An explosive letter from the attorney for an IRS whistleblower suggests a cover-up in the Hunter Biden criminal investigation and challenges Attorney General Merrick Garland's sworn testimony before Congress. Long-time IRS employee wants to share evidence with congressional leaders to "contradict sworn testimony to Congress by a senior political appointee" — Garland — and to reveal "preferential treatment" in the first son's criminal investigation, according to attorney Mark Lytle's letter on Wednesday.
The Justice and Treasury departments' inspectors general have already received information from the whistleblower. But before speaking before legislators, he wants to provide his own attorneys a more thorough explanation of his claims. To accomplish this, he requires congressional consent owing to a peculiarity in federal law.
Republicans have disputed the veracity of Garland's repeated assertions made under oath that Delaware US Attorney David Weiss, a holdover from the Trump administration who was recommended by the state's Democratic senators in 2017, can charge Hunter Biden with a crime without the approval of other Justice Department officials.
Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.) was informed by Garland in April 2022 that "there will not be interference of any political or improper kind" in the Weiss inquiry against Hunter Biden.
Garland described Weiss as the investigation's supervisor and said, "We put the investigation in the hands of a Trump appointee from the prior administration, who is the US attorney for the district of Delaware, and... you have me as the attorney general, who is committed to the independence of the Justice Department from any influence from the White House in criminal matters."
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) questioned Garland in March about whether Weiss had the authority to file charges without consulting other Justice Department officials, particularly if the alleged crime took place outside of Delaware.
You testified to Sen. Hagerty in April 2022 that the Hunter Biden investigation was shielded from political influence since it was sent to the Delaware US attorney's office, as you just informed me, Grassley remarked at the time. But it can be deceiving. Without special counsel power, he could in certain cases need the consent of another US attorney to file charges beyond the Delaware district.
Garland, a former federal judge who is now 70, said that Weiss had the authority to bring charges against Hunter Biden even for offenses that took place outside of Delaware.
"It has been conveyed to the US attorney in Delaware that he has complete ability to make the referrals you're referring to or to file charges in other jurisdictions if he thinks it's necessary. And if he does, I'll guarantee he'll be able to," the AG stated.
"Does the Delaware US Attorney lack independent charging authority over certain criminal allegations against the president's son outside of the district of Delaware?" Grassley pushed.
"If it's in another district, he would have to bring the case in another district, but as I said, I've promised to ensure he's able to carry out his investigation and that he be able to run it, and if he needs to bring it in another jurisdiction, he will have full authority to do that," Garland said.
The senator from Iowa said, "If Weiss... must request authorization from a [President] Biden-appointed US attorney to bring charges, then the Hunter Biden criminal investigation isn't insulated from political interference, as you publicly proclaimed," during the exchange.
If it is shown that the mistake was deliberate, giving false testimony before Congress is a criminal punishable by up to five years in jail.
Since early 2020, the IRS's investigation of Hunter Biden for suspected tax fraud and associated crimes relating to the 53-year-old's overseas revenue from nations including China and Ukraine has been overseen by the anonymous whistleblower.
According to reports, Weiss' office is contemplating filing charges against the first son for money laundering, unregistered foreign lobbying, and lying about using drugs on a paperwork for buying a rifle.
According to Lytle, the anonymous source "instructed us to reach out to both Democrats and Republicans on the Hill and let those statements—if they want to hear them—come into the Hill and talk to them and let those statements rest where they are."
Before releasing additional information on the underlying tax concerns, the lawyer's client wants to make sure that he complies with all applicable regulations, according to a letter sent to Congress on Wednesday. In fact, even his legal team is still in the dark about certain details.
"My client has refrained from sharing certain information even with me in the course of seeking legal advice," Lytle wrote. "Out of an abundance of caution regarding taxpayer privacy laws."
As a result, it is difficult for me to make decisions that are completely informed on the best course of action. Lytle said, "My aim is to make certain that my client can appropriately disclose his legally protected disclosures with congressional committees.
"Therefore, I sincerely urge that your committees cooperate with me to allow the lawful and informed sharing of this material with Congress. I would be happy to meet with you and provide a more detailed proffer of the testimony my client could provide to Congress, with the appropriate legal protections and in the appropriate setting."
