On Sunday, ABC’s Jon Karl actually did his job and asked Democrat Representative Ro Khanna about the IRS whistleblower report on Merrick Garland.
According to the report, Garland had likely lied under oath when he said he had not interfered in the Hunter Biden investigation.
Karl pressed Khanna on whether or not he was concerned about what was coming out of this case.
“Republicans in the House have released testimony of this IRS whistleblower suggesting he’s got evidence that…decisions are being made by the US Attorney in Delaware and not by the Attorney General is not true and ultimately it was the Attorney General – main Justice deciding this, are you concerned about what’s coming out of this case?” Jon Karl asked Ro Khanna on ABC’s “This Week.”
Khanna responded by distorting the facts and falsely claiming that Trump appointee US Attorney Weiss had “total power” over making a decision on Hunter Biden.
Karl quickly pushed back saying that this directly contradicted what Attorney General Merrick Garland had stated.
“But what the whistleblower is saying is that Weiss, who was appointed by Trump, said that he was not the deciding official on this case. If that turns out to be true, doesn’t that directly contradict what the Attorney General has said?”
Weiss was not saying that. If Weiss was saying that, I would have a concern,” Ro Khanna said.
What Ro Khanna said was a lie.
Weiss confirmed his charging authority was limited to his home district in Delaware, and if he needed to bring charges in another venue he would have to contact the US Attorney’s Office for the district in question.
The real question is, did the US Attorneys in California and DC, both appointed by Joe Biden, block Weiss from bringing charges against Hunter Biden?
It’s no surprise that representatives from both sides of the aisle are engaging in such behavior – after all, they don’t want to be held accountable for unethical actions.
If we allow politicians to skirt around questions like these without holding them accountable, then we open up a dangerous precedent where elected officials can get away with anything without consequence – even if it means lying under oath or interfering with investigations into high-profile people like Hunter Biden who may have important connections within Washington D.C..