"Then on June 7, "“I want to make clear that, as the attorney general has stated, I have been granted ultimate authority over this matter, including responsibility for deciding where, when, and whether to file charges and for making decisions necessary to preserve the integrity of the prosecution, consistent with federal law, the Principles of Federal Prosecution, and Departmental regulations” Weiss wrote to Jordan on June 7"
https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/26/politics … index.html
A very accurate statement, context very clear --- But was Weiss stopped? He just did not address the direct question, now did he?
"Jordan said Weiss’s response “declined to provide any substantive information” to the committee's request. And now, after two IRS whistleblowers contradicted Weiss’s “ultimate authority” claim, Jordan wants clarity on his previous letter.
The chairman is asking Weiss to provide the following information: a list of those who drafted and assisted in drafting his June 7 letter, who instructed him to sign and send the letter, when he first learned or was made aware of the committee’s May 25 letter to Garland, who at the Department of Justice forwarded him the May 25 letter, and whether there were any discussions with Garland or any other person at the DOJ about the committee’s May 25 letter.
The two whistleblowers, IRS supervisory special agent Gary Shapley and an unnamed source, testified to the House Ways and Means Committee staff about apparent DOJ interference and “preferential treatment” during the Hunter Biden investigation. The whistleblowers also testified that the DOJ “concealed” unverified foreign bribery allegations involving then-Vice President Joe Biden and his son from the IRS and FBI investigators on Hunter Biden’s case in Delaware.
They asserted that the DOJ blocked Weiss from bringing Hunter Biden’s three federal charges, which he plans to plead guilty to, in Washington, D.C., or California like he wanted to. They also stated that Weiss had sought special counsel status but was denied.
These allegations from the whistleblowers fly in the face of Weiss’s statement that he had the “ultimate authority” over the entire investigation. Garland denied the claims on Friday, saying he didn't know how it was possible for anybody to block Weiss “from bringing a prosecution given that he ever has this authority” and that Weiss “was given complete authority to make decisions on his own.”
But lawyers for Shapley released a statement over the weekend saying Weiss TOLD SIX WITNESSES, he did not have the authority to bring the charges in other districts."
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news … tleblowers
June 26, 2023, Current Story
Hunter Biden prosecutor told six witnesses he couldn’t charge outside Delaware: IRS whistleblower
The federal prosecutor tasked with investigating Hunter Biden told at least six witnesses last year that he lacked authority to charge the first son outside Delaware and was denied special counsel status, according to an IRS whistleblower — and now the House Judiciary Committee wants to talk to them.
Delaware US Attorney David Weiss made the shocking disclosure at an Oct. 7, 2022, meeting with top IRS and FBI officials — contradicting sworn testimony from Attorney General Merrick Garland, IRS supervisory agent Gary Shapley told the House Ways and Means Committee last month.
“He surprised us by telling us on the charges, ‘I’m not the deciding official on whether charges are filed,’” Shapley recounted in his May 26 testimony, which the committee released Thursday.
“He then shocked us with the earth-shattering news that the Biden-appointed DC US Attorney Matthew Graves would not allow him to charge in his district,” added Shapley, who said Graves’ refusal to prosecute meant that Hunter, now 53, would not face tax charges related to “foreign income from Burisma [Holdings] and a scheme to evade his income taxes through a partnership with a convicted felon” in 2014 and 2015.
“The purposeful exclusion of the 2014 and 2015 years sanitized the most substantive criminal conduct and concealed material facts,” Shapley went on.
Shapley’s legal team identified four of the six witnesses in the meeting as Baltimore FBI Special Agent in Charge Tom Sobocinski and Assistant Special Agent in Charge Ryeshia Holley, as well as Shapley and his boss, IRS Special Agent in Charge Darrell Waldon.
The IRS whistleblower also named Shawn Weede and Shannon Hanson, who work in Weiss’ office as a criminal chief prosecutor and assistant prosecutor, respectively, as attendees during his testimony.
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said Sunday that Republicans will launch an impeachment inquiry into Garland if Shapley’s account is corroborated.
The Judiciary Committee, chaired by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), is expected to call forward each of the alleged witnesses as it manages the fallout of the perjury allegation against Garland — including possible impeachment.
None of the purported meeting attendees responded to The Post’s requests for comment.
The FBI referred inquiries for Sobocinski and Holley to Weiss’ office — even though the US attorney’s comments are specifically at issue.
In the same Oct. 7, 2022, meeting, Shapley recalled, Weiss said he had “subsequently asked for special counsel authority from Main DOJ at that time and was denied that authority. Instead, he was told to follow the process, which was known to send US Attorney Weiss through another President Biden-appointed US Attorney.”
In an internal IRS email memorializing the Oct. 7 meeting and made public with Shapley’s testimony, the whistleblower wrote that Weiss’ disclosure that he was “not the deciding person” was “a huge problem — inconsistent with DOJ public position and Merrick Garland testimony.”
