Is the DOJ Preparing to Formally Charge Hunter Biden?

The Department of Justice (DOJ) is considering if tax and gun-related charges will be brought against President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, in connection to a federal investigation into his business dealings.

The investigation into Hunter Biden, led by U.S. District Attorney David Weiss, has “intensified” recently as officials discuss moving forward in a politically delicate case as the midterms loom, sources told CNN.

The DOJ initially investigated Hunter Biden for possible financial crimes, including money laundering and campaign finance laws, while Joe Biden was vice president, CNN noted. But the DOJ has reportedly limited its scope to focus solely on allegations the president’s son committed tax and gun-related crimes. (Read more from “Is the DOJ Preparing to Formally Charge Hunter Biden?” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Most Americans Believe Joe Biden Profited From Son’s Corrupt Business Deals

A poll of Joe Biden voters after the 2020 election showed that if they had known of the evidence of the candidate’s complicity in an international business trading off access to the White House, they would not have voted for the Democratic candidate.

Now, a poll published Tuesday indicates American voters overall believe Joe Biden profited from the deals made by his son Hunter and brother Jim with the likes of Chinese Communist Party operatives and corrupt Russian and Ukrainian oligarchs.

The Rasmussen Reports survey found 69% of likely U.S. voters believe it’s likely the president was aware of at least some of Hunter Biden’s business dealings, including 49% who believe it’s very likely.

Significantly, 62% believe Joe Biden personally profited from deals with companies tied to the Chinese Communist Party, including 44% who think it’s very likely.

Most, however – attesting to how the Justice Department and media treat Democrats and establishment figures in comparison to conservatives – don’t believe Hunter Biden will face criminal charges. (Read more from “Most Americans Believe Joe Biden Profited From Son’s Corrupt Business Deals” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Buttigieg, Dems’ Likely Presidential Contender, Wants to Take Away Your Cars

Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg — considered the most likely Democratic candidate for president in 2024 after Joe Biden in the latest Washington Post ranking — says the solution to high gas prices is getting “most Americans” to switch to electric vehicles. Willingly or not.

As secretary, Buttigieg is issuing federal regulations to force states to limit the use of gas-powered vehicles. If he becomes president, we’ll be living in green hell, compelled to buy pricey electric vehicles to comply with his climate zealotry.

Right now, fewer than one percent of vehicles on the road are electric-powered. EVs are probably the long-term future. But they won’t solve the current pain at the pump. They cost too much. And charging them is a logistical nightmare. The United States has 150,000 gas stations but only 6,000 charging stations.

On a radio show Thursday, Buttigieg roiled the audience by suggesting that switching to electric cars — rather than producing more energy — is the answer. Meanwhile gas prices are predicted to rise to as much as $6 a gallon this fall, per an internal US Treasury analysis, and even higher in JP Morgan’s worst-case scenario.

EVs are not the answer. Buttigieg is living in la-la land. The average new EV costs about $66,000. One of the best deals, according to US News and World Report, is the 2022 Kia EV6, priced at $40,900 before add-ons. Even that’s more than most people can afford. Three-quarters of Americans who need a car buy a used one, paying around $27,000 for it. (Read more from “Buttigieg, Dems’ Likely Presidential Contender, Wants to Take Away Your Cars” HERE)

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore via Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

The State Department Used Your Tax Dollars to Fund a Film Festival That Depicted Drag Queens, Incest, and Pedophilia

The State Department helped fund a film festival in September that featured movies depicting drag queens, incest, and pedophilia, the Washington Free Beacon has learned.

Queer Lisboa, an international queer film festival held in Portugal, was given $10,000 as part of the Biden administration’s push to “support LGBTQ+ and Diversity, Equity, Inclusion & Accessibility efforts” abroad, according to a State Department spokeswoman. The festival’s offerings included P.S. Burn This Letter Please, a documentary about drag culture in post-war New York City, Saint-Narcisse, a film about incestuous twins, and Minyan, a movie about a 17-year-old Jewish boy who leaves his parents to explore New York City’s gay scene and eventually has sex with an adult bartender.

