Garland and Fauci face the music
“I am not the President’s lawyer,” Garland is expected to say, according to the excerpts obtained by CNN. “I will also add that I am not Congress’s prosecutor. The Justice Department works for the American people.”
Right now, the House will question the corrupt Merick Garland and the infamous Dr Fauci before the American people. Andy Biggs is also calling for him to be impeached for weaponizing our Justice Department against conservatives.
It will be the first time Garland has testified since an IRS whistleblower called into question his claim that U.S. Attorney David Weiss had ultimate charging authority over Hunter Biden.
Garland is now making his opening statement.
Tags
Who is online
548 visitors
Now carried by responsible news organizations
two maga circle jerks both with the sole purpose of providing a distraction from the criminal acts of their party's leader...
The legally predicated investigations into the Biden Family are ongoing.
We are still trying to figure out what any Biden grandkids did to garner money from foreigners.
Why do Democrats/leftists love their criminals so damn much?
Ya! Nothing but projection and defection. All some have.
Didn't your grandparents and uncles funnel foreign bribery money from their LLCs to you while you were still in school? Shocker!
What criminal acts has Ronna McDaniel committed? She's who I see listed as the party "leader".
Have you ever noticed that not one liberal or "independent' will bother even attempting to explain why a Biden grandchild would be getting any money from foreigners?
What pray tell is Dr, Fauci 'facing the music for'?
doesn't matter, it's a kazoo band from the insurrectionist clown car of the GOP circus...
Nothing, they just want to believe the guy that told them to inject bleach and shove lightbulbs up their asses.
Nobody wants to hear about your sex life.
Comment stands, would have been removed except flagger also responded to it, by charger
Wow, you trigger easily.
Who's the man sitting behind Garland's right shoulder? Isn't he one of the whistleblowers?
I've checked throughout the hearing. NBC, CBS, ABC, and MSNBC weren't covering it. CNN and FNC have.
Amazing isn't it. It is getting late in the day to ignore this story.
As Yogi Berra once said "It gets late early around here."
Swalwell was right when he told Jordan that there was no credibility with him and the gqp. That's why you hate him.
Fox is far from being a responsible news organization.
Fox is fascism read by ignorant blond bimbos.
An exceptionally ignorant, false, idiotic comment.
And C-Span?
"Have you had personal contact with anyone at FBI HQ about the Hunter Biden investigation?"
AG MERRICK GARLAND: "Uh, I don't recollect the answer to that question"
Thank God he’s not on SCOTUS.
I call that divine intervention at its best.
Back then he was supposed to be totally independent. "A man of integrity!"
I call it We the People dodging a toxic, lethal bullet to preserve the US Constitution.
“I call that divine intervention…”
When one cites divine intervention in any reference to our courts, one misses the essence of our entire judicial system.
I can see some vocabularies could use some work here:
Divine, as in supremely good, superb.
Very superb!
QUESTION: "Have you had personal contact with anyone at the FBI headquarters about the Hunter Biden investigation?"
AG MERRICK GARLAND: "I don't recollect the answer to that question."
And THAT answer right there should disqualify him from office. He needs to go.
Your point is that he is either unfit or corrupt?
I'm going to go with the latter.
I'll go with unfit.
I don't know for sure if he got anything in exchange for his shitty handling of the whole mess.
His isn't a crime of monetary corruption. What Garland does he does because of ideology.
I expect there are many people who could be involved in such an investigation. It’s reasonable that the AG could have contact with someone involved and not know it.
You don’t think it’s reasonable for him to remember discussing the case with doj officials?
Given the obvious conflicts of interest involved in the BIden DOJ prosecuting a Biden who is threatening to call the president as a witness, it would seem extremely reckless to have off hand discussions about the case with random doj officials.
Depends on if he has. I don’t think anyone here has a clue what any Attorney General does on a daily basis, but his roll - in theory - is political, and to a lesser extent, administrative. I doubt he actually spends much time looking at or discussing specific cases.
You realize that flies in the face of credibility because the case involves the son of a sitting US President. Of course Garland was aware.
I didn’t say he was unaware of the particular case. I just think it’s perfectly reasonable to believe that he hasn’t been communicating with people working the case.
IDepends on if he has
Then it would be pretty easy to say "I've never talked about this case with FBI officials."
