It Pains Me, But: Don't Charge Alec Baldwin
And that's not because I don't believe he's guilty
As someone who stuck his neck out a bit to assure the public that the Iowa Bryan Kohberger case was going to be successfully prosecuted, I say with regret: I have no such faith in the Baldwin case.
As such: I’m not sure it’s worth indicting him.
Let’s do a quick timeline of this disaster, shall we?
October 2021: Film crew members Halyna Hutchins and Joel Souza are shot on the set of the Rust production, by a gun that Alec is holding. Hutchins dies. Alec contends he did not depress the trigger.
August 2022: The New Mexico DA on the case, Mary Altwies, hires Andrea Reeb, a NM legislator, as a Special Prosecutor to assist her.
Now: Somewhere in here, the gun in question is sent to the FBI for testing, to see if what Baldwin contends is possible. Incredibly, and reportedly with the prosecution’s consent, the FBI destroys parts of the gun while testing it. Apparently, by hitting it with a mallet.
So it takes until 14 months after the initial event before….
January 2023: Alec and set armorer Hannah Guttierez are charged with Involuntary Manslaughter.
March 29, 2023: The judge on the case rules that Spec. Prosecutor Reeb has to step down due to a conflict of interest. She does. DA Altwies then also withdraws from prosecuting the case.
March 30, 2023: Two new Special Prosecutors, Kari Morrison and Jason Lewis, take over.
April, 2023: The two new Special Prosecutors drop the charges against Baldwin.
May, 2023: For some reason, the two new Special Prosecutors then order new ballistics tests on the gun Baldwin was holding when the incident occurred.
The prosecution also states that the gun may have been “modified” from its original state before being handed to Baldwin on-set.
June, 2023: Lead investigator on the case, Chief Robert Shilling of the N. Mexico State Police, is either forced off the case or quits. He sends an email to the Prosecutors’ office, in which he states that the conduct of the Santa Fe Sheriff's Office during and after their initial investigation is "reprehensible and unprofessional to a degree I still have no words for."
Shilling’s email is somehow inadvertantly sent to Ms. Guttierez’s defense attorney, Jason Bowles (the list of ball drops in this thing is just astounding).
As a result, defense attorney Bowles indicates he believes the prosecution has been witholding evidence favorable to his client and states that he will be calling Chief Shilling — who wrote the criminal complaint against Guttierez — as a defense witness.
August 2023: Results of the new ballistics tests on the gun come back, apparently confirming the FBI’s assessment that the gun could only be fired if the trigger was pulled. However, the tests were done with “replacement parts” because the FBI tests destroyed the key parts of the original gun.
(Photo 159650919 | Alec Baldwin © Starstock | Dreamstime.com)
Folks, I included the entire timeline because I think it speaks for itself. While I admittedly don’t have all the facts, under the facts as-reported (and that remain uncontradicted): This case is without peer as a prosecutorial and investigatory calamity.
How can the prosecutors now expect to get a 12-person jury to unanimously agree that Alec Baldwin is guilty of Negligent Manslaughter when even the lead investigator is on-record as saying that the investigation was badly botched?
And when the key piece of evidence in the case — the gun — has been so damaged that what is essentially a facsimile is only now available for trial?
And when the supposed “new” evidence is again, the result of tests done on a facsimile?
Especially when the prosecutors themselves admit that the original gun might have been modified — but they no longer have it?
Good lord.
It pains me to say it, but: I’m not even sure they can convict Guttierez.
Drop the case. And all involved should resign.
(And as a last note: As I wrote here, there are still numerous pending civil cases [including those lodged by Baldwin]. But the fact that Halyna’s husband is now listed as an Executive Producer on the Rust production just adds to the ick factor of the whole affair).
The Special Counsel Needs A Special Counsel
Let’s make it crystal sparkling clear: Garland’s latest move is statutorily illegal.
It’s not very complicated. Here’s the statute. You don’t have to be a lawyer to read the plain language of it:
§ 600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel
The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and—
(a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney's Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and
(b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.
That’s it. That’s the whole legal universe of this.
Yes, there are other statutes that apply to the actions of the Special Counsel once he’s appointed. But the above is the statute that is clearly intended to govern when a Special Counsel can be appointed.
Now, note that the construction of (a) and (b) here is an “and” — not an “or.” So: We have to apply them both, in tandem, sequentially.
The key: Under (a), it is clear that the construction indicates the Spec. Counsel should be someone other than a U.S. Attorney, and…
Under (b), it is clear that the Spec. Counsel should be someone “outside” DOJ.
David Weiss satisfies neither of these.
They could play with the language of (a) — there’s a bit more there — but there’s no avoiding the word “outside” in (b).
And recall: this is an “and.” Meaning: We need both.
Which means: the nation’s top lawyer, Merrick Garland, doesn’t really care about the law. He’ll break it to get his boss re-elected.
As an attorney and former law enforcement, that is both tremendously disheartening — and scary.
(And btw: All of this applies to Jack Smith as well — who had been seconded by DOJ to the Hague to investigate Kosovo war crimes when he was appointed Special Counsel to investigate Donald Trump.
And while we all deplore war crimes: Why on earth is DOJ even involved in a European war crimes investigation, if no American is directly implicated? DOJ has really come to believe they rule the world, haven’t they?
Is there nothing we won’t just stay the hell out of?).
But Is Hunter Out Of The Woods?
There is the possibility (perhaps even a likelihood) that all of the above applies only to Joe Biden. And that it was all done to circle the wagons around the President — leaving a (dangerous) Hunter on the outside.
From Chris:
Maybe the coverup is no longer tenable. The Biden Brat is having a temper tantrum and his former babysitters are running for cover.
Hunter was quite adamant in his plea hearing that he would not accept the plea deal if it didn’t have the (hidden) immunity-from-prosecution clause. If Hunter is going to take this case to trial, the facts will emerge. And so will the slow-walking and lack of basic investigative curiosity from DOJ. Weiss will be very exposed.
By naming him Special Counsel, Garland has essentially put the ball in David Weiss’s court and removed any excuses as to why a larger case cannot be made.
So will Weiss finally play hardball?
Consider: Does David Weiss really think the White House can cover his ass through a public trial? Members of Congress are discussing impeachment proceedings against his immediate supervisor, Merrick Garland. The Speaker of the House has noted that impeaching the President is on the table.
Where does Davis Weiss sit in this drama? Near the bottom of the list of who is important to the powers that be. In other words: expendable.
Essentially: His overhead can subtly (or not-so-subtly) blame him.
Remember that Weiss has already allowed the statute of limitations to expire on several charges. He has not substantively addressed the possible money laundering and FARA charges that seem obvious to anyone familiar with the facts.
Allegations from whistleblowers also appear to discredit Weiss’s investigation. They were allegedly told not to investigate President Biden. As per whistleblower testimony, Hunter Biden’s attorneys were tipped off about potential search warrants and subpoenas.
And we all know about Weiss’s (shameful and unprecedented) attempt at the sweetheart plea deal.
And recall: Because of all this, Weiss himself is potentially a target in the Congressional investigation.
So Weiss is already vulnerable. And even more so, were a Hunter trial to end in acquittal.
All eyes are on Weiss now. He has the power of Special Prosecutor, and can pursue additional crimes outside of Delaware (so that excuse is gone). One would assume that money laundering and other crimes (narcotics? Patronizing prostitutes?) occurred elsewhere, based on the public laptop data.
And so: Hunter may be in real trouble.
Because the best way for Weiss to cover his own butt is to nail Hunter Biden.
 | A guest post by
|
Great take, nothing but love and respect for you guys!