The event was one of several bankrolled by taxpayers to promote LGBT acceptance abroad. In the last year, the State Department funded the “first gender and sexuality library in Lebanon,” provided diversity and inclusion consulting to Latin American police forces, and hosted a transgender recognition webinar in Norway, according to an interagency report. The department said locals sometimes pushed back against LGBT promotion, perceiving it as “Western,” “imported,” or “against cultural or religious values.”

The festival also screened a biopic of Harvey Milk, the United States’ first openly gay elected official. Milk, a city official in San Francisco during the 1950s, once dated a 16-year-old boy while Milk was in his 30s. He also tried to get another teenage boy to run away from home to live with him, according to a biography of the politician. (Read more from “The State Department Used Your Tax Dollars to Fund a Film Festival That Depicted Drag Queens, Incest, and Pedophilia” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

AOC Responds to Claims She Was Faking Being Handcuffed

. . .Shortly after 1:30pm on Wednesday, AOC finally addressed her act, by responding to Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) who was among those calling her out over Twitter. “Politics has become performative art,” Mace’s tweet read in part. “Performance, not policy, is the name of the game up here.”

AOC claimed that she was not, in fact, faking it, but that it was “a best practice while detained, handcuffed or not, to avoid escalating charges like resisting arrest.” She then went after Mace on a personal level, claiming she “lied about a fellow rape survivor for ‘points.'”

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), another squad member, who also was arrested, retweeted AOC’s response.

(Read more from “AOC Responds to Claims She Was Faking Being Handcuffed” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Uvalde School District Moves to Fire Police Chief

Uvalde Consolidated Independent School District officials published an agenda for a special school board meeting to consider firing the district’s embattled police chief. The move comes days after a report from the Texas House detailing failures at many levels in advance and in response to the shooting at Robb Elementary School in May.

Uvalde school district officials published an agenda for a special school board meeting on July 23. The agenda calls for an executive session and public meeting for: “Discussion and possible action regarding termination for good cause as recommended by the Superintendent of the non-certified contract of Pete Arredondo.”

The agenda also calls for a closed session. The agenda states:

A closed session will be held under Provisions of Texas Government Code, Chapter 551, Sections 551.071 and 551.074.

A. Pursuant to Section 551.071 and 551.074 of the Texas Government Code, consultation with the District’s attorney concerning legal and procedural issues related to recommended termination for good cause of the non-certified contract of Pete Arredondo.

(Read more from “Uvalde School District Moves to Fire Police Chief” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Supreme Court Asked to Punish Texas Over Use of ‘Trump Judges’

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. famously declared that there were no Trump judges or Obama judges. He is about to get a real test on that matter.

A law professor has filed a brief with the Supreme Court urging the justices to rule against Texas in a lawsuit over the Biden administration’s handling of immigration enforcement. The lawsuit claims Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has been unethically “judge shopping” by looking for Republican-appointed judges to handle his cases.

Stephen Vladeck, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law, said Mr. Paxton looks for courthouses dominated by Republican judges, many of them appointed by President Trump, to improve his chances of success.

Steve Bannon criminal contempt trial: Prosecution rests case
Mr. Paxton has filed 27 cases against President Biden‘s policies, 19 of them in Texas. Of those, all but one is being overseen by a judge appointed by a Republican president, Mr. Vladeck said.

“This is more than forum-shopping, it is thinly veiled judge-shopping,” the professor wrote in a brief filed with the high court. (Read more from “Supreme Court Asked to Punish Texas Over Use of ‘Trump Judges’” HERE)

Photo credit: Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Is the IRS Preparing to Torpedo the Right to Counsel?

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) recently announced that it updated the Dirty Dozen, the agency’s list of consumer alerts for scams designed to target innocent taxpayers with fraudulent schemes. Historically, the list included obviously illegal plots to defraud taxpayers in various ways, including IRS impersonation scams, email attacks, ID theft, and Social Security Numbers, etc.

The news release announcing a change to the Dirty Dozen list goes well beyond merely alerting taxpayers to illegal schemes. The statement blatantly encourages citizens to avoid consulting counsel with regard to a delinquent tax problem.

