, he’d still be president.

    mailman in reply to henrybowman. | June 23, 2023 at 3:17 am

    And just like that it’s all Trumps fault 😂😂😂

      wendybar in reply to mailman. | June 23, 2023 at 6:53 am

      Typical of the Never Trumpers. They aren’t ANY different than the Progressives.

      CommoChief in reply to mailman. | June 23, 2023 at 10:46 am

      Everything is NOT Trump’s fault. He is only responsible for the things he did do, like letting Fauci run/shape Federal Covid policy and the things he failed to do like build the border wall.

        Dimsdale in reply to CommoChief. | June 24, 2023 at 10:35 am

        Let’s stipulate that he was fought tooth and nail about the border wall, and as they said in Animal House, he f’ed up, he trusted NIH and his backstabbing advisors.

        I guess that is why he made such a stink about backstabbing Comey’s loyalty test.

          CommoChief in reply to Dimsdale. | June 24, 2023 at 11:37 am

          The DC establishment of both parties absolutely resisted funding the border wall; though DJT didn’t use his Veto to reject the budget the DC establishment sent him which lacked funding. The failure to use his Veto looms large. What it demonstrates is that he left a stone unturned and there isn’t any argument to the contrary. Another way to express this is that DJT failed to use every tool at his disposal to fight for his signature campaign promise. He’s gonna need to to accept his portion of the blame on this issue and lay out how he will do things differently in a second term.

          I am not a public health professional. I understand from about March that Rona was full of shit. It was the equivalent of an aggressive flu with 85%+ of the deaths and serious problems concentrated in the very elderly, those with weak immune systems and those with a few pre existing conditions.

          I am not the smartest guy ever and plenty of other folks figured this out early on. DR Bhattacharya was particularly prominent in the Spring of 20 before he and others were silenced by big tech/govt. Instead DJT gave Fauci free rein hell his own Surgeon General just this week praised Fauci. DJT was publicly slamming State Leaders that ‘opened up too early’ in Spring of 20. In his interview on Fox he basically said he wouldn’t change much about Federal Covid policy; that’s not a good answer. Tens of thousands lost their businesses, there jobs, their marriages. An entire cohort of school children are permanently behind in learning. Except in States like Florida which didn’t lock down or stay locked down; no learning loss from 19-23. Yet DJT would still bash opening up?

      ConradCA in reply to mailman. | June 28, 2023 at 4:46 pm

      Biden has sold us out to the Russians and Chinese. He is on their payroll and that’s why Russia could attack Ukraine and China can threaten to attack Taiwan.

      ConradCA in reply to mailman. | June 28, 2023 at 6:29 pm

      Biden has sold us out to the Russians and Chinese. He is on their payroll and that’s why Russia could attack Ukraine and China can threaten to attack Taiwan.

      At the start of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine most analysts thought that he would easily defeat and occupy Ukraine. That the only danger was NATO and the US militaries fighting alongside the Ukrainians. Thanks to the millions in bribes paid to Biden the first thing Biden did was to tell Putin don’t worry about us fight you in Ukraine. This justified the millions in bribes paid to Quisling Joe and enabled the Russians to attack Ukraine. A real American President would havre told the Russians that we would fighh he t them in Ukraine if they attacked and that would have prevented them from attacking.

      We have a huge opportunity to win the war in Ukraine. The Russian army has been show to be incompetent and unable to withstand the better trained and competent NATO military. If the USA and NATO would tell the Russians to withdraw from Ukraine or face our military fighting alongside Ukraines army they would have little choice but to withdraw. Quisling Joe can’t do this because the Russians would publicize the vibes they paid him.

MoeHowardwasright | June 23, 2023 at 5:06 am

Almost everyone elected to Congress or the Senate comes
In without 2 nickels to rub together. And within a few years is a multi millionaire. Want it to stop? You’re going to need a constitutional amendment both forbidding any charitable donations and term limits. The Senate especially. Ace Rothstein said it best “They won there comped life when they got elected”.

Is it possible to charge the corrupt members of the DOJ and FBI with obstruction of justice? If so, the Republicans should doing it to get the information they need. There appears to be no way those sleaze bags will voluntarily or involuntarily turn the documents over. They will continue to obstruct. Time to move off the dime and start charging the culprits with their crimes.

Fifty years ago I wondered why politics and history seemed to go off the rails from time to time.
Today I know why.
I wonder if, in 50 years, kids will wonder about Hunter as I wondered about Jack Ruby?

    Dimsdale in reply to scooterjay. | June 24, 2023 at 10:37 am

    It does make you think, given the level of deceit and corruption we see now. Hard to believe it just magically appeared with Pres. Trump.

    McCarthy understated the problem.

E Howard Hunt | June 23, 2023 at 9:11 am

When one considers how far the inaction and obstruction have already gone and the number of high-level people involved (in both parties), it is impossible to think anything like true justice will be done. The most that can be hoped for is that Biden be forced to resign, citing health reasons.

Steven Brizel | June 23, 2023 at 9:15 am

See here
This is a coverup and obstruction of justice from within DOJ that dwarfes Watergate

Steven Brizel | June 23, 2023 at 9:26 am

A AUSA would limit the scope and degree of investigations of this nature only with supervision, direction and control by the US Attorney and DOJ itself. Let;s bring on the subpoenas now

Never give up your guns under any circumstances. I can see where this is heading down the road.

Now do an in-depth PERSECUTION of President Trump

I really doesn’t seem to be doubtful that this president is compromised by big bucks paid – especially by China, then even Russia and others to his son who had nothing to sell except the office and influence of his father the US Vice President! I think we have never been in a more dangerous spot and that is right at the top. Amazing that folks would talk as if Trump was possibly a foreign agent because of the trash that the so-called MSM kept feeding them. There were investigative reporters who were telling us almost from the beginning that with Hillary’s people the FBI was setting up Trump supporters to then put pressure on them to tell dirt they knew or lie about what they knew to GET TRUMP. Everything Trump accomplished was somewhere between good for and hugely good for Americans in every income bracket and every ethnicity! Now the same people bend over backward to protect their puppet figurehead and this country may be on the downward slope of free, prosperous and with opportunity!!!

BierceAmbrose | June 26, 2023 at 10:05 pm

What’s the authoritah behind plea deals? Can any of the legal eagles round here clue in us mere citizens (of a Republic, looking to govern ourselves, to our advantage, in our own terms?)

Where’s it authorized that “You can drop stuff you know they did, adjudicate and punish stuff you know they didn’t do(*), so long as they agree?”

Who is authorized to do this?

Who authorized doing this?

And, of course: Why; what’s the point?

We have laws that declars particular things illegal, with what counts to be each thing; mechanisms with standards of proof; and responses specified if the illegal thing found.

Meanwhile, we have prosecutors scouring laws to find new crimes, new threories of crime, and new applicaitons of laws in place. (Charging objects leading to forfeiture is one fiction. Combined with expanded definitions of possession, you have Feds trying to seize a ferry in Seattle, because they found a whacky weed seed embedded in a railing. WTF, over?)

We have yuuuuuge, variance in how the wheels of justice grind toward instances of what look like the same: things that sure look the same charged differentl, from embiggened, to not at all. We have “plea deals” which seem both discretionary, and unbounded in scope.

So, in the marvelous John Cleese line from Silverado: “Whats all this, then?”

(*) I get that there’s conventions and protocols wrapped around this “flexibility”; perhaps anything they plead “down to” must also be a provable transgression. That’s part of the question.

— Do we want to do things this way, in the large, bigthink sense?

— Do we like the way it works now?

— Why is this good?

— Who said things could be done this way; should be done this way?