There are only two relevant questions here, both of which will have documented answers. First, is it true that the president’s appointed attorneys refused to bring charges against the president’s son in their districts, defying a team that had spent
years building a case? Second, was Mr. Weiss ever given formal authority to bring those charges on his own?

The answer to the first question already looks to be yes, and it alone constitutes a scandal. If the team appointed to investigate Hunter wanted cases prosecuted in certain jurisdictions, and those cases failed to proceed on the say-so of Biden
appointees, it destroys Mr. Garland’s claims that the case was insulated from politics. And no one will have to rely solely on Mr. Shapley’s word or emails, already partly backed by the Times reporting. His attorneys provided the names of others
present at that October meeting, and they’ll testify. Assuming the U.S. attorneys did block the effort, there will be an extensive document trail: travel vouchers by those who presented the cases in Washington and California, documents from those
presentations, emails about the decision. The department might try to block production of those documents from Congress, but federal inspectors general are now also on the case.

Then to the second question about Mr. Weiss’s own authority. U.S. attorneys can’t file charges wherever they please; they have jurisdictions. Mr. Garland’s claim that Mr. Weiss had even “more authority” than a special counsel with the ability
to file “in any district” is bizarre—unless Mr. Weiss was formally given such power. As Sol Wisenberg, a former associate and deputy independent counsel, explained on Twitter, to file elsewhere Mr. Weiss would “need some kind of letter from
Garland (or an [associate attorney general]) naming Weiss as a special or poo-bah counsel authorized to file charges in the relevant district.” He emphasizes that “Garland cannot give that authority verbally,” there needs to be a “written
delegation.”

So where is it?

I don't expect it to take appropriate oversight committees to recover the evidence and answer these question definitively. And when they do, it won't be good for the DoJ and Garland.

On another scandal front I saw a mildly interesting speculation....is the cocaine in the WH a message to Joe that he needs to step aside in 2024 or he'll be taken down? A pretty blunt message but Joe's a little dense at his age.

ScottW

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 7/7/23 11:33 PM, ScottW wrote:

That's an ironic subject, right?

There are only two relevant questions here, both of which will have documented answers. First, is it true that the president’s appointed attorneys refused to bring charges against the president’s son in
their districts, defying a team that had spent years building a case?
Second, was Mr. Weiss ever given formal authority to bring those
charges on his own?

What 'defy'? There's a long-standing practice of not bringing charges
and allegations in the week preceding a national election.

Weiss (Trump-appointed) has that authority. He prosecuted Hunter on
several charges.

The answer to the first question already looks to be yes,

Who is this?

<snip>

Then to the second question about Mr. Weiss’s own authority. U.S.
attorneys can’t file charges wherever they please; they have
jurisdictions. Mr. Garland’s claim that Mr. Weiss had even “more authority” than a special counsel with the ability to file “in any district” is bizarre—unless Mr. Weiss was formally given such power.
As Sol Wisenberg, a former associate and deputy independent counsel, explained on Twitter, to file elsewhere Mr. Weiss would “need some
kind of letter from Garland (or an [associate attorney general])
naming Weiss as a special or poo-bah counsel authorized to file
charges in the relevant district.” He emphasizes that “Garland cannot give that authority verbally,” there needs to be a “written delegation.”

So where is it?

He's citing a guy on Twitter? The authority is by statute:

https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-2000-authority-us-attorney-criminal-division-mattersprior-approvals

9-2.030 - AUTHORIZING PROSECUTION

The United States Attorney is authorized to initiate prosecution by
filing a complaint, requesting an indictment from the grand jury, and
when permitted by law, by filing an information in any case which, in
his or her judgment, warrants such action, other than those instances enumerated in JM 9-2.120.

In arriving at a decision, the United States Attorney should consider
the recommendations for prosecution of the specific offense set forth in
the chapters discussing substantive offenses. The recommendations are instructive only and not mandatory

I don't expect it to take appropriate oversight committees to recover
the evidence and answer these question definitively. And when they
do, it won't be good for the DoJ and Garland.

Still the guy speaking? If the committee wants good answers, they should
swear in their witnesses.

On another scandal front I saw a mildly interesting speculation....is
the cocaine in the WH a message to Joe that he needs to step aside in
2024 or he'll be taken down? A pretty blunt message but Joe's a
little dense at his age.

That's straight to the point.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, July 8, 2023 at 8:43:57 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:

On 7/7/23 11:33 PM, ScottW wrote:

That's an ironic subject, right?

There are only two relevant questions here, both of which will have documented answers. First, is it true that the president’s appointed attorneys refused to bring charges against the president’s son in
their districts, defying a team that had spent years building a case? Second, was Mr. Weiss ever given formal authority to bring those
charges on his own?

What 'defy'? There's a long-standing practice of not bringing charges
and allegations in the week preceding a national election.

Weiss (Trump-appointed) has that authority. He prosecuted Hunter on
several charges.

The answer to the first question already looks to be yes,

Who is this?

