CNN Inside Politics host Dana Bash and legal analyst Shan Wu reacted negatively to the news that Attorney General Merrick Garland as appointed Jack Weiss as special counsel in the Hunter Biden investigation by wondering why he still has a job and worrying it implies that Joe Biden is now a subject in Weiss’s investigation.
Bash turned to Wu’s fellow legal analyst Elliot Williams and wondered, “this special counsel -- idea of a special counsel is happening because David Weiss, who is now the special counsel, asked for it. Given what happened in that courtroom and frankly what a mess it was; does it surprise you that he is still in charge of this case?”
Williams immediately shot the question down, “It does not. Look, anybody who has been an attorney or federal prosecutor has had something blow up with the defense where you thought you had an agreement going into court, everybody was fine, you shook hands on it, and then you get in there and you, just sort of, misunderstood each other.”
As for Garland’s rationale, Williams theorized, “I think it was a recognition or a finding by Weiss, perhaps others, that the case was now so extraordinary on account of who the person being investigated is and some of the mishegoss around it, that it was wise to take out of the chain of command at the Justice Department. It didn’t have to happen, but it did.”
Trying to elaborate that, Bash noted that because Weiss is now a special counsel, “This is going to be a fulsome report about what the investigation looked like. Which is important legally but also very important politically because they're going to presumably have information in there that could answer with evidence some of the allegations without evidence, mostly, that Republicans have out there.”
Wu responded by blasting the announcement, “Yeah, I think that's about the only good thing that's come out of this decision by Garland. To me, this is a debacle for the Justice Department.”
He also tried to throw doubt on Williams’s early assessment of the downfall of the plea agreement, “It shouldn't have gone wrong in this case. I mean, the defense had an interest in keeping it a little bit ambiguous—is anything else happening-- because they want their deal. Prosecution had no interest in keeping it ambiguous. They should’ve made this very clear, at least for themselves, what the plan was.”
Additionally, Wu condemned Garland for trying to appease his critics and Weiss:
Garland, again, looks like he is just buffeted by political winds. He is so worried about looking political, if Weiss says ‘now make me special counsel’ he says ‘yes, yes, I’ll do that.’ He should’ve had better control over this to begin with because when Weiss was not a special counsel, he was in the chain of command at Justice, now he’s making him a special counsel, he could’ve just said no.”
As for his reasoning, Wu lamented, “this obviously implies, maybe he doesn't mean to imply it, that the conflict that's coming up now maybe extends to the president because the president's son, there's no conflict. Relatives of presidents have been looked before, you don't need a special counsel or independent council. So, again, I lay this at Garland's feet. It wasn't well managed and his reaction now makes things even worse.”
For years, the media accused former President Donald Trump of viewing his attorneys general as his own personal lawyers and here is a former Janet Reno counsel lamenting that Garland isn’t doing enough to protect Biden.
This segment was sponsored by AARP.
Here is a transcript for the August 11 show:
CNN Inside Politics with Dana Bash
8/11/2023
12:29 PM ET
DANA BASH: Let's start with David Weiss himself. He is a special counsel, as I mentioned, the -- well, the attorney general says explicitly we have here in the supporting documents that this is happening, this special counsel -- idea of a special counsel is happening because David Weiss, who is now the special counsel, asked for it. Given what happened in that courtroom and frankly what a mess it was; does it surprise you that he is still in charge of this case?
ELLIOT WILLIAMS: It does not. Look, anybody who has been an attorney or federal prosecutor has had something blow up with the defense where you thought you had an agreement going into court, everybody was fine, you shook hands on it, and then you get in there and you, just sort of, misunderstood each other.
So, that's not that alarming. Now, step back, why do you have a special counsel in the first place? And what the law says is that number one, when somebody has a conflict like, you know, one of the attorneys owns stock or something in the people being investigated, that's not the case here, so, or, extraordinary circumstances exist.
That's what the law says and I think it was a recognition or a finding by Weiss, perhaps others, that the case was now so extraordinary on account of who the person being investigated is and some of the mishegoss around it, that it was wise to take out of the chain of command at the Justice Department. It didn’t have to happen, but it did.
BASH: It did and then the other very important point of this is that because this is a special counsel, this isn't just -- if somebody is charged, then you were going to know the scope of the charge and what they allegedly did wrong or didn't. This is going to be a fulsome report about what the investigation looked like. Which is important legally but also very important politically because they're going to presumably have information in there that could answer with evidence some of the allegations without evidence, mostly, that Republicans have out there.
SHAN WU: Yeah, I think that's about the only good thing that's come out of this decision by Garland. To me, this is a debacle for the Justice Department. They've had years to investigate this case and Elliot's absolutely right, things go wrong in the courtroom. It shouldn't have gone wrong in this case. I mean, the defense had an interest in keeping it a little bit ambiguous—is anything else happening-- because they want their deal.
Prosecution had no interest in keeping it ambiguous. They should’ve made this very clear, at least for themselves, what the plan was. Garland, again, looks like he is just buffeted by political winds. He is so worried about looking political, if Weiss says “now make me special counsel” he says “yes, yes, I’ll do that.”
He should’ve had better control over this to begin with because when Weiss was not a special counsel, he was in the chain of command at Justice, now he’s making him a special counsel, he could’ve just said no.
And this obviously implies, maybe he doesn't mean to imply it, that the conflict that's coming up now maybe extends to the president because the president's son, there's no conflict. Relatives of presidents have been looked before, you don't need a special counsel or independent council. So, again, I lay this at Garland's feet. It wasn't well managed and his reaction now makes things even worse.
