David Weiss Is a Direct Witness to the Crimes on Which He Indicted Alexander Smirnov

On the day that Bill Barr aggressively intervened in the parallel impeachment inquiry and Hunter Biden prosecutions last summer, David Weiss’ office sent out a final deal that would resolve Hunter’s case with no jail time and no further investigation. Within weeks, amid an uproar about claims in an FD-1023 that David Weiss now says were false, Weiss reneged on that deal. With the indictment yesterday of Alexander Smirnov, the source of those false claims, Weiss confesses he is a direct witness in an attempt to frame Joe Biden, even as he attempts to bury it.

On June 7, 2023, Bill Barr went on the record to refute several things that Jamie Raskin described learning about Smirnov’s FD-1023. Specifically, the former Attorney General insisted that the investigation into the allegations Smirnov made continued under David Weiss.

It’s not true. It wasn’t closed down,” William Barr told The Federalist on Tuesday in response to Democrat Rep. Jamie Raskin’s claim that the former attorney general and his “handpicked prosecutor” had ended an investigation into a confidential human source’s allegation that Joe Biden had agreed to a $5 million bribe. “On the contrary,” Barr stressed, “it was sent to Delaware for further investigation.”

“It wasn’t closed down,” Bill Barr claimed. As I’ll show below, according to the indictment obtained under David Weiss’ authority yesterday, that’s a lie. “It was sent to [David Weiss] for further investigation,” Bill Barr claimed, not confessing that it was sent to Delaware on October 23, 2020, days after Trump had yelled at him personally about the investigation into Hunter Biden. According to Barr, Weiss was tasked with doing more investigation into the Smirnov claims than Scott Brady had already done.

In the Smirnov indictment, Weiss now says that he only did that investigation last year, and almost immediately discovered the allegations were false.

The same day the Federalist published those Barr claims, June 7, and one day after Hunter Biden attorney Chris Clark spoke personally with David Weiss, Lesley Wolf sent revised language for the diversion agreement that strengthened Hunter Biden’s protection against any further prosecution.

The United States agrees not to criminally prosecute Biden, outside of the terms of this Agreement, for any federal crimes encompassed by the attached Statement of Facts (Attachment A) and the Statement of Facts attached as Exhibit 1 to the Memorandum of Plea Agreement filed this same day.

That language remains in the diversion agreement Leo Wise signed on July 26, 2023.

According to an unrebutted claim from Clark, on June 19, 2023, Weiss’ First AUSA Shannon Hanson assured him there was no ongoing investigation into his client.

36. Shortly after that email, I had another phone call with AUSA Hanson, during which AUSA Hanson requested that the language of Mr. Biden’s press statement be slightly revised. She proposed saying that the investigation would be “resolved” rather than “concluded.” I then asked her directly whether there was any other open or pending investigation of Mr. Biden overseen by the Delaware U.S. Attorney’s Office, and she responded there was not another open or pending investigation.

That day, June 19, was the first day Wise made an appearance on the case.

On July 10, a month after the former Attorney General had publicly claimed that his office sent the Smirnov FD-1023 to Weiss’ office for further investigation in 2020, Weiss responded to pressure from Lindsey Graham explaining why he couldn’t talk about the FD-1023: “Your questions about allegations contained in an FBI FD-1023 Form relate to an ongoing investigation.” The next day, Hanson fielded a request from Clark, noting she was doing so because “the team” was in a secure location unable to do so themselves. “The team” should have had no purpose being in a secure location; they should have been preparing for the unclassified plea deal.

By July 26, the same day Leo Wise signed a diversion agreement that said Hunter wouldn’t be further charged, he made representations that conflicted with the document he had signed, claiming Hunter could still be charged with FARA. That was how, with David Weiss watching, Wise reneged on a signed plea deal and reopened the investigation into Hunter Biden, leading to two indictments charging six felonies and six misdemeanors.

According to the Smirnov indictment, sometime in July (tellingly, Weiss does not reveal whether this preceded his letter to Lindsey Graham, whether it preceded the plea colloquy where Leo Wise reneged on a signed deal), the FBI asked Weiss’ office to help in an investigation regarding the FD-1023.

In July 2023, the FBI requested that the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware assist the FBI in an investigation of allegations related to the 2020 1023. At that time, the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware was handling an investigation and prosecution of Businessperson 1.