<snip>

Then to the second question about Mr. Weiss’s own authority. U.S. attorneys can’t file charges wherever they please; they have jurisdictions. Mr. Garland’s claim that Mr. Weiss had even “more authority” than a special counsel with the ability to file “in any district” is bizarre—unless Mr. Weiss was formally given such power. As Sol Wisenberg, a former associate and deputy independent counsel, explained on Twitter, to file elsewhere Mr. Weiss would “need some
kind of letter from Garland (or an [associate attorney general])
naming Weiss as a special or poo-bah counsel authorized to file
charges in the relevant district.” He emphasizes that “Garland cannot give that authority verbally,” there needs to be a “written delegation.”

So where is it?

He's citing a guy on Twitter? The authority is by statute:

https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-2000-authority-us-attorney-criminal-division-mattersprior-approvals

9-2.030 - AUTHORIZING PROSECUTION

The United States Attorney is authorized to initiate prosecution by
filing a complaint, requesting an indictment from the grand jury, and
when permitted by law, by filing an information in any case which, in
his or her judgment, warrants such action, other than those instances enumerated in JM 9-2.120.

What district is your head up it's ass in?

ScottW

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 7/9/23 10:31 AM, ScottW wrote:

On Saturday, July 8, 2023 at 8:43:57 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:

On 7/7/23 11:33 PM, ScottW wrote:

That's an ironic subject, right?

There are only two relevant questions here, both of which will have
documented answers. First, is it true that the president’s appointed
attorneys refused to bring charges against the president’s son in
their districts, defying a team that had spent years building a case?
Second, was Mr. Weiss ever given formal authority to bring those
charges on his own?

What 'defy'? There's a long-standing practice of not bringing charges
and allegations in the week preceding a national election.

Weiss (Trump-appointed) has that authority. He prosecuted Hunter on
several charges.

The answer to the first question already looks to be yes,

Who is this?

<snip>

Then to the second question about Mr. Weiss’s own authority. U.S.
attorneys can’t file charges wherever they please; they have
jurisdictions. Mr. Garland’s claim that Mr. Weiss had even “more
authority” than a special counsel with the ability to file “in any
district” is bizarre—unless Mr. Weiss was formally given such power. >>> As Sol Wisenberg, a former associate and deputy independent counsel,
explained on Twitter, to file elsewhere Mr. Weiss would “need some
kind of letter from Garland (or an [associate attorney general])
naming Weiss as a special or poo-bah counsel authorized to file
charges in the relevant district.” He emphasizes that “Garland cannot >>> give that authority verbally,” there needs to be a “written
delegation.”

So where is it?

He's citing a guy on Twitter? The authority is by statute:

https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-2000-authority-us-attorney-criminal-division-mattersprior-approvals

9-2.030 - AUTHORIZING PROSECUTION

The United States Attorney is authorized to initiate prosecution by
filing a complaint, requesting an indictment from the grand jury, and
when permitted by law, by filing an information in any case which, in
his or her judgment, warrants such action, other than those instances
enumerated in JM 9-2.120.

What district is your head up it's ass in?

No arguing with that!

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sunday, July 9, 2023 at 11:31:10 AM UTC-4, ScottW wrote:

On Saturday, July 8, 2023 at 8:43:57 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:

On 7/7/23 11:33 PM, ScottW wrote:

That's an ironic subject, right?

There are only two relevant questions here, both of which will have documented answers. First, is it true that the president’s appointed attorneys refused to bring charges against the president’s son in their districts, defying a team that had spent years building a case? Second, was Mr. Weiss ever given formal authority to bring those
charges on his own?

What 'defy'? There's a long-standing practice of not bringing charges
and allegations in the week preceding a national election.

Weiss (Trump-appointed) has that authority. He prosecuted Hunter on several charges.

The answer to the first question already looks to be yes,

Who is this?

<snip>

Then to the second question about Mr. Weiss’s own authority. U.S. attorneys can’t file charges wherever they please; they have jurisdictions. Mr. Garland’s claim that Mr. Weiss had even “more authority” than a special counsel with the ability to file “in any district” is bizarre—unless Mr. Weiss was formally given such power. As Sol Wisenberg, a former associate and deputy independent counsel, explained on Twitter, to file elsewhere Mr. Weiss would “need some kind of letter from Garland (or an [associate attorney general])
naming Weiss as a special or poo-bah counsel authorized to file
charges in the relevant district.” He emphasizes that “Garland cannot
give that authority verbally,” there needs to be a “written delegation.”

So where is it?

He's citing a guy on Twitter? The authority is by statute:

https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-2000-authority-us-attorney-criminal-division-mattersprior-approvals

9-2.030 - AUTHORIZING PROSECUTION

The United States Attorney is authorized to initiate prosecution by
filing a complaint, requesting an indictment from the grand jury, and
when permitted by law, by filing an information in any case which, in
his or her judgment, warrants such action, other than those instances enumerated in JM 9-2.120.

What district is your head up it's ass in?

ScottW

Colón, known as Ciudad Colón is a district and the head city of the Mora canton, in the San José province of Costa Rica. It is famous for its warm climate, proximity to nature and its surrounding mountains, folkloric traditions, horse riding, and
multiculturalism.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)