On Biden's watch, Lady Justice has been weaponized. But Merrick Garland can't do this one thing

Op-Ed

Outside the Supreme Court building in our nation's capital, Lady Justice is depicted blindfolded holding a scale that's in balance because in principle justice is both "blind" and "equal." But under President Biden, Justice is neither.

Evidence continues to mount that the Biden Justice Department enforces the law unequally by tilting the scales to favor friends and family while unleashing the FBI and prosecutors on President Biden's political opponent. This is a perversion of the Founding principles of our Republic and a violation of the constitutional guarantee of equal protection under the law.

The good news is that Americans are now learning about these abuses of power because House Republicans are uncovering the weaponization of our government, especially at President Biden's Department of Justice. Republicans have been in the majority for six months. Yet even before then, we began investigating possible corruption by the Biden family. Those investigations continue today, as our committees work together to gather testimony, investigate misconduct, and uncover the truth, despite attempts by the media and the Biden administration to downplay and disrupt these efforts.

Leading the charge are Chairman Jim Jordan of the Judiciary Committee, Chairman James Comer of the Oversight Committee, and Chairman Jason Smith of the Ways and Means Committee.

Here's what we know so far:

After a five-year investigation, the President's son received a sweetheart deal from his father's DOJ in which Hunter Biden was allowed to plea down to misdemeanor tax charges and would not face any charges for money laundering or working as an unregistered lobbyist.

Attorney General Merrick Garland insists that David Weiss, the Delaware U.S. Attorney in charge of the Hunter Biden probe, has not faced any interference from the Department of Justice, telling Congress under oath that Weiss "has full authority to … bring cases in other districts if he needs to do that." But compelling evidence from whistleblowers refute Garland's version of events.

The Ways and Means Committee learned that Weiss sought to bring charges in two other districts and was denied both times. They also learned that Weiss reportedly sought and was refused special counsel status, telling a room full of IRS and FBI officials, "I am not the deciding person on whether charges are filed." IRS agent Gary Shapley, who was present at the meeting, memorialized these comments in an email at the time.

Political interference from the Biden administration also prevented investigators from taking basic steps that they would have in other tax evasion cases.

For example, Garland's DOJ allowed the statute of limitations to run out on Hunter Biden's tax evasion on payments from Ukrainian energy firm Burisma when his father was President Obama's lead on Ukraine while Vice President of the United States. As Shapley said, "the purposeful exclusion of the 2014 and 2015 years sanitized the most substantive criminal conduct and concealed material facts."

And when investigators uncovered a WhatsApp message from Hunter Biden to an executive at a Chinese energy firm in which Biden said, "I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled," prosecutors refused to authorize search warrants of the Delaware home or obtain location data to confirm the location of Joe Biden.

In fact, according to the whistleblower, one of the prosecutors admitted there was "more than enough probable cause for a physical search warrant" of President Biden's home and "a lot of evidence in our investigation would be found in the guest house of former Vice President Biden." Yet the search warrants were never approved because of "optics."

Mr. Shapley stated clearly what this meant for his team: "I would say that they limited certain investigation leads that could have potentially provided information on the President of the United States."

A prosecutor allegedly even tipped off Hunter Biden's lawyers that the IRS had probable cause to search Hunter's storage unit, a clear violation of the unbiased and independent role DOJ has to investigate allegations of wrongdoing. Additionally, Shapely testified that while there was probable cause for a search warrant, no warrant was obtained and no search was conducted.

After slow-walking this investigation for five years, the DOJ turned what the whistleblower described as a "slam dunk" felony case against Hunter Biden into a sweetheart plea deal and possibly buried evidence of crimes that have sent other Americans to prison.

When a prosecutor shields his boss's son from investigators, it smells like a cover up. Garland's DOJ did not aggressively follow the money. Why?

Are they afraid where that trail ends?

Recently, Weiss sent a letter to the House Judiciary Committee disputing that his charging authority was limited. He later claimed he had not requested special counsel designation from Garland but admitted he had some discussions about obtaining authority to file charges in a district outside of Delaware. What Weiss and DOJ have failed to answer is why Weiss told a room full of IRS and FBI officials, "I am not the deciding person on whether charges are filed."

Clearly, someone is not telling the truth, and Congress has a duty to get answers. To get all the facts, Weiss and others must testify before Congress, cooperate fully, and provide full access to their records.

The United States needs an Attorney General who defends equal justice under the law rather than engaging in a political, partisan agenda. Attorney General Garland took an oath to uphold the Constitution and faithfully discharge the duties of his office. If the whistleblowers' allegations are true, it raises serious concerns that Garland lied to Congress under oath.

Our committees will continue to gather evidence and conduct oversight, and we will follow the facts wherever they lead. Nothing will stop us from getting to the truth for the American people.

If warranted by the facts, the entire House could decide whether a formal impeachment inquiry concerning Attorney General Garland is necessary. At the conclusion of a serious, thorough and fair inquiry, the Judiciary Committee would decide whether to refer any articles of impeachment to the full House for an impeachment vote. Given the gravity of this constitutional remedy, House Republicans will ensure that any inquiry would be conducted in a transparent and public manner, without the partisan missteps of prior impeachments.

There are serious questions about the credibility of the Department of Justice. It is our responsibility to hold them accountable.

Source