It is virtually certain that the FBI asked Weiss to pursue whether any leads had been missed in 2020, not whether Joe and Hunter Biden had been unfairly framed. That’s because Weiss cannot — should never have — led an investigation into how the Bidens were framed. He’s a witness in that investigation. 

So it is almost certain that the FBI decided to reopen the investigation into the FD-1023, perhaps based in part on Bill Barr’s false claims. It is almost certain that this investigation, at that point, targeted Joe and Hunter Biden. It is almost certain that this is one thing Weiss used to rationalize asking for Special Counsel authority.

And that’s probably why, when Weiss’ team interviewed Smirnov on September 27, Smirnov felt comfortable adding new false allegations.

51. The Defendant also shared a new story with investigators. He wanted them to look into whether Businessperson 1 was recorded in a hotel in Kiev called the Premier Palace. The Defendant told investigators that the entire Premier Palace Hotel is “wired” and under the control of the Russians. The Defendant claimed that Businessperson 1 went to the hotel many times and that he had seen video footage of Businessperson 1 entering the Premier Palace Hotel.

52. The Defendant suggested that investigators check to see if Businessperson 1 made telephone calls from the Premier Palace Hotel since those calls would have been recorded by the Russians. The Defendant claimed to have obtained this information a month earlier by calling a high-level official in a foreign country. The Defendant also claimed to have learned this information from four different Russian officials.

Smirnov seemingly felt safe telling new, even bigger lies. In his mind, Hunter and Joe were still the target! Again, that is consistent with the investigation into Hunter Biden being reopened based off Bill Barr’s public pressure.

According to the Smirnov indictment, David Weiss’ team found evidence that proves Bill Barr lied and Scott Brady created a false misimpression — the former, to pressure him — Weiss — and the latter, in testimony to Congress that was also part of the pressure campaign against the Bidens.

Compare Bill Barr’s claim made on the day when Weiss agreed that Hunter would face no further charges with what the Smirnov indictment states as fact. The Smirnov indictment says that Scott Brady’s office closed the assessment, with the concurrence of David Bowdich and Richard Donoghue, which is what Jamie Raskin said (though Raskin said Barr himself concurred).

40. By August 2020, FBI Pittsburgh concluded that all reasonable steps had been completed regarding the Defendant’s allegations and that their assessment, 58A-PG-3250958, should be closed. On August 12, 2020, FBI Pittsburgh was informed that the then-FBI Deputy Director and then-Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States concurred that it should be closed.

But Barr told the Federalist that it was not closed down, it was forwarded — by Richard Donoghue, days after the President yelled at Barr about this investigation (though he didn’t say that) — to David Weiss for more investigation.

It’s not true. It wasn’t closed down,” William Barr told The Federalist on Tuesday in response to Democrat Rep. Jamie Raskin’s claim that the former attorney general and his “handpicked prosecutor” had ended an investigation into a confidential human source’s allegation that Joe Biden had agreed to a $5 million bribe. “On the contrary,” Barr stressed, “it was sent to Delaware for further investigation.”

Had it been forwarded to David Weiss for more investigation, had he taken those additional investigative steps Barr claims he was ordered to do, Weiss would have discovered right away the key things that proved Smirnov was lying, the claims that Scott Brady had claimed to investigate, the things that the Smirnov indictment suggest he newly discovered months ago.

According to Scott Brady’s testimony to Congress, his team asked Smirnov’s handler about things like travel records and claimed that it was consistent.

Mr. Brady. So we attempted to use opensource material to check against what was stated in the 1023. We also interfaced with the CHS’ handler about certain statements relating to travel and meetings to see if they were consistent with his or her understanding.

Q And did you determine if the information was consistent with the handler’s understanding?

A What we were able to identify, we found that it was consistent. And so we felt that there were sufficient indicia of credibility in this 1023 to pass it on to an office that had a predicated grand jury investigation. [my emphasis]

According to the Smirnov indictment, Weiss’ team asked the handler the same question — about travel records. Only, they discovered that Smirnov’s travel records were inconsistent with the claims the handler himself recorded in the FD-1023.

43. On August 29, 2023, FBI investigators spoke with the Handler in reference to the 2020 1023. During that conversation, the Handler indicated that he and the Defendant had reviewed the 2020 1023 following its public release by members of Congress in July 2023, and the Defendant reaffirmed the accuracy of the statements contained in it.