Is the IRS attempting to chill one’s constitutional right to counsel?

For reference, there are millions of people facing assessments of unpaid taxes. When such assessments are not immediately paid, citizens face enforced collection, including wage and bank levies, property seizures and tax liens. These citizens also face the assessment of penalties and interest, which often double or triple the amount of the original tax.

Most people are unaware of the various programs available to mitigate enforcement action and in certain cases, reduce or eliminate one’s debt. Such programs include, among other things, an installment agreement, penalty abatement relief, audit reconsideration appeals, etc.

The IRS’s flagship settlement program is known as the Offer in Compromise (OIC). An OIC allows a qualifying citizen to reduce one’s tax debt in any one of four circumstances. Most commonly, an OIC is used when the tax cannot be paid due to lack of sufficient income or equity in assets.

This is the program the IRS specifically targeted when encouraging delinquent citizens to avoid consulting counsel. The news release headline says it all: “IRS urges anyone having trouble paying their taxes to avoid anyone claiming they can settle tax debt for pennies on the dollar…” This plainly suggests that a claim of the ability to settle one’s debt for less than is owed is fraudulent.

But it’s the headline itself that’s misleading. The IRS’s own website plainly states that the OIC program “…allows you to settle your tax debt for less than the full amount you owe. It may be a legitimate option if you can’t pay your full tax liability or doing so creates a financial hardship. * * *”

This language defies the news release’s allegation that tax pros offering OIC representation “make outlandish claims” that they are able to “settle a person’s tax debt for pennies on the dollar.” But that’s exactly what the program allows one to do, as explained by the IRS’s own website. If one owes $100,000, but can pay just $10,000, he may can settle through an OIC for ten cents on the dollar—i.,e., “pennies on the dollar.”

Even worse than suggesting that OIC settlement claims are per se bogus is the claim regarding the IRS’s ability to help. Commissioner Rettig is quoted as saying, “No one can get a better deal for taxpayers, than they can usually get for themselves by working directly with the IRS to solve their tax issues.” Does anybody really believe that the IRS is going to “get you a deal” if you just ask for it? In other words, Rettig suggests that people should avoid getting independent professional help. Instead, they should take to heart the old adage that promises, “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”

Imagine the outrage of the A.C.L.U. if any state or local law enforcement agency issued an announcement saying nobody ever need consult counsel when dealing with such agency, because no lawyer can get them a better deal than “they can get for themselves.”

Rettig goes on to say that, “Taxpayers can check online for their best deal…” And though it’s true that the OIC is discussed on the IRS’s website, it’s equally true that the site provides no specific instructions on how to prepare, submit, argue, negotiate, or appeal an OIC. Moreover, it is impossible to submit an OIC online because one must be filed in writing only with the IRS’s Centralized Offer in Compromise (COIC) Unit, which is a specialized group of examiners who work only Offer cases. Thus, the idea that one can win an OIC online is completely inaccurate and misleading.

The commissioner follows with a statement lacking any credibility whatsoever. He says that (in additional to checking on line), taxpayers can call a “…specialized collection line where they can get fast service by using voice and chat bots or opting to speak with a live phone assister.”

We all know there’s no such thing as “fast service” when it comes to calling the IRS. Wait times for collection representatives are just about as bad as they can be. But even you were able to get a call answered quickly, there’s no such thing as a “specialized collection line” for OICs. As stated, they must be submitted in writing and are handled exclusively by COIC Unit examiners. It is simply impossible to get an OIC accepted over the phone of through the website.

How about the claim that taxpayers can get their best deal “by using voice and chat bots”? Is the commissioner suggesting that citizens can use the agency’s artificial intelligence tools to win acceptance of an OIC? This too is simply impossible, not just for the reasons already stated, but because every person’s financial facts and circumstances are unique. OICs take into account the totality of one’s personal and business financial circumstances as reflected in a lengthy financial statement that must be submitted with the OIC application. Most citizens are unable to navigate the byzantine financial statement without experienced counsel.

