A noted legal expert and professor has called out the U.S. attorney handling cases against Hunter Biden after statements made by him and Attorney General Merrick Garland didn’t gibe.
Georgetown Law professor Jonathan Turley revealed a host of issues he has with a claim by federal prosecutor David Weiss, who has said the Justice Department did not hold him back in any way during his investigation into Hunter’s nefarious activities.
Weiss was responsible for overseeing the federal investigation into Hunter, which ultimately resulted in a plea deal for the president’s son on June 20. However, before that, an Internal Revenue Service whistleblower named Gary Shapley came forward with allegations claiming that Weiss did not have complete control over the investigation.
Weiss denied the allegation in a letter addressed to House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio). Shapley further alleged that Garland and IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel had provided false information to Congress regarding the Hunter Biden probe.
“So, I just want to remind viewers from a week ago, Weiss, the prosecutor out of Delaware, sent a letter to Jim Jordan, and he seemed to outline his defense in four different parts. You have seen that letter. Do you have questions about the letter or do they satisfy you? And then I’ll ask you specifically about it, too,” Fox News host Bill Hemmer asked Turley on Friday.
“No, there is nothing to be satisfied with because there’s no answers in the letter. That is, what Weiss is saying is, ‘I was given this authority,’ but doesn’t deal with the specific allegations of these whistleblowers,” Turley responded.
“We have numerous witnesses, and other witnesses who are named in these accounts, who were present at a meeting where Weiss allegedly said that he was not the final decision maker, that he had tried to become a special counsel and was denied, and they were also told that the charges were attempted in California and D.C., but rebuffed by those U.S. Attorneys,” he added.
“That’s in direct and irreconcilable conflict with what has been said by Attorney General Garland. What Weiss is saying is, ‘I was given this authority,’ and so he’s got to answer to these discrepancies. But the problem that Weiss has is that the case itself is just a glaring mountain of contradiction,” he continued.
“I mean, the Justice Department seemed to let the statute of limitations run. Some of us wrote columns before that date and said, ‘Why are you doing this? The statute’s about to run.’ These whistleblowers are saying that it did appear to be intentional, that there was an agreement that more serious charges could be brought against Hunter and those were scuttled,” Turley added.
The accuracy of Shapley’s testimony, stating that Weiss faced obstacles in pursuing charges against Hunter Biden in California, was confirmed by The New York Times.
The Times independently verified that Weiss had indeed requested California prosecutors to initiate charges against Biden, but his request was denied. Shapley further testified to Congress that there were six additional witnesses who claimed that Weiss had informed them in 2022 about his inability to prosecute Hunter outside of Delaware due to being denied special counsel status.
A federal judge appointed by former President Donald Trump will have the final say over Hunter’s plea deal.
Biden arranged to plead guilty to a pair of tax-related misdemeanors and a charge related to an illegal gun purchase, the latter of which is normally a felony. Others who committed similar offenses — in this case, putting false information on a federal background check form — have been sent to prison.
Regarding the tax charges, Biden failed to pay income tax on earnings of around $1.5 million each year for 2017 and 2018.
“Hunter will take responsibility for two instances of misdemeanor failure to file tax payments when due pursuant to a plea agreement,” his attorney, Chris Clark, said.