44. The Handler provided investigators with messages he had with the Defendant, including the ones described above. Additionally, the Handler identified and reviewed with the Defendant travel records associated with both Associate 2 and the Defendant. The travel records were inconsistent with what the Defendant had previously told the Handler that was memorialized in the 2020 1023.

Tellingly, when Brady was asked more specific questions about Smirnov’s travel records, his attorney, former Trump-appointed Massachusetts US Attorney Andrew Lelling, advised him, twice, not to answer.

Q And did you determine that the CHS had traveled to the different countries listed in the 1023?

Mr. Lelling. I would decline to answer that.

[snip]

Q The pages aren’t numbered, but if you count from the first page, the fourth page, the first full paragraph states, following the late June 2020 interview with the CHS, the Pittsburgh FBI Office obtained travel records for the CHS, and those records confirmed the CHS had traveled to the locales detailed in the FD1023 during the relevant time period. The trips included a late 2015 or early 2016 visit to Kiev, Ukraine, a trip a couple months later to Vienna, Austria, and travel to London in 2019. Does this kind of match your recollection of what actions the Pittsburgh FBI Office was taking in regards to this.

Mr. Lelling. Don’t answer that. Too specific a level of detail

Q You had mentioned last hour about travel records.

Did your office obtain travel records, or did you have knowledge that the Pittsburgh FBI Office obtained travel records?

Mr. Lelling. That you can answer yes or no.

Mr. Brady. Yes.

If Brady obtained those travel records, he would have discovered what Weiss did: Neither Smirnov’s travel records nor those of his subsource, Alexander Ostapenko, are consistent with the story Smirnov told.

o. Associate 2’s trip to Kiev in September 2017 was the first time he had left North America since 2011. Thus, he could not have attended a meeting in Kiev, as the Defendant claimed, in late 2015 or 2016, during the Obama-Biden Administration. His trip to Ukraine in September 2017 was more than seven months after Public Official 1 had left office and more than a year after the then-Ukrainian Prosecutor General had been fired.

[snip]

34. Further, the Defendant did not travel to Vienna “around the time [Public Official 1] made a public statement about [the thenUkrainian Prosecutor General] being corrupt, and that he should be fired/removed from office,” which occurred in December 2015.

Paragraph after paragraph of the Smirnov indictment describe how the travel records — the very travel records that the handler and Scott Brady claimed corroborated the allegation — proved Smirnov was lying.

The record is quite clear that Bill Barr and Scott Brady made false representations about activities that directly involved David Weiss in 2020.

And yet Weiss has been playing dumb.

Abbe Lowell made a subpoena request and a discovery request relating to these matters on November 15. Lowell not only laid out this scheme in his selective and vindictive prosecution claim, but he cited the Federalist story in which Barr lied. He cited these matters in his discovery request.

Rather than acknowledging that Weiss’ team had discovered evidence that proved the claims of Barr and Brady were misrepresentations, Weiss’ team lied about the extent of Richard Donoghue’s role — documented in a memo shared by Gary Shapley — in forcing Weiss to accept the FD-1023 on October 23, 2022.

Next, defendant alleges that “certain investigative decisions were made as a result of guidance provided by, among others, the Deputy Attorney General’s office.” ECF 58, at 3 n.4. In fact, the source cited revealed that the guidance was simply not to conduct any “proactive interviews” yet.

And now, on the eve of Abbe Lowell submitting a reply on his motion to compel and a selective prosecution and discovery request in California, David Weiss has unveiled a belated indictment proving that Lowell’s allegations were entirely correct. The indictment may well provide excuse to withhold precisely the discovery materials Lowell has been demanding for months, and it may create the illusion that Barr’s pressure led Weiss to renege on a plea deal. But it is a confession that there was an attempt to frame Joe Biden and his son in 2020.

What David Weiss discovered — if he didn’t already know about it — is that he was part of an effort to frame Joe Biden in 2020, an effort that involved the Attorney General of the United States. If Merrick Garland is going to appoint Special Counsels for these kinds of things, one should be appointed here, especially given that Donoghue required the briefing on the FD-1023 days after Trump personally intervened with Bill Barr.

But David Weiss can’t lead that investigation. He’s a witness to that investigation.

Update: Fixed how long it took Weiss to renege on the deal after Bill Barr’s false claim.

See Hunter Biden’s Eight Legal Chessboards for links to all the filings.

image_print
63 replies
  1. EW Moderation Team says:

    A reminder to all new and existing community members participating in comments:

    — We have been moving to a new minimum standard to support community security over the last year. Usernames should be unique and a minimum of a minimum of 8 letters.

