Whistleblower
-
A second IRS whistleblower in the criminal investigation of first son Hunter Biden emerged Monday in documents sent to Congress following the purge of the entire investigatory team looking into President Biden’s son for tax fraud and related crimes.
The new whistleblower is a special agent in the IRS’s international tax and financial crimes group and worked on the Hunter Biden case since it was opened in 2018 — until he was ousted without explanation last week.
The agent joins his supervisor, who plans to testify behind closed doors before the House Ways and Means Committee on Friday, in publicly registering concerns about how the Justice Department has handled the investigation.
Both IRS whistleblowers expressed concerns internally for years about the case being swept under the rug but got nowhere, and they lay out extensive claims of retaliation in new disclosures to Congress.
-
@Mik IRS isn't under the DOJ, last time I looked. It's Treasury. Who's pulling the strings.
and why? -
@Mik IRS isn't under the DOJ, last time I looked. It's Treasury. Who's pulling the strings.
and why? -
@Mik said in Whistleblower:
On CBS?
Exactly. I was shocked to see that.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/irs-whistleblower-tax-probe-hunter-biden/
-
Shapley, the whistleblower gave a long interview last night.
Not much new. He reiterated how, at multiple times, evidence of more serious wrongdoing was stifled and investigations were hindered by prosecutors.
Of note:
He took notes at the time of his meeting and emailed them to himself to serve as a record of his recollections. So, it's not "yeah, I remember this happened about 5 years ago." Rather, it's "This is important. As soon as I get home, I'm going to write it down and email myself the memo."
He acknowledges Weiss's statements that he (Weiss) had full authority. Nevertheless, he says that Weiss said something quite different at the time (as noted in the email).
Finally, there are six wintesses, all telling the same story about Weiss saying that he doesn't have authority.
Link to video
Link to video -
Maybe they will make President Biden and President Trump cell mates. 555
-
Maybe they will make President Biden and President Trump cell mates. 555
@taiwan_girl said in Whistleblower:
Maybe they will make President Biden and President Trump cell mates. 555
Wouldn't that make a hell of a sitcom?
-
Weiss responds to Graham: Never requested special counsel status, never denied the ability to make any charges in any district.
https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000189-403e-d0a8-a59b-dffe47490000
-
As you said, someone's lying.
Shapley said it under oath. Weiss wrote it in a letter. Get Weiss under oath.
Mr. Weiss says he never requested a special-counsel designation, but that he did have “discussions with Departmental officials” about a “potential appointment” as a special attorney.
The latter would have let him “file charges in a district outside my own without the partnership of the local U.S. Attorney.” He says “I was assured that I would be granted this authority if it proved necessary.” This conveniently gels with Attorney General Merrick Garland’s claim that Mr. Weiss never asked for special-counsel status but could have filed charges anywhere.
Yet those claims conflict with the testimony of IRS investigator Gary Shapley. The tax specialist says a team of IRS, FBI and DOJ officials last year were ready to charge Hunter with felony tax offenses in Washington, D.C., and California, but that Mr. Weiss told them in an October meeting that he’d been denied “special counsel authority from Main DOJ” and that he wasn’t “the deciding official on whether charges are filed.” Mr. Weiss last month settled the tax case in Delaware in a deal that will likely let Hunter escape jail time.
Mr. Weiss’s letter doesn’t say if that’s what he told Mr. Shapley and the others in October. It also doesn’t answer whether U.S. Attorneys appointed by President Biden blocked Mr. Weiss from filing charges against Hunter in their D.C. and California districts. That’s Mr. Shapley’s claim, and the New York Times reports that it has confirmed the California story.
That undermines Mr. Garland’s claim that the probe was free of political interference. If Mr. Weiss did have the freedom to ask for special-attorney privileges, why didn’t he pursue the charges that his team spent years investigating and recommended?
In his letter Mr. Weiss again refused to discuss anything further about his “ongoing investigation.” But if he’s settled the case, why is it “ongoing”? Congress is right to demand that Mr. Weiss answer its questions.
-
As you said, someone's lying.
Shapley said it under oath. Weiss wrote it in a letter. Get Weiss under oath.
Mr. Weiss says he never requested a special-counsel designation, but that he did have “discussions with Departmental officials” about a “potential appointment” as a special attorney.
The latter would have let him “file charges in a district outside my own without the partnership of the local U.S. Attorney.” He says “I was assured that I would be granted this authority if it proved necessary.” This conveniently gels with Attorney General Merrick Garland’s claim that Mr. Weiss never asked for special-counsel status but could have filed charges anywhere.
Yet those claims conflict with the testimony of IRS investigator Gary Shapley. The tax specialist says a team of IRS, FBI and DOJ officials last year were ready to charge Hunter with felony tax offenses in Washington, D.C., and California, but that Mr. Weiss told them in an October meeting that he’d been denied “special counsel authority from Main DOJ” and that he wasn’t “the deciding official on whether charges are filed.” Mr. Weiss last month settled the tax case in Delaware in a deal that will likely let Hunter escape jail time.
Mr. Weiss’s letter doesn’t say if that’s what he told Mr. Shapley and the others in October. It also doesn’t answer whether U.S. Attorneys appointed by President Biden blocked Mr. Weiss from filing charges against Hunter in their D.C. and California districts. That’s Mr. Shapley’s claim, and the New York Times reports that it has confirmed the California story.
That undermines Mr. Garland’s claim that the probe was free of political interference. If Mr. Weiss did have the freedom to ask for special-attorney privileges, why didn’t he pursue the charges that his team spent years investigating and recommended?
In his letter Mr. Weiss again refused to discuss anything further about his “ongoing investigation.” But if he’s settled the case, why is it “ongoing”? Congress is right to demand that Mr. Weiss answer its questions.
