“Who Has Helped Joe Biden The Most?”

Posted by lwwahlert 2 weeks, 4 days ago to Government
5 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

November 5, 2020
E D I T O R I A L - L. W. Wahlert
“Who Has Helped Joe Biden The Most?”

It appears that the Main Stream Media did their job in this past Presidential Election. Every News Network & Major Newspapers did an impeccable job of protecting Joe Biden Inc. Hunter Biden totally disappeared in the same week that his computer appeared. Yes, the most powerful “police” department in the world, The FBI, had Hunter’s computer since 2019. One-half of the United States population has no clue who Hunter Biden is, no idea that his lewd-laced PC was populated with every conceivable video, picture, and document that would expose The Biden Inc. machine.

How could this have been covered up so successfully? How could we have nearly 150,000,000 U. S. citizens vote for President & not have this information exposed?

I lay the blame squarely on the United States Attorney General Bill Barr. Is Bill Barr and ethical individual? I say resoundingly YES ! Then why wasn’t the investigation that he is leading with the help of Special Investigator, John Durham, delivered to the American people BEFORE the 2020 Election?

U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr has reportedly begun suggesting to top Republican officials that the Department of Justice's invasive report on the origin of the investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 election will not be complete before Election Day.

On multiple occasions, President Donald Trump has insisted that "Obamagate" is a real scandal. In fact, on multiple occasions, he has accused former President Barack Obama of investigating his 2016 presidential campaign. However, there has always been just one issue with Trump's claims: he never had the intelligence to support his allegations. Now, Barr's remarks raise more questions about whether or not Trump will ever be able to confirm his claims.

Trump repeatedly discussed the Russian investigation during numerous phone interviews on Fox News. During one interview, Trump slammed Barr, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) director Christopher Wray. Although the report remains incomplete, Trump claimed the delays are simply to get "more" information.

"To be honest, Bill Barr is going to go down as either the greatest attorney general in the history of the country or he's going to go down as, you know, a very sad situation," Trump told host FOX’s - Maria Bartiromo. "I'll be honest with you. He's got all the information he needs. They want to get more, more, more. They keep getting more. I said, 'you don't need any more.'"

Back in September of 2020, John Durham has said almost nothing about his 15-month probe into the FBI’s investigation of the Trump 2016 campaign. Not so Durham’s boss, Attorney General William Barr, who has called “Crossfire Hurricane” one of the “greatest travesties in American history.” Now, as America heads into the final weeks of a contentious presidential campaign, experts say it is Barr who will control how, and possibly when, Durham’s findings are presented to the country.

The Democrats were fearful & nearly petrified that the Barr/Durham investigation would drop the bombshell on the 2020 election much like what happened in 2016 – Re: Comey/Clinton -

That has Democrats feeling deja vu. In 2016, former FBI Director James Comey infamously revealed that the bureau had reopened an investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server just days before the election. With Trump’s intense interest in Durham’s work, Barr’s controversial comments, and a fast-approaching presidential election, the timing and manner of the end of this probe could affect voters as they go to the polls.

In the spring of 2019, Durham was tasked with “exploring the extent to which a number of countries, including Ukraine, played a role in the counterintelligence investigation directed at the Trump campaign during the 2016 election,” Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said. His mandate, the Justice Department also said, is to determine whether “intelligence collection activities by the U.S. government related to the Trump 2016 Presidential Campaign were lawful and appropriate.”

Since then, Durham has largely been quiet, and it remains unknown what exactly he is looking at. His investigation has garnered one guilty plea so far, from former FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith, who admitted to making a false statement when he altered an email used in a request for a warrant against former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. It’s not known whether Durham is pursuing other criminal matters. Barr himself has traveled internationally to enlist the support of foreign officials in Durham’s investigation, including to the U.K. and Italy.

In theory, some norms control whether and how Durham’s findings would become public. If Durham does not have any other criminal indictments resulting from his work, typically the Justice Department would refrain from making such information public. The Department tends not to release information about what it has found about someone if that person isn’t going to be criminally charged. (This was the norm Comey broke in his public statements about Clinton’s email investigation in 2016.) On the other hand, if people are charged as a result of Durham’s work, the Justice Department has an unwritten “60-day rule” that urges caution on taking major action in any politically significant cases within a window of time before an election if it could affect the results.

But in practice, it’s up to Barr how much deference to give to these traditions. “Other than those soft norms, he basically can do what he wants,” says Jack Goldsmith, professor at Harvard Law School who served in the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) under President George W. Bush. Unlike Robert Mueller, whose investigation was governed by the special counsel regulations, Durham has no formal roadmap to follow for how he needs to present his findings. Barr “has enormous discretion,” says Goldsmith. “There are no express Justice Department rules governing this.”

The findings are set to drop at a moment of particular concern about politics influencing the course of justice in America. Democrats allege Barr has turned DOJ into a political arm of the White House. They point to Barr’s handling of the rollout of the Mueller report, his interventions in politically-charged prosecutions of Trump allies, and even his appointment of Durham, among numerous other actions. Barr himself gave a speech recently extolling the virtue of political appointees holding influence over DOJ career prosecutors as a mechanism for accountability.

Former Justice Department officials and former federal prosecutors say Barr will almost certainly be briefed on the findings once Durham finishes his work, and then Barr will decide whether to make any of those findings public when to do so, and in what form. “It would be very surprising if on a high-profile matter like this, that the Attorney General wasn’t at least briefed before the investigation was closed,” says John Bies, who worked in OLC under President Barack Obama and is now chief counsel at American Oversight. Barr has said he expects there will be some form of “public disclosure” of Durham’s work, and said in congressional testimony this summer he would not necessarily wait until after the election to make some of Durham’s findings public.

So, wrapping this up, it’s clea

Add Comment


All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read


  • Comment hidden. Undo