Today, we have the esteemed Constitutional attorney Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University and a Fox News contributor, joining us to discuss the appointment of David Weiss as special counsel in the Hunter Biden probe. Turley expresses his concern over this appointment, stating that Garland missed an opportunity to regain public trust by appointing someone else and expanding the mandate to include investigations into potential influence peddling crimes associated with the Biden family. Instead, Garland focused solely on investigating Hunter Biden, choosing an individual who has faced criticism and whistleblower accusations of conducting a biased investigation. Turley argues that this decision will not help restore the public’s trust in the Department of Justice.
Furthermore, Turley highlights the significance of the oversight committee’s role in these investigations, explaining that they can dig in, bring witnesses, and gather testimony, but ultimately, they must pass the baton to the Department of Justice for prosecution. The appointment of Weiss as special counsel is likely to insulate the Department itself, preventing Weiss from testifying before Congress and potentially hindering the flow of crucial information. Turley suggests that the limited scope of the mandate may fuel calls for a Biden impeachment inquiry and raises questions about why the Justice Department refuses to clarify whether the president is within the scope of the investigation. Overall, Turley’s analysis leaves room for concerns over the integrity of the Hunter Biden probe and its potential implications.
Jonathan Turley’s thoughts on David Weiss being named special counsel
Jonathan Turley, a Fox News media contributor and Constitutional attorney, has shared his thoughts on the appointment of David Weiss as special counsel in the Hunter Biden probe. In his analysis, Turley raises several concerns and critiques about Weiss’s appointment and its implications.
Garland’s missed opportunity to regain public trust
Turley believes that Attorney General Merrick Garland missed an opportunity to regain the public’s trust with the appointment of Weiss. According to Turley, Garland could have appointed someone else as special counsel to independently investigate the influence peddling crimes associated with the Biden family. By keeping the focus solely on investigating Hunter Biden and appointing Weiss, who has been criticized for weeks and accused of leading a fixed investigation, Garland may not be instilling confidence in the public.
Weiss’s appointment criticized for lack of independence
There are accusations that Weiss’s appointment lacks independence, further fueling public skepticism. Whistleblower allegations against Weiss suggest that he was the head of a fixed investigation. These allegations undermine the perception of independence and impartiality surrounding Weiss’s appointment. This lack of independence could potentially have an impact on future testimony in Congress.
Impact on the Department of Justice
The appointment of Weiss as special counsel has implications for the Department of Justice itself. Turley argues that his appointment will insulate the department, making it unlikely for Weiss to provide substantive information if he testifies in Congress. This lack of transparency and limited information sharing raises questions about the department’s commitment to thoroughly investigate the President.
Potential implications for impeachment inquiry
Turley suggests that the appointment of Weiss may fuel calls for a Biden impeachment inquiry. He argues that Congress has a duty to investigate corruption allegations, and Garland’s mandate may not encompass all the concerns associated with the Biden family’s influence-peddling crimes. Turley believes that impeachment might be a constitutional response to address these allegations, especially if they are not adequately investigated by the Department of Justice.
Unclear stance on investigating President Biden
There is uncertainty surrounding the attorney general’s stance on investigating President Biden himself. Turley points out that Garland provided specificity regarding the mandate to investigate Hunter Biden but did not clearly answer whether the president falls within that mandate. This ambiguity raises doubts about the commitment of the rank and file in the Department of Justice to thoroughly investigate the President.
Focus on the Pharah issue
The Pharah issue, specifically violations of the FARA (Foreign Agents Registration Act), is a matter of focus in the investigation. Turley believes that this issue is still ongoing and expects it to be one of the areas the Department of Justice is examining. Hunter Biden’s lawyer’s statement to “rip it up” implies a potential violation of FARA. However, Turley highlights the challenges in charging Hunter Biden as a foreign agent and the potential implications of this issue on the wider investigation.
Confidence in ongoing investigation
Turley expresses expectations that the Department of Justice will look into allegations of Pharah violations and is particularly concerned about the significant amounts of money funneled through shell companies. With allegations of corruption surrounding the Biden family, Turley believes that the public perceives these allegations as signs of corruption. Despite the criticism and skepticism, Turley maintains confidence in the ongoing investigation.
Charges related to original plea agreement
One aspect within Weiss’s mandate is his oversight of tax issues related to Hunter Biden. Turley raises concerns about crimes expiring and missed opportunities. Whistleblower claims that a deal to extend the statute of limitations was allowed to expire, damaging Weiss’s credibility. The decision not to pursue certain inquiries related to the president may raise questions about the fairness and impartiality of the investigation.
The statute of limitations
The statute of limitations is a crucial factor in the ongoing investigation. Turley explains that Weiss will oversee charges related to the original plea agreement and any tax issues associated with Hunter Biden. However, concerns arise about the expiration of crimes and the potential impact on the overall investigation. It remains to be seen whether Weiss can effectively address these issues within the confines of the statute of limitations.
Perceptions of Weiss as damaged goods
Turley contends that Weiss’s appointment may not present him as an unimpeachable figure to the public. An unimpeachable reputation is one of the principal reasons for appointing a special counsel. With accusations of a fixed investigation, lack of independence, and missed opportunities, public skepticism and concerns about Weiss’s credibility are inevitable. These perceptions could hinder the public’s trust and confidence in the ongoing investigation.
In conclusion, Jonathan Turley has offered several critical insights into David Weiss’s appointment as special counsel in the Hunter Biden probe. Turley highlights missed opportunities, concerns about independence, potential implications for the Department of Justice, and the wider impeachment inquiry. He also addresses the unclear stance on investigating President Biden, the focus on the Pharah issue, confidence in the ongoing investigation, charges related to the original plea agreement, the statute of limitations, and the perceptions of Weiss as potentially damaged goods. These insights contribute to a comprehensive understanding of the implications of Weiss’s appointment in the context of the Hunter Biden probe.