This isn't an ordinary case. He is investigating the son of his boss, making the case rife with conflicts of interest. Unless he's a really shitty lawyer, that should have set off alarm bells from the beginning about who he talks to about it. If he's so blase about who he talks to about it, he shouldn't be AG.
Garland has zero excuse for not appointing a special prosecutor from the very beginning.
I think it’s arguable, at least. In theory, they’re not investigating the president yet, so I think it’s harder to cite a conflict of interest. That’s usually the reason they appoint one. The other reason would be in the public interest, which is so vague a standard as to be meaningless.
WTF?
No conflict of interest when investigating the son of the man who appointed you?
I have no idea how anyone can possibly believe such crap. It is ridiculous spin.
Why don’t you calm tf down and read? I said it was arguable. Do you really need to freak out every time someone doesn’t agree with you 100%?
If you think it’s so clear, then you’re free to cite legal precedents of independent counsel being assigned whenever the relatives of appointing executives are investigated.
If THAT is an "argument", I want no part of that insanity.
Crazy idea that the AG of the US had no knowledge of anything to do with Hunter Biden and the Biden family investigations.
If you choose to believe it, then that is solely on you, but I simply refuse to believe something so damn idiotic.
I suppose it is possible some could choose to refuse to see any conflicts of interest. People sometimes believe all sorts of things which are just flat-out crazy, and I can't stop them, but I can SMH at them!
Well, that wasn’t the question, so there’s no pressure on anyone to believe it.
Perhaps it would help you if you researched the laws, guidelines, and precedents on conflict of interest.
I know a conflict of interest when I see it. Someone appointed by the President should have appointed a special counsel from the start. He failed to do try that, thus creating the a appearance of impropiety.
I won't stick my head in the sand and ever pretend that isn't a conflict of interest.
Ok, but he did end up appointing one, didn’t he? Or am I thinking of a different case?
By Jove, you got it!
I have no earthly idea what you are thinking. Your post 5.1.21 kind of displays a little ignorance on the topic.
Then I don’t see what you have to be mad about.
I’m thinking of the decision to appoint special counsel in a general way. I think I have said elsewhere that I don’t care about Hunter, so excuse me for not thinking immediately about all the latest developments. I don’t think that has much of an impact on anything we have been talking about.
What does that even mean? Either he appoints one or he doesn't. Stop trying to spin.
That wasn't your complaint. Your complaint was that he didn't do it from the very start. If all you care about is that it happened, then you should be satisfied.
I thought our conversation was about how necessary it was. Or maybe you're changing it.
My point yet once again is that he should have done it long ago.
David Weiss was recommended for US Attorney by the two democrat Senators from Delaware. He had to be safe to get that recommendation.
Enough with the BS about Trump appointing somebody that democrats recommended.
Not to mention he was only one of two prosecutors Biden retained. He showed his worth to Biden and was rewarded
He was an Obama investment and Biden collected the returns.
So long as the American people have a D behind their name (especially if their last name ends with Clinton, Obama, or Biden); are not named Trump or any of his followers; are not parents concerned about their children's education; and don't say or do anything we don't agree with.
If you meet all of those requirements; then yes the DOJ does "work for you".
Did Garland just say he didn't pay attention to the Hunter Biden investigation?
He claimed to know nothing about what Weiss knows.
He is claiming he had nothing to do with the investigations. Which is why it is most perplexing as to why he didn't appoint a special prosecutor from the get-go.
We are down to:
Question: “Have you had personal contact with anyone at FBI HQ?”
Garland: “Uh, I don't
Was he not prepared for the onslaught?
McClintock just asked Garland if it was incompetence or corruption!
LMAO!
As Garland becomes a stuttering bumbling mass of jelly, some are beginning to wonder
I wonder why he keeps harping on the fact that Weiss was a Trump appointee?
Sounds like they are setting him up to be hung out to dry and then they will spin it somehow into being Trump's fault!
Every lefty prefaces every reference to Weiss with that. As I said, Weiss only got forwarded to nomination by Delaware's two democrat Senators. I'm sure Trump was simply filling a vacancy with what he thought would be an unbiased prosecutor. The fact is that Delaware is Biden territory. It is a club out there.
Just another smokescreen attempt by leftists.
Garland is the one ultimately responsible, and he didn't do shit. He allowed the investigation to continue without special prosecutor and then let the SOL run out.
When Biden's dumb press secretary said Hunter would not be pardoned, we knew the fix was in.