People in tax trouble generally find out the hard way that the IRS does not work like other law enforcement agencies. When dealing with the IRS, the burden of proof is on you. When it comes to an OIC, you must prove you qualify for the program and that the amount offered is the most you can reasonably expect to pay under the circumstances. The IRS doesn’t have to prove you don’t qualify.

And there’s the rub. The OIC program is controlled by Internal Revenue Code section 7122 and regulations thereunder, along with the massive Internal Revenue Manual, which has a lengthy chapter dedicated to the processing, evaluation, investigation, and acceptance or rejection of an OIC—plus the appeal rights associated therewith. This means that people often need professional help to get through the IRS’s labyrinth of rules, regulations, procedures, forms, and instructions.

To suggest that one can get an OIC using “voice and chat bots” controlled by artificial intelligence is, at best, a farce.

One might ask what might be driving the IRS’s effort to chill the right to counsel. After all, the right to counsel is one your ten essential taxpayer rights, as expressed in code section 7803(a)(3). My answer is to point to the tax gap. The IRS and the Treasury Department are apoplectic over the reported tax gap of $400-plus billion. They’re promising more agents, increased audits, and more aggressive enforcement to get the money.

On the other hand, an accepted OIC means the citizen actually pays less in taxes than he otherwise might. In 2020 and 2021 respectively, the IRS accepted just about 15,000 OICs. In every single case, the settlement meant the taxpayer paid less than was owed. The IRS does not tell us how much was written off, but it must have been billions of dollars. And they want the money.

By chilling the right of representation, and in turn inducing people to simply call the IRS to “make their best deal,” the IRS will force more people into long term installment agreements which they often cannot afford. Such agreements often make matters worse because people end up using current tax revenue to pay their back tax debt, which only leads to more delinquent years.

Make no mistake about it. The IRS is working to chill your right to counsel by branding all tax pros as frauds and scammers. They’re doing it because they intend to make every effort to squeeze blood from a turnip.

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

POLL: Americans Trust Armed Civilians More Than Police, Feds In Mass Shootings

More Americans trust a good Samaritan armed with a gun to stop a mass shooting than police officers or federal agents, according to a Convention of States Action and Trafalgar Group survey of Americans.

The new survey found that the more Americans believe that their best protection in a mass shooting situation is a nearby armed civilian, rather than police officers or federal agents. Respondents chose armed citizens as the best protection by 41.8% to 25.1% for local police and 10.3% for federal agents. About a fifth people chose none of the above – 22.8%.

Democrats and Republicans differed widely on who each believed best able to protect them during a mass shooting. A plurality of Democrats, 33.9%, picked none of the above. Local police came in second with 31.4%.

Republicans, on the other hand, trusted an armed civilian far more than local police or federal agents. Of the GOP respondents, 70.4% said they trusted an armed civilian most to protect them and their families. Just 1.6% of GOP respondents said that federal agents were in the best spot to protect them.

The pollster surveyed 1,078 likely general election voters from July 7-10, with a margin of error of 2.9%. (Read more from “Poll: Americans Trust Armed Civilians More Than Police, Feds in Mass Shootings” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Twitter Shreds Prince Harry for Condescending UN Speech Against America

Conservative Twitter users tore Prince Harry apart after the British royal gave a condescending speech trashing the Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade during a U.N. summit on International Nelson Mandela Day.

During the Monday speech, Harry seemed to take aim at conservative policies. He claimed that “the rolling back of Constitutional rights in the United States,” in addition to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, represent a “global assault on democracy and freedom.” . . .

Conservatives online read between the lines and reminded Prince Harry exactly how Americans feel about the British being involved in their politics.

British Journalist and former Margaret Thatcher aide, Nile Gardiner, accused Harry of promoting propaganda at his wife’s behest. He wrote, “Prince Harry is increasingly just a mouthpiece for Meghan Markle’s far Left political activism. A sad decline for a once hugely popular figure. He is actively undermining the British Monarchy by engaging in political attacks, and damaging the image of the Royal Family in America.”

“Go home, little boy,” wrote American Greatness senior fellow Ned Ryun.

(Read more from “Twitter Shreds Prince Harry for Condescending Un Speech Against America” HERE)

Photo credit: Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.