An IRS whistleblower alleges that federal prosecutors obstructed the filing of criminal tax charges against Hunter Biden, raising questions about the independence of the Delaware U.S. attorney’s office overseeing the investigation and contradicting Attorney General Merrick Garland’s recent congressional testimony.
On Wednesday, an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) whistleblower claimed that political interference occurred in the criminal investigation of a high-profile, politically connected individual, later confirmed to be Hunter Biden by unnamed sources. This accusation contradicts Attorney General Merrick Garland’s recent congressional testimony and raises concerns about the independence of the Delaware U.S. attorney’s office overseeing the Hunter Biden investigation, the Federalist reported.
Attorney Mark Lytle sent a letter to various congressional committee chairs, detailing his client’s intention to “make protected whistleblower disclosures to Congress.” The client, described as a “career IRS Criminal Supervisory Special Agent,” had been overseeing the investigation of a “high-profile, controversial subject” since early 2020. Lytle’s letter outlined three disclosures the whistleblower was prepared to make.
First, the whistleblower’s testimony would reportedly contradict sworn congressional testimony by a senior political appointee. Second, the career IRS agent would expose the failure to mitigate clear conflicts of interest in the case’s ultimate disposition. Finally, the letter claimed the whistleblower possessed detailed evidence of preferential treatment and politics that improperly influenced decisions and protocols.
Sources directly familiar with the case assert that Hunter Biden is the “high-profile” individual under investigation and claim that at least two Biden DOJ political appointees in U.S. attorneys’ offices declined to seek a tax indictment against Hunter Biden, despite career investigators’ recommendations. They also claim that career prosecutors in the Department of Justice tax division had approved the prosecution of Hunter Biden, generally required in criminal tax cases.
The whistleblower previously filed complaints with the U.S. Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration and the DOJ’s Office of Inspector General. However, after hearing Garland’s March 1, 2023, testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, the whistleblower decided to inform congressional oversight committees of the alleged political improprieties.
During the Judiciary Committee’s oversight hearing, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, questioned Garland on Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss’s ability to pursue criminal charges in a different judicial district without special counsel authority. Garland responded that Weiss had been advised he had the authority to bring cases in other jurisdictions if necessary.
However, sources claim the whistleblower intends to reveal that Weiss sought permission to bring tax charges in other districts but was denied by two U.S. attorneys appointed by Biden. The whistleblower also allegedly claims that Weiss requested special counsel status for more independent authority in the probe but was turned down.
While it is unknown to the public whether these two U.S. attorneys prevented the filing of criminal tax charges against Hunter Biden, Weiss knows what transpired. Instead of forcing the whistleblower to endure likely character attacks, Weiss should clarify the record.
