Garland’s Growing Cover-Up

Does Attorney General Garland’s dropping of Delaware charges against Hunter Biden, ending a trial that would have opened the door to criminal evidence against his father – then appointing the same in-house prosecutor, David Weiss, to be a “Special Counsel” – make you feel better? Or is this just more evidence of a rolling cover-up for the Bidens? Consider the facts.

First, Mr. Weiss is the same in-house prosecutor who, after being appointed by Garland to investigate, narrowed his investigation of Hunter to minor tax and gun charges, then fashioned what even liberal outlets are calling a “sweetheart” plea deal for the president’s son.

Second, that “sweetheart” plea – shaped by Weiss – got set aside by a Delaware judge as indefensible. Why? It failed to address serious charges linked to Hunter’s crime-ridden laptop – in FBI possession since 2019 – and let him walk…probation.

Worse, Weiss’s deal sought to gild the lily and shield the son from future indictments and prosecutions for more serious offenses – sweeping them into the scope of the plea, in effect blocking any future investigation or trial through the Constitution’s “double-jeopardy” clause.

The 5^th Amendment’s “double jeopardy” clause says, “no person shall…for the same offense twice be put in jeopardy,” so if serious crimes were obliquely referenced in the plea deal, that gave the son a defense against any future prosecution tied to those same crimes.

It was a neat trick – but it did not work. The Delaware judge did not buy it, nor did the judge buy another trick lodged in the “sweetheart” deal, seemingly aimed at protecting the President.

The federal judge, Maryellen Noreika, could not get a straight answer from prosecutors as to what crimes and persons remained under investigation. Her questioning suggests a suspicion that one aim of the plea deal was to suppress evidence, likely to emerge at trial, about Joe Biden.

The judge’s surmise is not unreasonable, as crimes for which the son might be charged includes violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA, 15 USC 78,), Federal Bribery statutes (18 USC 201), and Racketeering and Corrupt Practices Act (RICO, 18 USC 1961).

Proving these crimes would implicate public officials like his father. Strong circumstantial evidence suggests a trial on these crimes would surface evidence of Joe Biden’s participation.

These crimes carry stiff penalties for son and coconspirators. Penalties for FCPA range up to five years in prison, Federal Bribery up to 15 years (and three times the bribe), RICO up to 20 years.

Thus, in a trial, the son and father are both at risk. Garland reports to the father; Weiss reports to Garland. The son, father, and those who work for the father thus all share a strong motive for shutting down the investigation, not letting a trial unfold which might implicate the President.

This is what, without saying so, the Delaware judge plainly saw – another reason she could not accept the all-encompassing, trial-killing, evidence-suppressing “sweetheart” plea deal.

Third, Garland’s latest decision plainly looks like a “cover-up.” Instead of letting the trial unfold before this judge – Garland just shut down the trial, dismissed all charges in Delaware. While not illegal per se, one has to ask why Garland would do this – not let the trial go forward?

Fourth, in a neat sleight-of-hand, apparently intended to make Garland look tough, he just elevated Mr. Weiss to Special Prosecutor, officially giving him jurisdiction in DC and California.

But look closer. What did that elevated status for Weiss and giving him “official” jurisdiction in DC and California do? At a time when a potentially devastating criminal trial was about to begin – against the son, implicating the President – it is over.

At the very least, Garland’s decision delays any serious charges against the President’s son and damning evidence against the father in Delaware. Remember, suppressing that evidence is why the plea agreement was tossed. 

But worse, Garland just set in motion another stage of cover-up, allowing the same plea agreement to be attempted in another, more favorable jurisdiction, DC or California.

We also know that Garland and Weiss understood the need to move fast in Delaware, stay under the radar on the plea agreement, get it done, and move on – because, when Weiss was asked point blank about his powers, he contradicted himself, saying he could go anywhere.

Garland and Weiss then got their stories straight, contradicting IRS and FBI whistleblowers – who now look granite-solid and who said Justice was trying to play fast and loose, trying to end the investigation, get the plea, and be done. For speaking up, their whole team was removed.

All this stinks to high heaven and will ahead. Garland’s sudden end to Hunter’s Delaware trial, before a judge who suspects a “cover-up” and saw Joe Biden implicated – is bad enough.

But watching Garland appoint the same “sweetheart” insider as a Special Prosecutor, officially give him jurisdiction he said he had, not to mention in places that help keep the Bidens out of prison, is pathetic, and embarrassing. Only a fool would see this as anything but – a growing cover-up.

Robert Charles is a former Assistant Secretary of State under Colin Powell, former Reagan and Bush 41 White House staffer, attorney, and naval intelligence officer (USNR). He wrote “Narcotics and Terrorism” (2003), “Eagles and Evergreens” (2018), and is National Spokesman for AMAC.