Garland Stonewalls Questions about a Special Counsel Despite New Evidence Tied to President Biden

by Jonathan Turley


Attorney General Merrick Garland continued to refuse to address questions over his refusal to appoint a Special Counsel in the Hunter Biden investigation despite new evidence tying President Joe Biden to the controversial business deals. The New York Post is reporting that President Biden agreed to cover more than $800,000 in bills of Hunter, including legal fees tied to the foreign deals. While President Biden’s denial of knowledge of Hunter’s deals has been repeatedly contradicted (including by Hunter himself), White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki declared that President Biden stands by his denials. However, she declined to explain new information showing that a key business partner in these deals visited the White House over a dozen times, including at least one meeting with then Vice President Biden.

The New York Post shows that on Jan. 17, 2019, Hunter Biden’s then-personal assistant, Katie Dodge told accountant Linda Shapero that Joe Biden was covering the legal costs. The email states “I spoke with Hunter today regarding his bills. It is my understanding that Hunt’s dad will cover these bills in the short-term as Hunter transitions in his career.”

[America's two tier Justice system.  A different set of rules depending on who you are, aptly depicted by the following two cases (1) you're a globalist elite above the law OR (2) An ordinary Joe who gets hammered for his indiscressions. - ED]

What may be even more damaging is the the new disclosure that Hunter Biden’s business partner, Eric Schwerin, made at least 19 visits to the White House and other official locations between 2009 and 2015. Schwerin was the president of Rosemont Seneca, one of the key firms involved in the alleged influence peddling schemes.

We have previously discussed the various references to the President in these emails. Indeed, it is impossible to look into these allegations of influence peddling without repeatedly running into references to the President.

As vice president, Joe Biden flew to China on Air Force Two with Hunter Biden, who arranged for his father to meet some of his business interests. Hunter Biden’s financial interest in a Chinese-backed investment firm, BHR Partners, was registered within weeks of that 2013 trip.

There are emails of Ukrainian and other foreign clients thanking Hunter Biden for arranging meetings with his father. There are photos from dinners and meetings that tie President Biden to these figures, including a 2015 dinner with a group of Hunter Biden’s Russian and Kazakh clients.

People apparently were told to avoid directly referring to President Biden. In one email, Tony Bobulinski, then a business partner of Hunter’s, was instructed by Biden associate James Gilliar not to speak of the former veep’s connection to any transactions: “Don’t mention Joe being involved, it’s only when u [sic] are face to face, I know u [sic] know that but they are paranoid.”

Instead, the emails apparently refer to President Biden with code names such as “Celtic” or “the big guy.” In one, “the big guy” is discussed as possibly receiving a 10 percent cut on a deal with a Chinese energy firm; other emails reportedly refer to Hunter Biden paying portions of his father’s expenses and taxes.

There were other connections like an office arranged for Joe Biden by the Chinese, a letter of recommendation written by Joe Biden for a key Chinese figure’s child, and expenses paid out of joint accounts.

President Biden has long insisted that that his son did “nothing wrong.” That is obviously untrue. One can argue over whether Hunter committed any crime, but few would say that there is nothing wrong with raw influence peddling worth millions with foreign entities. The public has a legitimate reason to know whether the President or his family ran an influence peddling operation worth millions.

Given this mounting evidence, the position of Attorney General Garland has gone from dubious to ridiculous in evading the issue of a special counsel appointment.  He continues to refuse to acknowledge these conflicts with the President. In a hearing yesterday, Garland again refused to address the issue, even discussing what it would take to warrant the appointment of a special counsel. There is no reason why he cannot answer such legal questions without getting into the evidence produced in Delaware.

Federal regulations allow the appointment of a special counsel when it is in the public interest and an “investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney’s Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances.”

It is hard to imagine a stronger case for the appointment of a special counsel. [It's really NOT in the interests of the globalists who contol the majority of US agencies, the judiciary and of course Congress. It's 'Pay for Play' at it's finest and they will block all attempts to stop it just as they have prevented the stolen 2020 election from being decertified. - ED}

Share this:





EXCLUSIVE: New Jan. 6 Bodycam Videos Show DC Police Officer Assaulting Unconscious Protester

by Joseph W. hanneman


A District of Columbia police officer used a large wooden stick to strike the body and head of protester Rosanne Boyland three times as she lay motionless on the ground on Jan. 6, 2021, according to bodycam footage from several officers obtained by The Epoch Times.

Use-of-force expert Stanley Kephart, upon reviewing the previously unreleased footage, concluded that the three full-force blows by D.C. police officer Lila Morris constituted a felony assault with intent to cause great bodily harm.

Kephart called Morris’s use of force “indefensible” and the internal-affairs investigation of Boyland’s death a “clear and convincing coverup.”

“I think that the first thing that occurred is an assault under the color of authority by Morris,” Kephart told The Epoch Times. “That is a crime, an arrestable offense.”

Police at the mouth of the Lower West Terrace tunnel at the U.S. Capitol ignored dozens of pleas to help Boyland after she collapsed, the videos show.

When a lifeless Boyland was pulled inside the building more than 10 minutes later, other police and EMS personnel began 50 minutes of life-saving efforts that ultimately failed.

An independent forensic pathologist hired by the Boyland family contends that her cause of death wasn’t an overdose of the prescription drug Adderall—as reported by the D.C. medical examiner—but manual asphyxia. Boyland was crushed under a pile of people when police gassed protesters and pushed them out of the tunnel at about 4:20 p.m. on Jan. 6.

