Garland's Ultimate Principle Test: Will the DOJ Send Hunter Biden's Perjury Allegations to a Grand Jury?

Garland's Position and Hunter Biden's Allegations

Merrick Garland, the Attorney General, has always claimed that he is an entirely apolitical figure who strictly adheres to the law. This claim has been questioned by critics in relation to key cases, including those involving Hunter Biden. However, Garland may now be facing one of the most explicit tests of his claim during his tenure. House committees have publicly reported three separate instances where Hunter Biden is alleged to have committed perjury. The question now is what Garland is willing to do about it.

Hunter Biden's Testimony and Potential Criminal Charges

When Hunter testified, it was suggested that he might invoke the Fifth Amendment to remain silent because of the high risk that he might lie or mislead investigators with his responses. Despite months of preparation, he chose to face the challenge and now seems to have made himself vulnerable to additional criminal charges. Hunter Biden has yet to respond to the specific allegations, but they seem strong on the surface. It's worth noting that the Justice Department has spent significant time and resources pursuing false statements against individuals like Michael Flynn over a single statement describing a meeting with Russian diplomats. These are cases where Hunter was under oath, had been preparing for months, and had legal counsel present.

Controversial Instances and Alleged Lies

One of the instances involves a controversial WhatsApp message in which Hunter not only threatened a Chinese businessman to send him large sums of money, but also claimed that his father was sitting next to him at the time. The Bidens later received millions. Hunter's response to questions about the message was both curious and evasive. Another alleged lie was Hunter's denial that he ever assisted people associated with Burisma in obtaining visas. The Committee has produced an email showing Hunter's associate Devon Archer discussing the revocation of Burisma CEO Nikolay Zlochevsky's visa. Hunter also swore under oath that he had no involvement in shell companies that received foreign payments. However, evidence from the IRS whistleblowers and Archer's testimony contradicts this claim.

Garland's Decision and its Implications

These allegations seem clear and well-founded enough for a referral to the Justice Department. After expediting false statement claims against Trump officials, the question is whether Garland will even present the matter to a grand jury. He could also assign the matter to the Special Counsel prosecuting Hunter. However, Special Counsel David Weiss has been accused of downplaying charges against the President's son and trying to push through a notorious sweetheart deal that fell apart in court. Now, Garland faces an unavoidable decision: to treat this referral as he did with the Trump cases (by sending it to a grand jury) or to dismiss alleged perjury made by the President's son before Congress.

The Legal and Political Challenges for Merrick Garland

This situation is less of a legal challenge for Merrick Garland than it is a political one. If the rule of law still prevails at the Justice Department, Hunter Biden could be facing a third front in his ongoing legal battles.

Closing Thoughts

This situation presents a significant test for Attorney General Merrick Garland. Will he uphold his commitment to being an apolitical figure who strictly follows the law, or will political considerations influence his decision? What are your thoughts on this matter? Feel free to share this article with your friends and engage in a discussion. Don't forget to sign up for the Daily Briefing, which takes place every day at 6pm.