Whistleblowers Testify About Biden's Appointees Interfering in Sham Investigation of Hunter Biden

at the Paper of Record

IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley's opening statement on Department of Justice Corruption and the Biden Family's Crimes:

"I'm here to tell you that the Delaware US Attorney's Office and Department of Justice's handling of the Hunter Biden tax investigation was very different from any other case my 14 years at the IRS. At every stage decisions were made that benefited the subject of this investigation.

For example, prosecutors conceal contents of Hunter Biden's laptop from investigators. DOJ slow walked steps to include interviews, serving document requests, and executing search warrants. Warrents that we're ready as early as April of 2020, but were delayed until after the November 2020 election, and never pursued.

Investigators were not allowed to follow up on WhatsApp messages from Hunter Biden's Apple iCloud backup, where he suggested he was sitting next to his father. Assistant United States Attorney Leslie Wolf cited the optics of executing a search warrant at President Biden's residence as a deciding factor for not allowing it even though she agreed that probable cause existed.

Prosecutors instructed investigators not to ask about the big guy or dad when conducting interviews. The Biden transition team was tipped off about interviews the night before the investigation went over.

...

After our investigation largely concluded by the end of 2021, the IRS recommended charging Hunter Biden with multiple felonies and several misdemeanors for the tax years of 2014 through 2019. The Delaware Assistant United States Attorneys and tax evasion trial attorneys supported charging the felonies and misdemeanors listed in Exhibit two of my interview transcripts...

Attorney General Garland led Congress to believe the case was insulated from improper political influence because all decisions were being made exclusively by Delaware US Attorneey David Weiss, but that was not true. The Justice Department allowed the President's political appointees to weigh in on whether they charged the president's son.

After US Attorney for DC, Mathew Graves, appointed by President Biden refused to bring charges in March 2022, I watched US Attorney Weiss tell a roomful of senior FBI and IRS leaders on October 7, 2022, that he was not the deciding person on whether charges were filed. That was my red line.

I had already seen a pattern of preferential treatment and obstruction. Now, US Attorney Weiss was admitting that what the American people believed based on the Attorney General's sworn statement was false. I could no longer stay silent..."

The second whistleblower, who until recently was anonymous and called "whistleblower x," also came forward to support Shapley's charges.

This from the released draft of his opening statement:

Mr. Weiss stated that he had been granted "ultimate authority" over this matter but then later stated in the same letter that his "charging authority" is geographically "limited" and that he would need to ask President Biden appointed U.S. Attorney's[sic] to "partner" with him in charging the case. We know that as recently in March of 2023, even the Department of Justice-Tax Division attorney assigned to the case questioned Mr. Weiss's authority and didn't know where Mr. Weiss was going to charge the case.

...

My own agency retaliated against me and threatened me with criminal conduct in response to an internal email I sent to IRS leadership, even after years of essentially being left on an island when it came to this investigation. It is not my desire to become a martyr for this case -- and I fear effectively ending my career. I did not ask to be in this position, nor did I want to be...

At the end of the day, I worked on a complex criminal tax investigation over the last 5 years and the investigative process is 999% done and we were in the process of bringing the case to indictment. Since October of 2022, the Delaware AUSAs and DOJ-Tax had effectively stopped communicating with me and my team has ultimately been removed from the investigative team.

X concludes his statement by saying "it is not difficult to believe that appointing a special counsel in this matter is the best way to go forward to give everyone confidence in the fairness of our tax system."

"The U.S. Attorney in Delaware in our investigation was constantly hamstrung, limited, and marginalized by DOJ officials as well as other U.S. Attorneys," X will reiterate. "I still view that a special counsel for this case would have cut through the toughest problems that continues to make problems for this case."

He also testified that it is IRS policy to charge failure to file a tax return as a felony if the case involves evasion or obstruction. Obviously, Hunter Biden's case involved this -- he hid his money from Ukraine. He set up 20 dummy corporations to make tracking the payments impossible. He had his "business" partners direct payments to his family members.

And so Weiss refused to charge him with felonies, offering him a sweetheart deal requiring two admissions of misdemeanors.

Whistleblower X is a gay man who is gay-married to a gay husband who is himself a gay man, so the Democrats are being a little careful in smearing him as a Dark MAGA Extremist and Insurrectionist.

He's also a Democrat. He says he's been pressured to not go against the Democrat Regime.

I had recently heard an elected official say that I must be more credible, because I am a gay democrat married to a man. I'm no more credible than this man sitting next to me due to my sexual orientation or my political beliefs. I was raised, and have always strived to do what is right. I have heard from some, that I am a traitor to the democratic party, and that I am causing more division in our society. I implore you, that if you were put in my position with the facts as I have stated them, that you would be doing the exact same thing -- regardless of your political party affiliation. I hope that I am an example to other LGBTQ people out there, who are questioning doing the right thing at a potential cost to themselves and others. We should ALWAYS do the right thing, no matter how painful the process might be. I kind of equate this to coming out, it was honestly one of the hardest things I ever had to do. I contemplated scenarios that would have been highly regrettable. But I did what was right and I am sitting in front of you here today.

Ziegler also says that no one ever bothered to get the geolocation data for Hunter Biden's cell phone for the time of his "I am sitting here next to my father" WhatsApp shakedown text. It's obvious that this should have been done -- and that the location data for Joe Biden also should have been checked -- which is exactly why it wasn't done. These were not investigators and prosecutors seeking evidence for crimes, but rather deliberately avoiding gathering evidence of those crimes.

Note that the geolocation data for huge masses of January 6th suspects was sought out and obtained without question.

But Princelings and Regime Puppets are entitled to their privacy! You're not, but they are. They are citizens; you are subjects.

Shapley's testimony:

Ziegler's testimony. He points out that Hunter Biden's fraudulent tax returns are being allowed to stand, including his illegal fake-deductions.

He wanted to interview Hunter Biden's adult children, whom Hunter was claiming tax deductions for for alleged school tuition. He wanted to find out if these deductions were real, or, like Hunter's deduction of a sex club's dues, fraudulent.

His supervisors refused to let him discover if these deductions were real or not.

Related: Judicial Watch is suing Jack Smith to discover the names of the Angry Partisan Democrats he's filled his staff with. Smith claims that state prosecutors have some kind of guarantee of immunity, as if they're whistleblowers.

Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) for records disclosing the names of staffers working in Special Counsel Jack Smith's office on two investigations targeting former President Donald Trump and other Americans (Judicial Watch Inc. v U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:23-cv-01485)).

Judicial Watch filed the suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Justice Department rejected a December 9, 2022, FOIA request for staff rosters or similar records that would identify the names of employees in the Office of Special Counsel Jack Smith.

The Justice Department responded on April 12, stating that records responsive to Judicial Watch's request have been located, but are being withheld "pursuant to Exemptions 6 and 7(A)" of FOIA:

Exemption 6 pertains to information the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Exemption 7(A) pertains to records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, the release of which could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings.

posted by Ace at 04:24 PM

| Access Comments