Though the lede was completely buried in the 21st paragraph, The New York Times has confirmed the biggest allegation lodged by IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley.
As RedState reported previously, following a hedging quasi-denial by AG Merrick Garland, Shapley named the names of those present in a meeting with US Attorney David Weiss. In that meeting, Weiss allegedly admitted he was stifled by DOJ leadership from filing charges against Hunter Biden in two separate districts, including in California.
In an extensive write-up mostly meant to excuse the scandal, the Times stated that an independent source (i.e. not the two whistleblowers) confirmed to the paper that Weiss did say that.
NYT buries in the 21st paragraph that it has an independent source who confirms the two IRS whistleblowers' claim that David Weiss said he was blocked from bringing charges against Hunter Biden in California. https://t.co/nH55AVQAJq pic.twitter.com/wSPKT4aiMG
— Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) June 27, 2023
In any situation not involving a major Democrat, that would have been blared in the headlines as a bombshell. In what was presented as a passing mention in a broader piece, the Times independently sourced the damning allegation that AG Merrick Garland committed perjury before Congress (and repeatedly lied to the press and the American people). That’s the story here, not the idea that there are “competing accounts,” as the headline reads. One side is pretty obviously not telling the truth, and it’s not the side that contains the two IRS whistleblowers.
Ironically, despite the aforementioned whistleblowers being technically such and being protected under the relevant statutes, the very same Times that has now confirmed the key component of their testimony is still putting scare quotes around the word whistleblowers.
Curious why NYT put "whistle-blowers" in quotes like this, suggesting that they aren't actually whistleblowers. https://t.co/MU3oEZAJdp pic.twitter.com/NMhUk4rxla
— Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) June 28, 2023
Regardless, Garland and Weiss have been put into a box of their own making by this latest revelation. Both insist that the latter had total control, with the ability to charge anything he wanted in any jurisdiction he wished, yet you’ve now got at least three people saying Weiss told them the opposite. Repeated denials aren’t going to suffice in the face of that.
None of this is important legally speaking, as the DOJ will never investigate itself. It is important in relation to the push to impeach Garland in the House of Representatives. Just days prior to this writing, Speaker Kevin McCarthy said that if the assertion by the whistleblowers of what Weiss said is found to be true, an impeachment inquiry will begin by July 6th. With this third source cited by the Times, the allegation has been corroborated to a point where it can’t be ignored any longer. Every single person that Shapley named as being in the room needs to be interviewed under oath immediately and a formal inquiry needs to be opened.
I can’t imagine those things are not already in motion behind the scenes. There’s too much on the table to not go through with an official inquiry at this point. The powers that are unleashed with that are extensive and would allow House investigators to dig much deeper without having to abide by the typical stonewalling. It’s time to pull the impeachment trigger.