As required by federal law, the whistleblower is asking either Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) or House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-Mo.) for permission to speak with their attorneys about the specifics of tax issues before testifying to Congress.
The Justice and Treasury departments' inspectors general have already received information from the whistleblower. But before speaking before legislators, he wants to provide his own attorneys a more thorough explanation of his claims. To accomplish this, he requires congressional consent owing to a peculiarity in federal law.
Republicans have disputed the veracity of Garland's repeated assertions made under oath that Delaware US Attorney David Weiss, a holdover from the Trump administration who was recommended by the state's Democratic senators in 2017, can charge Hunter Biden with a crime without the approval of other Justice Department officials.
Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.) was informed by Garland in April 2022 that "there will not be interference of any political or improper kind" in the Weiss inquiry against Hunter Biden.
Garland described Weiss as the investigation's supervisor and said, "We put the investigation in the hands of a Trump appointee from the prior administration, who is the US attorney for the district of Delaware, and... you have me as the attorney general, who is committed to the independence of the Justice Department from any influence from the White House in criminal matters."
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) questioned Garland in March about whether Weiss had the authority to file charges without consulting other Justice Department officials, particularly if the alleged crime took place outside of Delaware.
You testified to Sen. Hagerty in April 2022 that the Hunter Biden investigation was shielded from political influence since it was sent to the Delaware US attorney's office, as you just informed me, Grassley remarked at the time. But it can be deceiving. Without special counsel power, he could in certain cases need the consent of another US attorney to file charges beyond the Delaware district.
Garland, a former federal judge who is now 70, said that Weiss had the authority to bring charges against Hunter Biden even for offenses that took place outside of Delaware.
"It has been conveyed to the US attorney in Delaware that he has complete ability to make the referrals you're referring to or to file charges in other jurisdictions if he thinks it's necessary. And if he does, I'll guarantee he'll be able to," the AG stated.
"Does the Delaware US Attorney lack independent charging authority over certain criminal allegations against the president's son outside of the district of Delaware?" Grassley pushed.
"If it's in another district, he would have to bring the case in another district, but as I said, I've promised to ensure he's able to carry out his investigation and that he be able to run it, and if he needs to bring it in another jurisdiction, he will have full authority to do that," Garland said.
The senator from Iowa said, "If Weiss... must request authorization from a [President] Biden-appointed US attorney to bring charges, then the Hunter Biden criminal investigation isn't insulated from political interference, as you publicly proclaimed," during the exchange.
If it is shown that the mistake was deliberate, giving false testimony before Congress is a criminal punishable by up to five years in jail.
Since early 2020, the IRS's investigation of Hunter Biden for suspected tax fraud and associated crimes relating to the 53-year-old's overseas revenue from nations including China and Ukraine has been overseen by the anonymous whistleblower.
According to reports, Weiss' office is contemplating filing charges against the first son for money laundering, unregistered foreign lobbying, and lying about using drugs on a paperwork for buying a rifle.
According to Lytle, the anonymous source "instructed us to reach out to both Democrats and Republicans on the Hill and let those statements—if they want to hear them—come into the Hill and talk to them and let those statements rest where they are."
Before releasing additional information on the underlying tax concerns, the lawyer's client wants to make sure that he complies with all applicable regulations, according to a letter sent to Congress on Wednesday. In fact, even his legal team is still in the dark about certain details.
"My client has refrained from sharing certain information even with me in the course of seeking legal advice," Lytle wrote. "Out of an abundance of caution regarding taxpayer privacy laws."
As a result, it is difficult for me to make decisions that are completely informed on the best course of action. Lytle said, "My aim is to make certain that my client can appropriately disclose his legally protected disclosures with congressional committees.
"Therefore, I sincerely urge that your committees cooperate with me to allow the lawful and informed sharing of this material with Congress. I would be happy to meet with you and provide a more detailed proffer of the testimony my client could provide to Congress, with the appropriate legal protections and in the appropriate setting."
As required by federal law, the whistleblower is asking either Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) or House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-Mo.) for permission to speak with their attorneys about the specifics of tax issues before testifying to Congress.