Well, that or it was a lie.
A special prosecutor should have been appointed on day one instead of trying to get sweetheart deals for the President's son.
Remember, these are the people trying to fight "disinformation."
He probably doesn’t. He’s a cabinet officer, running a huge department. It’s not his job to conduct investigations.
As head of the Justice Department, I don't find it at all unreasonable to assume he should have been informed about what occurs in his department.
Thousand of investigations are ongoing some he may know about and some he may not. Some he may not WANT to know about to give separation between him and investigators.
Always an excuse.
Leftists everywhere are probably cheering you on!
He reminds me of Kirby. Another bumbling, mumbling little mouse.
I think you’re assuming too much. I worked in a government office with only about 80 employees, counting attorneys, investigators, secretaries, and so on. The big boss never had a clue what I was doing. Half the time, he wasn’t even in the office (and I’m being generous). He was usually off at some meeting with other government people or a public event.
Compare that to the Attorney General of the United States, who heads a department of over 115,000 employees across 40 different organizations. He’s also in various government meetings, answering questions in Congress, or giving press conferences and interviews. Maybe a few speeches.
Meanwhile, DOJ has a lot more going on than just prosecuting the president’s son. DOJ is also civil rights, taxes, interpol, national security, fbi, atf, prisons, etc.
There are probably dozens of levels of bureaucracy between the AG and any one case.
I don't have any doubts he was consulted. The son of the President? of course he knew and he blew it by not appointing a special prosecutor from the start.
He sure did look bad today.
I'm sure he couldn't wait to get out of there.
You also don’t have any evidence that he was.
And even if he was consulted, advised, or whatever, it was probably by a supervisor of a supervisor of a supervisor, and not someone who was actually working on the case.
Sorry, but hopefully I will never be dumb enough to believe that crap.
I have my eyes open and see what Garland failed to do from the onset---appoint a special prosecutor.
I won't pretend this was handled at all well to satisfy some liberals.
Don’t sell yourself short.
He still may. Just because he hasn’t appointed one, that doesn’t mean he can’t at some future date. It will likely depend on how the case evolves.
That is simply hilarious based solely on what else you said in that post.
There basically is no difference between a special prosecutor and a special counsel. Garland already appointed one in case you missed it (and your post indicates you did).
Keep up.
Rep Gaetz is tearing him limb from limb right now!
No, he isn't.
Swalwell tore Gym Jordan apart limb by limb.
He hasn't got the weapons.
jim "hit the showers boys" jordan?
Garland should resign.
He is looking like a dumbass up there.
Yup, he is a total wreck.
Thank you Mitch McConnel for saving us from this piece of partisan crap.
Oh, the irony LOL
And another ignorant comment.
Letting him resign allows him to leave with some sort of dignity, integrity and respect. The man has none. Like those that are supporting this clown, he lacks integrity and deserves no respect. The only option is impeachment.
Swalwell is now making an idiot of himself again.
The guy who slept with a Chinese spy when he was on the Intelligence Committee.
Known for his flatulence.
Again? You mean he stopped at some point?
Didnt Andy Biggs support Trump's fake election fraud campaign?
Lets impeach him for being a traitorous clown.
Garland is making himself look foolish.
I like the way the seeded article cites Andy Biggs as if he is some sort of legitimate voice.
He is a total jackass.
I like how you can't refute anything presented and attack the source.
Andy Biggs wants to impeach Garland.
That will be after he impeaches himself for his traitorous actions surrounding the 2020 election.
As do many other people. Now don't go crying about elections and people who should be removed. Unless you are going to call out all the Democrats who did, pretty much the same thing back from now to the 2016 election.
Speaking of Jackasses, the democrats showed a film of Jan 6th.
What does it have to do with Garland's corruption?
What corruption is that? Waiting so long to investigate Trump that now his trials will not be completed before the 2024 election?
Protected Hunter Biden; protected Brandon; protected the whole fucking Brandon clan.
Garland doesn't give a shit about the Constitution or the laws. Otherwise he would have known he couldn't appoint Weiss as a Special Counsel.