‘Under the Color of Authority’

Kephart, a 42-year law enforcement veteran and former director of security for the 1984 Los Angeles Summer Olympics, reviewed Boyland’s case at the request of The Epoch Times. He has testified as a witness more than 350 times on topics including excessive force, police discipline, officer safety, and crowd control.

Kephart concluded that Morris’s use of force was a felonious “assault under the color of authority,” with intent to cause great bodily harm. He said that Morris should be prosecuted in criminal court and fired from the D.C. Metro police force.

“I believe two things were in operation here. One was anger at this person,” Kephart said, referring to Boyland. “That was overridden by fear. And those two elements were the causal connection between what was done to the person by the officer and the result.”

Rosanne Boyland was struck with a wooden stick on Jan. 6, 2021: once in the ribs and twice in the head, video evidence shows. (Metropolitan Police Department Bodycams/Graphic by The Epoch Times) The force used against Boyland fails a four-part standard set in the 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case Graham v. Connor, Kephart said: whether...

Gubernatioral Candidiate Kari Lake and SOS Mark Finchem File AZ Lawsuit to remove Electronic Voting Machines

by Summer Lane


Mike Lindell, the CEO of MyPillow and a fearless advocate for election integrity, discussed the historic preliminary injunction filed yesterday in Arizona to eliminate digital voting machines during an interview with RSBN’s Brian Glenn.

“Yesterday was [a] historic day in the history of America,” Lindell shared, standing near a line of excited rallygoers in Delaware, Ohio, ahead of Saturday night’s scheduled Save America rally event.

“We filed our first preliminary injunction in the state of Arizona to get rid of the machines once and for all. That’s the first of many, many,” he continued.

The injunction plaintiffs include Kari Lake, the Republican and Trump-endorsed candidate for Arizona governor, and Rep. Mark Finchem, R-Ariz., candidate for Arizona Secretary of State. If successful, the injunction will remove the Dominion voting machines from being used in the upcoming midterm election.

“In the 2020 election,” Lindell said, all the stuff that these states did…who was supposed to stop them? Their attorney generals.” He added that only one attorney general in the United States stood up: Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.

Lindell further revealed that election integrity advocates will file more preliminary injunctions across the nation to remove the voting machines, including in South Dakota, Alabama, Louisiana, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Colorado, Michigan, and Ohio.

Additionally, Ohio, which President Trump won twice, was not immune to election fraud, Lindell claims. The MyPillow CEO says that Trump actually won Ohio in 2020 with 3,400,000 votes, which is an additional 500,000 more votes than what was officially tallied.

"What I see happening is the machines are gonna be gone,” Lindell continued. “We’ve already got forty-some counties gone…and then I believe we’re gonna have the biggest turnout in history for a midterm, ever.”

In fact, Lindell says there are plans to do preliminary injunctions in all fifty states. “All machines have to go,” he said firmly.

Source: https://www.rsbnetwork.com/news/mike-lindell-on-injunctions-to-remove-voting-machines-all-machines-have-to-go/

Biden's Family Scandal: Never Underestimate the Power of Blackmail

by Oliver North and David Goetsch


Bidens Family Scandal Never Underestimate the Power of Blackmail

The Hunter Biden coverup continues to unravel and, as it does, questions about the president's involvement become harder to dodge. Hunter's nefarious dealings with what at the time was China's largest energy company, CEFC, are well-documented, as are his questionable activities in Russia and Ukraine. The concept is known as influence peddling, a smarmy practice refined to an art form in "the swamp."

Hunter Biden's "take" from Russia while his father was vice president was reportedly at least $3.5 million, for which he did nothing but be Joe Biden's son. Now, Joe Biden is president of the United States and is directly accusing Russian President Vladimir Putin of war crimes and genocide in Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The possibility of blackmail is undeniable.

Hunter Biden never provided any substantive service to his foreign patrons. He was widely known to be a spoiled, profligate son of privilege. All Hunter Biden ever peddled to China, Russia and Ukraine was access to his father, then vice president of the U.S. Hunter not only compromised his father but set him up for blackmail.

Now, as president, Joe Biden is in the unenviable position of having to stand up to two enemies -- Russia and China -- who likely have evidence damaging to his presidency. Neither Russia nor China have yet publicly released information damning to Joe Biden. This may be because they want him -- hapless, easily manipulated and cognitively challenged -- right where he is: in the White House. His replacement, Vice President Kamala Harris, could be even more difficult to control.

There already appears to be sufficient evidence against Hunter Biden to convict him of what is likely to be illegal influence peddling -- but what about Joe? Did Joe Biden use his position as vice president to arrange lucrative business deals for his hapless, drug abusing, sex-addicted son? Is our president compromised by his actions on behalf of Hunter and his brother James?

The mainstream media refuses to acknowledge the elephant in the room: Was Joe Biden actually part of Hunter's deals? Is he the "big guy" mentioned in the now infamous email of May 13, 2017, authored by James Gilliar of the international consulting firm J2cR? This email contains a line that may eventually open the Pandora's box of "Bidengate." It reads: "10 held by H for the big guy?" There is little doubt the "H" mentioned in the May 13 email is Hunter and the "10" refers to $10 million. It is difficult to draw any conclusion other than the "big guy" is Joe Biden.

As you contemplate the questions we raise and the mainstream media's continued denial of Joe Biden's involvement in his son's treacherous dealings with foreign governments, consider one more question: How did a lifelong politician who often claimed to be the "poorest man in the United States Senate" suddenly become a multimillionaire on the vice president's salary, which in 2017 was $230,700?