    — We do not require a valid, working email, but you must use the same email address each time you publish a comment here. **Single use disposable email addresses do not meet this standard.**

    — If you have been commenting here but have less than 1000 comments published and been participating less than 10 years as of October 2022, you must update your username to match the new standard.

    Thank you.

  2. small_16FEB2024_0900h says:

    Check your date — “According to an unrebutted claim from Clark, on June 19, 2026, Weiss’ First AUSA Shannon Hanson assured him there was no ongoing investigation into his client.”

    [Welcome to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We are moving to a new minimum standard to support community security. Because your username is far too common a word, it will be temporarily changed to match the date/time of your first known comment until you have a new compliant username. Thanks. /~Rayne]

  3. OldTulsaDude says:

    I wouldn’t think Merrick Garland to be in over his head but it certainly appears that way at times.

    • ColdFusion says:

      Maybe he’s playing the long game, but hoping that the truth will come out early enough before the election? He certainly gave the trump supporters more than enough rope to hang themselves with.

      • thisguyknowsnothing says:

        Everyone keeps saying Garland is doing good work, but I haven’t seen it at all.

        What I’ve seen is Garland giving the majority of jan 6th insurrectionists sweet non-violent plea deals. 6 month misdemeanors for “parading” with no jail time and non-reporting probation. For one of the greatest attacks on our country.

        (btw if this site would remember my last used username so I wouldn’t have to type it in every time, that would be great!)

        [Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the SAME username and email address each time you comment so that community members get to know you. You first published a comment here as “pankakarot” — make a note of it.

        Look around you — do you see any ads here harvesting your personal data? Did you have to enter your phone number or a validated working email address? Did you get a pop-up warning you about GDPR compliance forcing you to choose what cookies you’ll allow? The price for that is REMEMBERING YOUR OWN USERNAME AND EMAIL ADDRESS if you want to comment here. /~Rayne]

  4. harpie says:

    What David Weiss discovered — if he didn’t already know about it — is that he was part of an effort to frame Joe Biden in 2020, an effort that involved the Attorney General of the United States.

    Wow, Marcy! THAT was an absolutely riveting read.

    • Rugger_9 says:

      It gift-wrapped an opportunity for Abbe Lowell to provide direct witnesses (including SC Weiss, now) to the selective prosecution claim he can make stand up. The trouble with trying to spike so many investigations is that strings will be left out to pull.

      The 9th Circuit has a reputation for being more liberal, but it depends on the panel selected. I do not know about the reputation of the 3rd Circuit that oversees DE. This could be important since I expect Lowell will file all sorts of objections when he’s stonewalled and force these into appeals unless Weiss’ cases fall apart as they just might, or HB gets acquitted all around.

      As a direct witness, doesn’t that mean that Weiss must recuse / resign?

    • jecojeco says:

      I listened in on the Nicole Sandler broadcast. This is going to blow up so badly on Weiss. Not only will Hunter walk (and he should) but Weiss will be lucky if only his reputation is trash after this and it stops at gross ethical violations and not criminal. A SC to investigate a SC, would that be a first?

      Garland judgement has been so piss poor appointing rogue political hacks like Weiss & Hur to conduct political hit job investigations on the Bidens and to slow walk criminal investigations of trump. A visitor from another planet would wonder why the Biden admin would appoint a pro-trump AG.

  5. Dt_24JUN2022_0946h says:

    When you first mentioned, Leo Wise you don’t mention who he is or what his role is. Your writing is very dense, and I could probably figure it out from context it makes it harder for me to follow. Maybe I’m just a dumb dumb though.

    [Welcome to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We are moving to a new minimum standard to support community security. Because your username is far too short it will be temporarily changed to match the date/time of your first known comment until you use a site standard compliant username. You have previously commented as “An actual cloud” which meets the site’s standard. /~Rayne]

    • grizebard says:

      Not “dumb”, just not up to speed. This whole saga is like a classic Russian novel, it’s stuffed chock full of characters, most of whom are involved in disreputable behaviour, many apparently betraying their sworn duty into the bargain. (And some even happen to share the same surname or near enough). No wonder it’s hard to keep track.

      What Marcy is managing to put together is astounding. She’s providing a genuine public service without equal.

