The Biden Four: Did the Vice President Seek to Screw Over Four Americans to Get Cozier with the Iraqis

Matt Vespa

For now, it appears that Biden was part of another railroading of Americans' constitutional rights concerning security contractors in Iraq.

The Biden Four, Dustin Heard, Evan Liberty, Nicholas Slatten, and Paul Slough, were tried and convicted on manslaughter and weapons charges stemming from a 2007 incident in which these men were attacked while protecting an American diplomat

The Congressional Justice for Warriors Caucus laid out the case for their innocence in a lengthy press release this week, noting that the men had to open fire to protect their asset and their lives from what appeared to be a possible vehicle rigged with an explosive. Multiple Iraqis were killed.

Documents show that witnesses said the group took enemy fire. One of the witnesses said one of the shooters who fired at the Biden Four was dressed in an Iraqi police uniform. The vehicle the Biden Four was driving was hit with bullets. This was an act of self-defense. And yet, it appeared as if Joe Biden, not wanting to rock the boat and looking to get cozier with the Iraqi government, promised to crucify these contractors, all of them veterans. American lives were sacrificed legally to appease the Iraqi government. Apparently, in the Obama administration, American civil rights were tradeable assets.

Here's the kicker. The Iraqi police conducted most of the investigation, evidence was lost, and the FBI didn't arrive on the ground to the scene of the attack until three weeks after the incident. The Iraqi police were also notoriously corrupt; its police chief at the time might have been an Iranian intelligence agent. It's all documented. There was no way the polluted crime scene could yield anything legitimate in the pursuit of justice or the investigation. The Warrior Caucus details that in 2009, a federal judge tossed the manslaughter and weapons charges based on Brady violations. This did not sit well with Biden or then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who eventually got this circus act stateside, where the men were sentenced to 12-15 years in jail for this incident. Slatten was convicted of first-degree murder and received a life sentence. These men did nothing wrong, which is why the caucus is requesting all four to receive pardons from President Trump:

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2020/05/14/the-biden-four-did-the-vice-president-seek-to-screw-over-four-americans-to-get-cozier-with-the-iraqis-n2568756

Oh shite Sullivan was another Mueller set up, maybe that’s why everything was delayed and stalled 3-1/2 years at this point

Is This Why the Judge Presiding Over the Flynn Case Is Allowing Amicus Briefs from Anti-Trump Lawyers

The New York Sun’seditorial board has an idea for why Sullivan is doing this, which The Wall Street Journal cited in their op-ed. Sullivan is playing for time for a Democrat to win the 2020 election and then have a Biden DOJ drop the motion to dismiss the charges against Flynn. It’s speculation but given the breadth of the anti-Trump deep state and how far they will go to attack this White House, nothing is too crazy to consider. Remember it was nuts to think that Flynn was the victim of an FBI plot [emphasis mine]:

The decision of a United States judge to stall America’s motion to drop its case against General Michael Flynn appears calculated to delay the matter until after November. That’s how it looks, at least to us, in the wake of the judge’s decision to invite outside parties to file friend-of-the court briefs on what to do next.

Could it be that the judge hopes the Democrats will win the election and, come January, drop the motion to drop the case

In offering that line of speculation — and that’s all it is — we do not intend to question the integrity of the judge, Emmet Sullivan. We see as long-overdue and courageous Attorney General Barr’s decision to move to dismiss the case against General Flynn. The judge, though, has had a long and distinguished career on the bench. He was elevated to his several judgeships by Presidents Reagan, George Bush ’41, and Clinton.

Nor was it was ever, in our view, a foregone conclusion that the judge would grant America’s motion to end the case against the general, even if the betting around the courthouse is that the judge, in the long run, has few options but to grant the motion. After all, there is no longer an actual case or controversy, which is the only thing the Constitution grants the courts the power to decide.

Note, though, our caveat “in the long run.” What Judge Sullivan did today was issue a written order saying the court “anticipates that individuals and organizations will seek leave of the Court to file amicus curiae briefs” in the case. He must have been reading the op-ed pages. His order is practically an engraved invitation to the entire industry devoted to destroying the Trump presidency to pile on against the general.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2020/05/14/is-this-why-the-judge-presiding-over-the-flynn-case-is-allowing-amicus-briefs-from-antitrump-lawyers-n2568793