I realize much of political commentary flying around this week is of the ‘all Trump, all the time’ variety — and I’ve offered a few of my own baseline thoughts about the latest indictment, while deferring to legal experts I trust on the matter. The ‘news’ media spent approximately one day in damage control mode for the Bidens on Monday into Tuesday, spinning and twisting themselves into pretzels. I half joked that the Biden DOJ would inevitably indict Trump again one day after Devon Archer’s significant testimony, and then the Biden DOJ did precisely that. Whether this is a series of pure coincidences, or something more political and sinister, it is pretty remarkable how often the wheels of ‘justice’ just happen to churn forward against the former president immediately after troubling developments arise about the current president:
Under the most charitable, non-‘conspiratorial’ explanation for the timeline above, at the very least, the timing suggests that the Biden DOJ does not care one whit about the glaringly problematic optics, or the growing perception among millions of Americans that the whole system is bent in favor of one partisan tribe. In any case, lost in the Trump shuffle was a statement from one of the IRS whistleblowers (remember them?) who testified in late July that their probe into Hunter Biden’s various financial crimes and irregularities was repeatedly stymied by DOJ higher-ups. A partial summary of their sworn allegations, written by one of the career investigating agents (who happens to be a gay registered Democrat), in case you’d already forgotten, or primarily get your news from certain outlets:
In every case I worked, we followed standard operating procedure. We went by the book, and every taxpayer we investigated received fair and equitable treatment. I came forward because in my opinion, Hunter Biden received preferential treatment. Although some in Congress tried to explain away my concerns, what I saw during the investigation was entirely outside the norm. I have disagreed with prosecutors in the past. In some cases I didn’t get my way. But those disagreements always followed the normal investigative process. I was always allowed to follow concrete evidence and investigate a case without being handcuffed or slow walked by the Justice Department. Looking back on my five-year tax investigation of Hunter Biden, I recall many disagreements between prosecutors and investigators.
These involved the search warrants of Hunter Biden’s residence and storage unit, the verification of WhatsApp messages that seemingly detailed Joe Biden’s presence during business discussions, and delayed or blocked interviews with members of the Biden family. I would characterize the Justice Department’s behavior as obstruction. Things reached a breaking point when Gary Shapley and I were sidelined after a disagreement with U.S. Attorney David Weiss. Four assigned prosecutors and Mr. Weiss had agreed to recommend the approval of misdemeanor and felony charges for 2017-19 before Mr. Weiss ultimately claimed he wasn’t the deciding person on whether to file charges. When Biden-appointed U.S. attorneys in the District of Columbia and the Central District of California declined the case after only a brief review, and refused to allow Mr. Shapley or me to brief them on our findings, I knew I had to blow the whistle.
And then there was this explosive assertion from the other IRS whistleblower, the supervisory agent on the case:
“There were certain investigative steps we weren’t allowed to take that could have led us to President Biden.” Place that statement side by side with Democrats’ talking point that “no evidence” leads to the president (though that isn’t necessarily true either). Add all of that to Hunter’s team being tipped off to pending interviews and searches. Entire threads of evidence being forcibly abandoned. Sit-downs with people who’d likely have pertinent information being forbidden. Statutes of limitations on clear-cut felony charges permitted to expire. And recommendations for felony prosecutions ignored and rejected, culminating in a breathtaking plea deal that was revealed to be even worse than publicly known when a federal judge asked a simple question in open court. Separately, but relatedly, Devon Archer’s testimony confirms major elements of a confidential FBI informant’s bribery accusations against Joe and Hunter Biden — allegations that were reportedly partially corroborated by some FBI agents before being sent to the ‘official’ Delaware investigation to die. That would be the same Delaware investigation that resulted in the astounding erstwhile plea deal, no felony charges on any of the tax or gun crimes, and whose investigators were barred from pursuing various lines of inquiry or leads — all as the US Attorney in charge of the probe told a room full of frustrated subordinates that he didn’t have the power to file charges in jurisdictions controlled by recalcitrant Biden appointees. That is quite a fact pattern. Gary Shapley, the IRS official and whistleblower featured in the CBS report above said this week that other witnesses against the Bidens are being pressured not to talk:
“I’ve heard Joe Biden say that he’s never discussed business with Hunter. That is false. I have firsthand knowledge about this because I directly dealt with the Biden family, including Joe Biden… [Bobulinski] recalled a conversation with Jim Biden about the family’s ties to CEFE, when he asked, “‘How are you guys getting away with this? Aren’t you concerned?'” to which Bobulinski claimed Jim Biden laughed. “Plausible deniability,” Bobulinski said he remembered Jim Biden responding. “He said it directly to me in a cabana at the Peninsula Hotel.” … Bobulinski also claimed during the interview that Biden’s denial of knowing about his son’s business affairs with the Chinese energy firm was a “blatant lie.” Bobulinski described a scene during the interview in which Joe Biden arrived for a conference held partially at the Beverly Hilton Hotel and how Jim Biden and Hunter Biden introduced him to the former vice president. “I didn’t request to meet with Joe [Biden],” he told Carlson. “They requested that I meet with Joe [Biden]. They were putting their entire family legacy on the line. They knew exactly what they were doing.”
One might call that the “family legacy” at work. Others, like Devon Archer, would call it “the brand,” affirming that Joe Biden himself was the face of “the brand” they were selling:
The claim that others also thought Viktor Shokin needed to go is not exculpatory for Joe, who singularly brought about that outcome, ultimately, then bragged about it on camera. Crucially, that outcome perfectly aligned with the fervent, self-interested desires of Hunter Biden’s million-bucks-per-year benefactors, who joined Hunter on at least one infamous “call to DC” to press for their agenda, according to two sources with knowledge. The firm paying Hunter seven figures annually got what they wanted. And the man responsible for making it happen was Hunter’s father, using US taxpayer dollars as leverage. That is not definitive proof of the aforementioned $10 million bribery scheme alleged by the FBI’s trusted informant — yet. But the existing and mounting facts speak very loudly for themselves.