      • Kick the Darkness says:

        That’s an interesting observation. From Dostoevsky to Without Sky. I guess you could look at that and say there’s a progression from the complexity of Dostoevsky’s view of human nature to Surkov’s calculating cynicism where everything is equivalently compromised and false. Injected into our body politic.

      • dopefish says:

        Yes, I hope Dr. Wheeler has time one day to write the book about this entire Republican effort to smear the Biden family.

        It would be dense and fascinating.

    • c-i-v-i-l says:

      Depending on the point of the column, Marcy may not provide a background on people she’s discussed in previous columns; there’s an expectation that readers have been following the sequence of columns. However, she does often tag people at the end of a column, and there’s a search bar, so two ways to figure out who someone is: click on the tag for that person and then search in reverse chronological order or use the search bar. If you do that for Leo Wise, for example, you’ll find “On June 19, Principal Senior Assistant Special Counsel Leo Wise made his first appearance” in an earlier column, as well as another column named “Principal Senior Assistant Special Counsel Leo Wise Insinuates David Weiss Lied to Congress.”

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Commenting here is a contact sport. You may need to read more outside of this blog to fully enjoy it. The Guardian, the Washington Post, and the New York Times are places to start, though each has its own pluses and minuses.

      Marcy tends not to write about the obvious; she scours primary sources to write about things the media ignores or only superficially covers.

    • EuroTark says:

      I must admit too also confusing Weiss and Wise with each other, and have a very hard time keeping the three different Zieglers apart.

    • RipNoLonger says:

      In addition to the other good recommendations, I suggest doing a quick search on the name. I use the DuckDuckGo context search whereby I just highlight the term(s) on a web page, right-click, and choose “Search DuckDuckGo”.

      Of course Wikipedia is also usually very helpful.

  6. Golden Bough says:

    Again, thank you so much for covering this entire mess with such vigor and detail when no other outlet seems to care that a former president enlisted the sundowning former America’s mayor and deranged AG to frame a political rival and his son.

    In the end, where does this go? Does Lowell succeed in getting all charges dismissed? Will there be any consequences for Weiss, Wise, Barr, Comer, et al? Does this have any consequences for Gym Jordan and his clown car full of insurrectionists pushing for impeachment based on less than nothing?

    Good grief.

    • jecojeco says:

      For openers chages against Hunter will be dropped in the interest of justice or whatever.

      If Weiss had any dignity or self respect he’d resign, but he wouldn’t be at this point if he did, so he’ll hang on like a barnacle hoping for a trump Revenge ’24 judicial appointment.

      Assuming we still have a post Nov ’24 democracy this whole situation screams for an investigation, if Garland is still AG there will probably be a tedious 18 month IG investigation leading to an equally tedious investigation of all the players who concocted the Bidens set up smear campaign/investigation. But no way Garland will return, he was the wrong man for the job.

      Thanks to Marcy for her tremendous fact finding & analysis and the thoughtful, informed insights from the peanut gallery here!

  7. greengiant says:

    What I woke up this morning to ask. How many different necessary investigations and prosecutions is Weiss trying to preempt. Seems not just about 2024 “but Hunter Biden”.
    Guessing Barr did not realize the GRU gets bonus points for damage done to the GOP and rule of law.
    Will Jack Smith’s brief get expanded or what will Garlands DOJ do now?

    • scroogemcduck says:

      Is it Garland’s DOJ? He’s supposed to be in charge, but is he actually in charge? It looks like a few of the footsoldiers are running rings around the general.

        • pluralist says:

          Yeah, one of the impressions I get reading EW and following some of the links is that neither the DOJ nor the FBI were of one mind.

          Is internal conflict within both the DOJ and FBI something new with trumpism, or just something that became more pronounced?

  8. vertalio says:

    First of all, I want to say I found that post absolutely brilliant.

    Now I’m wondering how we, your loyal readers, can best apply ourselves to pressure DOJ to appoint a special counsel. Contact Senators? Reps? Our state AG? Clearly letters to the FTFNYT won’t move the needle….

  9. Greg Hunter says:

    I finally have understood how the politics at the DOJ works.  I was exposed to DC politics through the science based agencies where GS-14, 15s that had an eye to make more cash if they appeased their large powerful contractors like SAIC/Leidos/BoozeAllenHamilton/ComputerSciencesCorporation then they would be in line to double dip when they retired. 

    In my experience, one greedy person will ensure that those other less ambitious government workers will not say a thing.  At the DOJ the prize is the law firms that litter the beltway.

    This case has stretched some necks but I bet no heads get cut.  They never do.

  10. Trevanion says:

    “But David Weiss can’t lead that investigation. He’s a witness to that investigation.”

    We’ve analyzed EW’s latest, sir, and there is a danger. Should I have your ship standing by?

    Evacuate? In our moment of triumph? I think you overestimate their chances.

  11. Fancy Chicken says:

    I understand that Weiss charged Smirnov ostensibly to cover his own ass in participating in the Barr directed smear of the Bidens, but what I’m confused about is that it not only apparently gives Lowell some leverage possibly but it seems as if Weiss is risking the wrath of Comer and Jordan for yanking out the bogus claim that they have based so much of their investigation on.

    With the amount of dickish prosecutorial moves Weiss’ team has been playing I don’t understand why he felt so…. can’t find the adjective, compelled maybe, to prosecute Smirnov. MAGA land is going to be howling at Weiss for undermining the house investigation.

    So maybe make plain as day please someone- Why did Weiss choose this prosecution when he could just continue to rely on prosecutorial shenanigans and risks the wrath of the frothy right?

    • Shadowalker says:

      It could be an act of desperation. These cases are getting weaker by the day. This looks like the FARA charges are dead, thus clearing the way to resurrect the plea deal.

    • Wirenaut says:

      some options:

      He’s not as smart as he thinks he is.
      He’s Edmund Exley in L.A. Confidential: “With a wrecking ball.”
      He’s General Hux in The Rise of Skywalker: “I need Kylo Ren to lose.”

    • tje.esq@23 says:

      I dunno…. perhaps, maybe, just MAYBE, because it was the RIGHT THING to do?

      And in keeping with his lawyer’s oath?

      To engage in conspiratorial speculation degrades the intellect and adherence-to-evidence-for-conclusion-drawing of this commentariot. We decry poiltical players for doing the same. (Recall when Jim Jordan accused David Weiss of indicting Hunter Biden as a “smokescreen to avoid scrutiny of President Biden’s involvement in his son’s alleged influence-peddling” and how utterly ridiculous we viewed that?)

      Marcy, so far, has noted the timing of the indictment, coming AFTER the CA judge appeared to agree to allow Lowell some discovery to support his selective prosecution claim. In the post above, she points out further dates that support suspicious timing of when folks SAID publicly they were investigating, and when others have now declared under oath they were. But they are not the same parties.

      If there is evidence of bad faith or overt acts of intentional delay or obstruction, Marcy will find it, and treat us all to a brilliant, well-resourced, well-cited breakdown. I just find the current speculation and insinuation as assertions of fact to be a bit hypocritical, and weaken any argument — about speculation being improper or premature — we might rightfully lob at others.

      Any chance we can, for now, let the facts lead us, and not the conclusions we are currently trying to infer or independently assert? Marcy’s important work absolutely deserves wider distribution. But when/if that time comes, it will be cheapened if the comments below appear as partisan and ill-informed as Marcy is trying to reverse elsewhere in the world.

      Sorry to be a bit cranky, but a yesterday & a morning watching hearings in GA have gotten me riled up about the disservice that premature conclusion-drawing does to the legal profession and the cases we try to righteously prosecute or clients we try to rigorously defend.

      • Fancy Chicken says:

        Thank you tje. I wondered myself if this was a way that Weiss might be getting back at those who’s political pressure to take down Hunter have caused him to be on the receiving end of threats, but as you say we will never know that.

        I was not trying to prompt conspiracy mongering however. Sometimes Dr. Wheeler’s posts allude to a conclusion that goes over my head and at the risk of seeming like a dim bulb in the mists of often brilliant comments I’m hungry enough to just put it out there if I feel like I’m missing something. And the results are helpful replies like yours.

    • Artemis Prime says:

      My guess is that he didn’t have much of a choice, especially if it was that obvious and easy to prove that the informant was lying. Maybe it was going to come out no matter what, and he’d rather be ahead of it than in trouble because he tried to bring false evidence to court?

  12. Oldguy99 says:

    “So it is almost certain that the FBI decided to reopen the investigation into the FD-1023, perhaps based in part on Bill Barr’s false claims.”

    Since the FBI reopening the investigation into the FD-1023 happened in 2023, the genesis of the reopening would seem to be a very important question, assuming it was not a virgin birth. The passage I quote suggests Bill Barr’s comments may have played a role, but Barr was a private citizen at this point.

    Can we assume that knowing who in the FBI authorized this specific investigation, and what or who influenced that decision maker, might be key to understanding the nexus of any attempt to frame the Bidens?

    • Ginevra diBenci says:

      Thanks, Oldguy99, for articulating this in such a way that I realized you had put your finger on one of my central questions: why Bill Barr’s comments would have an effect on the investigation if he made them long after leaving office.

  13. person1597 says:

    MAGA petting-zoo clean-up on aisle Weiss…
    “Desperado, why don’t you come to your senses?
    You’ve been out ridin’ fences for so long now
    Oh, you’re a hard one
    I know that you got your reasons
    These things that are pleasin’ you
    Can hurt you somehow”
    https://youtu.be/yUg10CPelvo

  14. Sussex Trafalgar says:

    This was an important ruling by Chief Justice Roberts a couple of years ago regarding Trump’s documents.

    “Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the court’s two decisions, declaring, “In our system, the public has a right to every man’s evidence,” and “since the founding of the Republic, every man has included the President of the United States.”

    David Weiss and his attorneys will not be able to avoid testifying under oath and providing documents requested by Lowell.

    If Lowell wishes, he can and should obtain testimony and documents under oath from Bill Barr and previous Trump Administrators, too.

    • ColdFusion says:

      God, I hope so. This needs a better ending than “Oops, sorry about that, never mind all the things we said about you and your dad.”
      It seems like some of the things the prosecutors did should be against the law? Isn’t there sworn statements from them about all of this?

  15. Kick the Darkness says:

    “The indictment may well provide excuse to withhold precisely the discovery materials Lowell has been demanding for months, and it may create the illusion that Barr’s pressure led Weiss to renege on a plea deal.” After reading this, I went back and re-read the “Hearing Footsteps” post from Dec. 18 last year, which focused on witnesses to this shitshow, at least as I followed. From Lowell/Biden’s standpoint, is the idea that by maneuvering to foreclose discovery, the new indictment essentially admits their theory of the prosecution is correct? And, if so, how does that inform using witnesses to prove that at a trial? Those are probably not good questions on my part; its hard for me to tell if the smokescreen you’ve punctured is, as a legal matter, getting thinner or thicker.

  16. Another dude from Gville says:

    As Hangman said after Mav completed the training run in 2:15, all I can say is, damn.

    [Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the same username and email address each time you comment so that community members get to know you. You have published (26) comments as “Another dude from G-ville” — the dash matters. You also used a different email address on this comment; it may be a big typo but the mismatch still forces your comment into moderation. Future mismatches of username and email address may prevent your comment from publishing. /~Rayne]

  17. vigetnovus says:

    Without out a doubt we need a special counsel for this. I have long suspected that Bill Barr did something in October 2020 where he got way out in front of his skis and someone at DOJ found out about it. I naively thought that someone was Durham and that Barr secretly made him SC as a quid pro quo to keep him quiet.

    Now we know: that someone was Weiss. And Barr made Durham SC so that he would be able to drag the DNC and Biden through the mud, so as to tee up the Biden allegations.

    But then J6 happened and Jack Smith came on the scene. And Durham’s BS story fell apart. And Smith was able to show Trump committed much more serious crimes, so the false equivalency narrative was lost.

    And even more damming, now that I think about it, is what Jensen’s team did … by falsifying the date in Strozk’s notes. Because there is one person who could have easily testified and blown that narrative apart: Joe Biden. And now, thanks to Hur, we know Biden had the receipts in the form of his diary of that day.

    It is worth noting that the Jensen investigation fell apart on October 9th, 2020 (there are several concurrent EW posts on this). When was Weiss briefed by Brady at the urging of Donaghue? Also, Durham was made a SC on October 20, 2020.

      • vigetnovus says:

        Well, isn’t that interesting? Betting Weiss declined that offer, after he did some cursory digging into the CHS. Or rather, I’d say Wolf probably told him to.

        Oh, the irony is delicious.

      • vigetnovus says:

        By the by, and you may have seen this already, but a New Yorker piece about Jonathan Buma from August 2023 claims that Buma was shutdown from having contacts with CHSs by fall of 2022. I know there was some speculation about who Smirnov’s handler was in the other thread, this would tend to suggest it was definitely not Buma.

        Link to article

    • Ginevra diBenci says:

      vigetnovus, your initial comment here gave me that palpable thrill that we get from stories that click. Narrative is my metier, both as composer and deconstructor, I therefore feel honor-bound to recognize when someone else manages to put the pieces of a story together in such a way that they work.

      Obviously, we all come here because of Marcy’s brilliance at unraveling the false-but-truthy narratives propounded by others, and her parallel skill at pulling seemingly disparate elements together to show how they in fact connect and accumulate toward a greater whole. This latter ability shines in her work on the Hunter Biden debacle.

      But you too show that talent; your take on this confounding agglomeration of incidents has transformed it into a fact pattern, for me at least. Thank you.

  18. JimmyAnderson says:

    “Tellingly, when Brady was asked more specific questions about Smirnov’s travel records, his attorney, former Trump-appointed Massachusetts US Attorney Andrew Lelling, advised him, twice, not to answer.”

    Boom!

    Thank you Marcy – this is quite an indication of just how early certain “leftovers” in DOJ were aware of the discrepancies within Smirnov’s FBI affidavit.

  19. Rugger_9 says:

    OT: 350+ M$, barred for 3 years out of NY, Barbara Jones continuing as Special Monitor, etc. et al in a fairly long and detailed order that pretty much hit everybody. This will cut into the cash Defendant-1 can pay out in leverage and I think the dam break will follow shortly. I look forward to EW’s take on this.

    https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-civil-fraud-verdict-whats-in-judge-engorons-decision-2024-2

    92-page text is embedded here:
    https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/full-text-new-york-civil-fraud-ruling-rcna139121

    Meidas Touch has a short but thorough walkthrough here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5sm5b0yoUk

        • vigetnovus says:

          Exactly. Sorry, I didn’t mean *he* would make the billions. But he will certainly will get enough to pay legal bills and be even more in debt to the Evil League of Evil.

        • Rayne says:

          LOL that’s too funny.

          Soon plenty of people were trumpeting the end of an era. “The indictment of the Trump Org will likely result in its destruction as a viable entity,” Richard Signorelli, a former federal prosecutor in the Southern District of New York, tweeted in June 2021. “No bank will ever do business with an indicted company,” Dan Goldman, a onetime prosecutor who served as lead counsel during Trump’s first impeachment trial, said on MSNBC, calling an indictment “almost a death blow to the Trump Organization.”

          Those predictions turned out to be dead wrong. In the last 15 months, the Trump Organization—under indictment, with its founder characterizing the charges as part of a “political Witch Hunt by the Radical Left Demo­crats”—has managed to rework almost all $900 million of the debt it had coming due. Two of its most troublesome Deutsche Bank loans, totaling $295 million, are now off the books. The former president sold his money-losing hotel in Washington, D.C., to an investment shop connected to former Major League Baseball star Alex Rodriguez and retired boxing champion Floyd Mayweather, thanks to help from a firm tied to computer billionaire Michael Dell. Trump also refinanced $125 million of debt against a Miami golf resort and reworked a $100 million mortgage at Trump Tower.

          Turned out to be dead wrong” bwahahahahah

          • Ginevra diBenci says:

            Rayne, that “help” Trump received from Michael Dell tells me that the true power players behind the scenes have a clearcut but two-faced goal: to reinstall DJT as president, but to do so without their fingerprints on the project.

            I would know nothing about Mr. Dell if not for the book I co-authored in 2013. That project plunged me into the very white, very rich, very conservative, and very Christian world of golf, as played and (mainly) coached at the most exclusive clubs in the South.

            Trump would never be granted membership in these clubs had he not been president. But these men know very well what he can do for them (tax cuts), so they hold their noses and pretend-befriend him for however long it takes.

            The intersection of golf, Christianity and money: look no further for those who either run your life or aspire to.

  20. billtheXVIII says:

    I apologize for not getting it but how does charging Smirnov foreclose Lowell getting discovery ? Is the idea that the prosecution isn’t selective and vindictive after all ?

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Rereading the comment thread. the post, and earlier posts on topic, which often answer these questions. See the previous post, comment at 7.13 pm from Feb. 15th.

      • Rugger_9 says:

        Any reasons that Lowell can’t subpoena Smirnov and Weiss as hostile fact witnesses if Weiss apparently cribbed off of Smirnov’s testimony to the FBI?

        Could Weiss be forced out of the case for conflict of interest if he relied on Smirnov’s input as a CHS in any way?

Comments are closed.