House Ways and Means Chairman Jason Smith and Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan issued subpoenas to IRS and DOJ officials they believe have knowledge about a meeting on October 7, 2022, with now-Special Counsel David Weiss.
The men wrote in a statement:
“Our Committees, along with the Committee on Oversight and Accountability, have sought these interviews since IRS whistleblowers came forward with concerning allegations of political interference in the investigation into Hunter Biden’s foreign influence peddling and tax evasion. Unfortunately, the Biden Administration has consistently stonewalled Congress. Our duty is to follow the facts wherever they may lead, and our subpoenas compelling testimony from Biden Administration officials are crucial to understanding how the President’s son received special treatment from federal prosecutors and who was the ultimate decision maker in the case. Americans deserve to know the truth, especially now that Attorney General Garland has appointed as special counsel the same U.S. Attorney who oversaw Hunter Biden’s sweetheart plea deal and botched the investigation into his alleged tax crimes.”
They sent the subpoenas to:
Sobocinski and Holley are located in the FBI’s Baltimore Field Office.
At the meeting, Weiss allegedly said “he was prevented from bringing charges against President Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, for tax crimes.”
The DOJ and IRS have not complied with requests to hand over the transcripts from the interviews.
A whistleblower testified that Weiss, who served as the U.S. Attorney for the District of Delaware, said during the October meeting that he could not be the person to decide whether to charge Hunter. He insisted “that in multiple instances his efforts to bring charges in multiple jurisdictions were denied.”
However, AG Merrick Garland told, “Congress that Weiss had all the authority necessary to pursue charges and Mr. Weiss told Congress that he had ‘ultimate’ authority over the case.”
The sweetheart plea deal fell apart since it included blanket immunity for any possible future prosecution of Hunter.
Then Garland made Weiss the special counsel after the sweetheart plea deal with Hunter fell apart because that is supposedly the only avenue to prosecute the case despite Garland and Weiss admitting the latter had ultimate authority.
Jordan and Smith find it suspicious that Garland would appoint a special counsel and the timing “also comes after whistleblowers have raised serious and unchallenged allegations of impropriety in the investigation of Hunter Biden.”
Smith and Jordan told Batdorf and Waldon why they received the subpoena:
For example, the whistleblowers allege politicization and misconduct with respect to the investigation of Hunter Biden. Specifically, the Committee is examining claims that the investigation was purposely slow-walked and subjected to improper and politically motivated interference. You were part of the chain of command for these whistleblowers and received an email from Supervisory Special Agent Gary Shapley in which he detailed a key prosecution team meeting on October 7, 2022. What Supervisory Special Agent Shapley detailed in that email is an essential piece of our investigation. Your testimony about these subjects is necessary for the Committee to advance its ongoing investigation. The Committee has sought to obtain the IRS’s voluntary compliance with our request to conduct a transcribed interview of you and has engaged in good faith with the agency to address the purported reasons why it could not comply. Nevertheless, the agency has still has not agreed to make you available.
Smith and Jordan told Sobocinski and Holley:
For instance, according to whistleblower testimony, you attended a meeting on October 7, 2022, at which U.S. Attorney David Weiss allegedly said he was “not the deciding official on whether charges are filed” against Hunter Biden.26 Additionally, as Special Agent in Charge of the Bureau’s Baltimore Field Office, you would have had oversight of the Hunter Biden investigation in the Wilmington Resident Office. The Committee has sought to obtain the Department’s voluntary compliance with our request to conduct a transcribed interview with you, and has engaged in good faith with the Department to address the purported reasons why it could not comply. Even still, the Department has not agreed to make you available.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY