IRS whistleblowers in Hunter Biden tax case vindicated by witness testimony

When the IRS whistleblowers publicized their concerns about how the Hunter Biden investigation was handled by the Justice Department, Democrats, the media, and Hunter Biden’s lawyers assailed their credibility.

Now, witness by witness, congressional Republicans have secured testimony that repeatedly confirmed the whistleblowers’ accounts.

The latest revelation in the Hunter Biden investigation saga comes from closed door testimony by Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss before the House Judiciary Committee this morning. After the testimony, Chairman Jim Jordan, R.-Ohio, told reporters that the testimony confirmed the IRS whistleblowers' contention that Weiss was denied special anttorney authority by Biden’s Justice Department.

“When he was specifically asked, did you ever request special attorney authority under Section 515, Mr. Weiss's response was yes, in the spring of 2022. So that that goes to the heart of the matter,” Jordan told reporters, according to a House Judiciary Committee post to X.

“I think the key is, is entirely consistent with what Mr. Shapley said after the October 7, 2022 meeting, when he said USA Weiss requested Special Counsel authority when it was sent to DC and Main DOJ denied his request and told him to follow the process,” Chairman Jordan continued.

Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R.-Ky., told the "Just the News, No Noise" TV show on Tuesday night that this new testimony from Weiss shows the whistleblower testimony to be consistent as opposed to the ever-changing story of the Biden administration. Just the News previously documented several claims from Joe Biden, his White House and his son Hunter that turned out to be untrue.

This summer, IRS Agents Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler brought concerns to the House Ways and Means Committee that the Justice Department had provided preferential treatment to Hunter Biden during the probe into his alleged tax violations, including by blocking search warrants and limiting the investigator's pursuit of information related Joe Biden. Abbe Lowell, Hunter Biden's lawyer, immediately attacked the agents and sent a letter to the House committee seeking to discredit them. Eventually, Hunter Biden sued the IRS over the whistleblowers' disclosures, claiming they unlawfully disclosed his private tax returns.  

"Well, I'm not surprised, There have been so many lies by President Biden, by his administration, by the deep state actors who were supposed to be the ones to prevent this type of Vegas influence-peddling operation by our leaders at the highest level," Comer said.

"The whistleblowers continue to be spot on in everything they said. ... Not only do you have a massive crime by the Biden family, you also have a massive coverup. And you know, I think the deposition today was valuable information as we move forward," he added.

Previously, Attorney General Merrick Garland testified that Weiss had “full authority” to pursue the investigation into Hunter Biden and to bring charges as he saw fit, even outside his jurisdiction in Delaware. Weiss backed up Garland’s claims in multiple letters to Congress in which he claimed to have always possessed the authority to bring charges.

Shapley testified to the House Ways and Means Committee this summer that, in fact, Weiss told the investigative team that he was “not the deciding person” on bringing charges against the first son, according to Shapley's contemporaneous, handwritten notes. 

You can read those notes below:

Shapley’s understanding of Weiss’ powers were backed up by his notes from an October 2022 meeting of the investigative team in Delaware, Just the News previously reported. "Weiss requested Special Counsel status in D.C.. Main DOJ said 'no.' Follow the process," Shapley wrote.

Now that his testimony has apparently corroborated the IRS Whistleblower’s recollection of events, Weiss is part of a growing cadre of witnesses whose sworn accounts support the whistleblowers’ claims of political interference in investigations of Hunter Biden. Garland, the White House and Democrats in Congress have insisted there's "no evidence" of any such effort.

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Just the News.

Just last week, Just the News reported that the Justice Department’s chief tax prosecutor told Congress that U.S. Attorney Weiss was required to secure prior Justice Department approval before he could bring charges against Hunter Biden.

In the transcribed interview obtained by Just the News, Acting Assistant Attorney General Stuart Goldberg, the head of the DOJ’s Tax Division, also told investigators that the Hunter Biden case received special attention because of his father’s political stature.

“Was the fact that Hunter Biden was involved here, did that require DOJ Tax’s signoff because it’s a sensitive matter?” a House investigator asked during the interview.

“Well, without getting into the case, again trying to answer a question at a slightly higher level, there are cases that are sensitive, people – some would say sensitive, sometimes say significant cases. And those cases typically have closer supervision than other, more run of the mill cases,” Goldberg answered.

Goldberg also told investigators that even if Weiss had secured Section 515 authority—which grants special counsel status—he would have still been required to seek approval from his DOJ tax division before moving ahead with any proposed charges.

This further contradicts Garland’s claims that Weiss had “full authority” to decide “where, when, and whether to file charges,” even before his eventual appointment as special counsel in August, after the IRS Whistleblowers’ testimony.

During their testimony, the whistleblowers both raised concerns about DOJ Tax Division’s interference in the Hunter Biden investigation, including requiring approval for specific interviews, “dragging their feet,” and reversing course on their recommendation to charge Hunter Biden.

More recent testimony from a former federal prosecutor shed light on the FBI’s seemingly political interference in the investigations into Hunter Biden. Former Pittsburgh U.S. Attorney Scott Brady told the House Judiciary Committee that there was “reluctance” in the FBI and the Delaware U.S. Attorney’s office under Weiss to further investigate credible evidence of an alleged bribery scheme involving President Joe Biden and his son Hunter.

“It was a challenging working relationship,” Brady said of the FBI in testimony reviewed by Just the News last month. “I think there was reluctance on the part of the FBI to really do any tasking related to our assignment from DAG Rosen and looking into allegations of Ukrainian corruption broadly and then specifically anything that intersected with Hunter Biden and his role in Burisma. It was very challenging.”

Brady told congressional investigators that he encountered similar resistance at the Delaware U.S. Attorney’s office under Weiss when he tried to pass evidence along to further their investigation.

“Speaking generally, from a process perspective, I think there was both a skepticism of the information that we were developing, that we had received, and skepticism and then weariness of that information,” Brady said of Weiss’ office. “I think they were very concerned about any information sharing with our office.”

This confirms testimony by the IRS whistleblowers about the Delaware U.S. Attorney’s office, and specifically, Assistant U.S. Attorney Lesley Wolf’s reluctance to cooperate with the Pittsburgh U.S. Attorney’s office, which possessed evidence of the bribery scheme.

“AUSA Wolf’s comments made clear she did not want to cooperate with the Pittsburgh USAO and that she had already concluded no information from that office could be credible, stating her belief that it all came from Rudy Giuliani,” Shapley said. After Wolf was eventually ordered to take a briefing on the Pittsburgh bureau's evidence, she never informed the IRS investigative team about the information the other prosecutor’s office provided.

U.S. Attorneys Matthew Graves in Washington, D.C. and E. Martin Estrada in the Central District of California both testified to congressional investigators in October that Weiss was prevented from bringing charges in their jurisdictions, where Hunter Biden’s tax crimes are alleged to have been committed.

Graves told lawmakers in an interview that his office decided not to partner with Weiss to bring tax charges against Hunter Biden, though he declined to name the officials involved in the decision. Graves said that he met with a team of people from his office in March of 2022 to determine if his office should partner with Weiss. Three weeks later, the office decided not to sign on to bring the charges in Washington.

Graves also confirmed that Weiss needed the DOJ Tax Division’s approval in order to open a grand jury in the probe, and confirmed other testimony and the whistleblower claims.

U.S. Attorney Estrada told congressional investigators that he declined to partner with Weiss to bring tax charges against Hunter Biden. He told Congress that career attorneys from his office “were recommending against partnering or co-counseling in the charges being contemplated,” according to Fox News Digital.

Estrada did say that it was his understanding that Weiss could still bring charges in his district without other offices partnering on the case.

In September, an FBI supervisor who worked with the IRS whistleblowers and David Weiss’ office confirmed instances where the prosecutors delayed the investigation into Hunter Biden, though she did not believe it was for political reasons.

The FBI supervisor, who’s name remains redacted, confirmed that the prosecutors delayed the investigation because of the 2022 midterm elections. She also confirmed that both Graves’ and Estrada’s offices had refused to partner with Weiss to bring charges in their jurisdiction.

The testimonies of Graves, Estrada, and the unnamed FBI supervisor ultimately confirm Shapley’s handwritten notes, provided to the House Ways and Means Committee as part of a tranche of documents related to the investigation.

“Estrada in charge of authorizing these charges in that jurisdiction,” Shapley wrote.

“Weiss requested special counsel status in D.C.,” he continued. “Main DOJ said ‘NO’—follow the process.”