U.S. Department of Justice officials deliberately delayed an investigation into Hunter Biden’s potential tax law violations and sketchy overseas business dealings because of the effect it could have on the presidential election, according to a Politico report.
Delaware’s U.S. Attorney David Weiss allegedly postponed allowing prosecutors to obtain search warrants and issue grand jury subpoenas last summer, after facing pressure from other officials who feared the investigation’s influence on the 2020 presidential election and now-President Joe Biden’s campaign.
“They advised [him] to avoid taking any actions that could alert the public to the existence of the case in the middle of a presidential election,” reported Politico, one of the many corporate media outlets that brushed off the possibility of any wrongdoing by Hunter despite the discovery of his incriminating laptop.
The Department of Justice has retracted its claim that it seized a “fully constructed U.S. Capitol Lego set” from an accused Capitol rioter.
In an memorandum asking a court to order Robert Morss be held pending trial, prosecutors claimed that law enforcement officials “recover[e]d a fully constructed U.S. Capitol Lego set” while arresting the defendant.
But in a supplemental motion, authorities said they erred in conveying that claim.
“Please note that after a review of the photographs from the search, there appears to have been a miscommunication and that statement appears to be inaccurate. The Lego set was in a box and not fully constructed at the time of the search, as pictured below,” they wrote.
The Department of Justice’s threat is a red flag to states that the federal government is poised to intervene if states conduct election audits. This should be prompting Republican-led legislatures to begin doing election audits immediately and passing voter integrity laws. The Democratic Party is obviously greatly concerned that elections in the U.S. scrutinize the eligibility of voters to cast ballots in state elections.
“We are scrutinizing new laws that seek to curb voter access and where we see violations we will not hesitate to act,” he said. “We are also scrutinizing current laws and practices in order to determine whether they discredit against black voters and other voters of color. Particularly concerning with in this regard are several studies showing that in some jurisdictions nonwhite voters must wait in line substantially longer than white voters to cast their ballots.”
“The Department of Justice will apply the same scrutiny to postelection audits, according to Garland, to make sure the election reviews fall in line with federal laws meant to protect records and guard against voter intimidation,” the Epoch Times reported.
“Garland referenced the audit taking place in Maricopa County, Arizona, on the orders of the Republican-controlled Senate in the state, noting that the Department of Justice previously sent a letter to Arizona Senate President Karen Fann expressing concern about the review,” the report continued. “Fann said in a response letter that the audit was secure and that a previous plan to canvass some voters was on hold indefinitely. The attempted intervention lacked constitutional authority, experts told The Epoch Times.”
Conducting an audit on an open and fair election should not be an issue, especially when the audit can be easily observed by the public in real-time.
Yet, Democrats have left no stone unturned in their campaign to end the Arizona state Senate’s comprehensive forensic audit of all ballots cast in Maricopa County during the November presidential election.
Following months of obstruction via bogus lawsuits and a full-court press from heavyweight Washington lawyer Marc Elias (who commissioned the Steele dossier) and his many minions, influential Democrat-run organizations appealed to the Department of Justice late last week. Their efforts have born fruit. According to KNXV-TV, the DOJ has decided to get involved in some capacity in the matter.
This latest move smacks of desperation and leaves many Republicans wondering what has the Democrats running scared.
The DOJ Civil Rights Division’s Principle Deputy Assistant Attorney General Pamela Karlan wrote a letter to Karen Fann, the president of the Arizona state Senate, on Wednesday to express the department’s concerns about ballot security and potential voter intimidation arising from the forensic audit.
Not a surprise. Kirsten Clarke, Biden’s nominee to head civil rights at the DOJ, has a history of black nationalism, and sympathy for racism and antisemitism.
Kristen Clarke, Joe Biden’s nominee for assistant attorney general of the United States, once promoted racist pseudoscientific quackery, arguing that the human brain was structured in a way that makes Black people superior to white people, and that “human mental processes” in the brain have chemicals that imbue one race with “superior physical and mental abilities” and “spiritual abilities.”
The Biden Justice Department is “actively considering” whether to give prosecutors new authorities to bring specific charges against “domestic terrorists.”
“One of the things we’re looking at is would we need new authorities,” Brad Wiegmann, deputy assistant attorney general for the department’s national security division, said Thursday.
Because the current laws on the books to bring charges for arson, violations of weapons or explosives laws isn’t enough.
The reality is the DOJ is looking to make new laws to persecute people with whom they politically disagree.
The Justice Department did not mention BLM terrorists or Antifa terrorists; they are focused on so-called “white supremacists” – which is just code for Trump supporters/conservatives.
The FBI said white supremacists pose the most lethal threat despite the fact that BLM and Antifa have caused billions in damage, killed dozens of people and burned countless buildings to the ground over the last year.
They always knew.
Today, the DOJ published records unsealed by court order in the Ghislaine Maxwell case. These included a motion and numerous exhibits detailing what the FBI/DOJ – and in particular, the Southern District of New York – knew about the criminal activities of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell back in 2016.
Recall that Epstein was given a sweetheart deal back in 2007. Notes from a meeting in 2016 – read the document here – reveal that a “US Attorney has said [Epstein] could be prosecuted elsewhere.” They failed to act for years, however.
Despite all the outrage and the threats of charging “insurrectionists” with sedition—the act of attempting to overthrow the government—proving them based upon actual facts and evidence seems to be increasingly unlikely. For example, Michael Cantrell reported on America’s Sheriff that:
“Many of the trials for individuals involved in the Capitol riot of January 6th have started and much to the chagrin of liberals everywhere, the charges these folks are facing aren’t quite as serious as we were all led to believe they would be. In fact, the Justice Department has now said that the body of evidence in these cases is not as damaging as it was previously thought to be.”
Further, developing reports indicate that none of the 400 people who have been arrested for their involvement in the riot have been charged with sedition, according to the Post Millennial. The most serious charge that has been brought against a defendant in this incident has been assault. To be clear, there is quite a leap between the charges of assault—and the charges of conspiring to overthrow the government.
Even more perplexing, while others have been charged with conspiracy and obstruction, there’s a rather inconvenient fact that prosecutors must reckon. As the Post Millenial explained: “Others have been charged with conspiracy, and obstruction. While five people lost their lives during the riot, only one was killed with a weapon, and that was Ashli Babbit, who died after being shot by an unnamed Capitol Police Officer.”
The secrecy surrounding the death investigations of Sicknick and Babbit do nothing to bolster confidence in “transparency.” The additional three victims suffered medical emergencies, yet transparency is still lacking in these cases as well.