Read the parts I bolded. Weiss doesn't qualify to be a special counsel. First he is member of the government/DOJ. Second he has a proven conflict of interest with the Brandon family- which he has already abused by slow walking what should have been an open and shut investigation and charging; preventing investigators from following any leads that tied into Brandon; didn't want to even file charges against Hunter- but was forced to when whistleblowers outed his corrupt investigation. Gave Hunter a plea deal no impartial uncorrupt prosecutor ever agree to. Judge that shot down the plea deal forced Weiss to bring gun charges against Hunter- or else be shown to be the partisan corrupt POS he truly is. Also, Weiss has a connection to the Brandon family.
Nothing to see here. No conflict of interest.
Why do Democrats/leftists love their criminals so damn much? We are still waiting for an answer.
Blame Biden for his shitty choice for AG.
That is 50% of it. Prosecuting his boss's opponent and waiting for an election to do it.
That is your opinion of anyone that doesn't have a "Get Trump at all costs" mentality 24/7.
In case you missed it. This is about the human POS Garland, the most partisan and corrupt AG in the history of the US.
Could potentially be the first impeached AG as well.
Democrats do love their criminals.
Wonder if they will throw Garland under the bus to try and save Brandon, Hunter, and the rest of the Brandon clan that received foreign money?
Garland may be a criminal, and have that all important D behind his name; but Democrats will do anything to maintain power. Garland can always be replaced by another lapdog with a D behind their name.
You confuse the crazy, MAGA and QAnon riddled Republican committees with a responsible investigation.
Garland would have a larger chance of being hit by lightning twice than he would have of being found guilty in an impeachment trial.
You confuse Democrats with anyone that cares about the Constitution or our laws. Much the less about criminals with a D behind their names.
The Democrats would prove yet again they don't give a shit about this country in the Senate. Nothing new with them. They proved it long ago with the Clinton impeachment. Maybe they can go stand on the White House lawn with their criminal of the moment in a show of solidarity again.
and win the lottery
Or the J6 Committee partisan shit show that altered "evidence"?
Or Alvin Bragg's "investigations" that went nowhere?
Or the Fulton County "investigation" that is acting in a partisan manner?
How about the Smith "investigation" that has violated the Brady rule several times?
Those " responsible investigations"?
Some MAGA idiot on the committee just asked Garland "do you support more crime?".
Sadly, I have to ask.
What did he answer, and did you believe it?
Are you saying he should have assumed the answer was "Yes?"
The only people the DOJ seems eager to prosecute are 70 year old ladies and people who protested only at one specific protest.
"The Justice Department follows the rule of law without regard to political party, religion, or belief." ~Merrick Garland
If anyone believes that, I have oceanfront property in Kansas for sale!
Also, he took absolutely NO responsibility for how the DoJ and FBI have abused the American people under his tenure.
How so?
If you watched the hearing live as I did, you'd know. If you couldn't watch it live, I'm sure it's available on the Internet by now.
Here you go. Take your pick:
CBS:
CNBC:
WaPo:
Here is the little cherry on top:
Like Swalwell said, and why you hate him, 'you have no credibility'
How has he 'abused the American people'?
You don't have an answer, obviously.
How so 'the cherry on top'?
This asshole scumbag has no credibility whatsoever nor any one else on this distraction of a 'trial'
One more thing:
Adam Schiff claimed that Donald Trump lied when he said Joe Biden pressured Garland to prosecute him.
(Start at 2:22 of the tape)
From April of 2022:
"A new report claims President Joe Biden has told people he wants former President Donald Trump to be prosecuted .
The leak was published in the New York Times on Saturday as Democrats mount increasing pressure on the Justice Department to take action against Trump and people within his orbit in relation to the Capitol riot. At focus are Attorney General Merrick Garland and his "deliberative approach," as the report put it, which is causing frustration."
Biden wish for Trump prosecution leaked as Democrats mount pressure campaign on DOJ | Washington Examiner
Leaked to the New York Times.
Once again Donald Trump told the truth and Adam Schiff lied.
That last sentence there REALLY takes the cake!
Trump tells the truth every once in a while.
Brandon should try it for a change.
"Former Trump advisor Kash Patel says that Republicans should focus on impeaching Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Christopher Wray for enabling the "two-tiered system of justice."
"The real people that need to be impeached are the architects of the two-tier system of justice: the people who have covered up the crimes continuously," Patel said on the "Just the News, No Noise" TV show. "Merrick Garland and Christopher Wray are the top two twins of deceit at the top of my list."
Kash Patel says the 'top two twins of deceit' Merrick Garland and Chris Wray need to be impeached | Just The News