The following Tuesday, Oct. 11, 2022, Waldon appeared to confirm Shapley’s read on the proceedings, responding: “Thanks, Gary. You covered it all.”
Garland has noted repeatedly that Weiss, recommended to his position by Delaware’s two Democratic senators — both of whom are close Biden allies — was appointed by former President Donald Trump.
The attorney general said Friday that Weiss was allowed “to continue his investigation and to make a decision to prosecute any way in which he wanted to and in any district in which he wanted to.”
McCarthy, meanwhile, said the disparities between the Justice Department’s statements and Shapley’s testimony need to be reconciled.
“US Attorney David Weiss must provide answers to the House Judiciary Committee,” McCarthy tweeted Sunday. “If the whistleblowers’ allegations are true, this will be a significant part of a larger impeachment inquiry into Merrick Garland’s weaponization of DOJ.”
On Monday, the White House attempted to brush off what it called McCarthy’s “unfortunate” impeachment threat against Garland, which would be the first such proceedings aimed at an attorney general in a century.
“This is not the main priority of American families,” press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said at her regular briefing Monday.
Shapley’s account of Biden-appointed US attorneys in DC and Southern California shielding the first son from serious criminal charges, resulting last week in the announcement of a misdemeanor plea deal in Delaware, was backed up in testimony to the same House panel by a publicly unidentified IRS case agent assigned to the Hunter Biden investigation since 2018.
“I was not afforded an opportunity to present to DC on the merits of the case, what we had found through our investigation for 2014, 2015,” the second whistleblower said during his June 1 deposition before the Ways and Means Committee. “I was not afforded the opportunity to present to the Los Angeles US Attorney or the US Attorney’s Office with the evidence that we had found in this case. That was not given me the opportunity. So that right there alone, I think, is improper on its face. The people that know the case the best, the case agents that work the case, should be the ones that present on the material.”
Hunter Biden is scheduled to appear in federal court July 26 as part of a probation-only plea deal he reached with Weiss’ office following a five-year investigation into potential tax and gun crimes. The deal still must be approved by a judge.
Well, it all seems to hinge on what Weiss, and the other six people that the whistleblower claims can corroborate his testimony.
I think they have the goods on Garland, and he will be impeached.
Very simply, has the trump hand-picked attorney Weiss made any statements that he has been blocked by Garland or the FBI in his investigations? Specifically by the man chosen by Trump to lead this investigation, has he made that statement? What does Weiss have to say I'd rather hear from him because Gym Jordan is absolutely irrelevant
"New York Times Confirms Most Explosive Allegation of IRS Whistleblowers Alleging Biden Admin Cover-Up"
In a striking example of “burying the lede,” the New York Times revealed, deep into a story on bombshell IRS whistleblower testimonies, that the newspaper has independently confirmed the most sensational allegation from that testimony — a confirmation that calls into question multiple statements provided by the U.S. Attorney General.
Two IRS whistleblowers said last week that their investigation into Hunter Biden’s unpaid taxes encountered politically driven roadblocks from officials connected to the Biden Administration.
That allegation, if true, could prove devastating to the Biden White House and his 2024 re-election campaign.
One of the whistleblowers, IRS official Gary Shapley, told the House Ways and Means Committee that top prosecutors in Los Angeles and Washington, D.C. denied a request from U.S. Attorney for Delaware, David Weiss, to bring charges against Hunter Biden in those districts.
Shapley also told the Committee that he personally witnessed Weiss claim that he would not be the deciding official on whether to bring charges against Hunter Biden.
The second whistleblower, who remains anonymous, confirmed Shapley’s account.
Those two whistleblower accounts run contrary to multiple public comments Garland has made about the supposed independence of the Hunter Biden investigation.
Garland had earlier told U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) that the Trump-appointed Weiss had complete authority to bring charges against Hunter Biden in California and the District of Columbia if the evidence supported it.
The New York Times buried the following bombshell:
“A similar request to prosecutors in the Central District of California, which includes Los Angeles, was also rejected, Mr. Shapley testified. A second former I.R.S. official, who has not been identified, told House Republicans the same story. That episode was confirmed independently to The New York Times by a person with knowledge of the situation.”
The New York Times describes Garland’s testimony as “at odds” with Shapley’s account.
But the third confirmation means three separate source now oppose the on-the-record version of the investigation related by Garland. That is, that there was no interference from the Biden Administration into the IRS’s investigation of Hunter Biden’s unpaid taxes.
Either Garland’s is inaccurate when he says Weiss had complete authority over investigation, or all three sources are telling the same lie.
In addition to contradicting his testimony before Congress, those confirmations also contradict statements Garland made at a press conference five days ago in response to the release of the whistleblower testimonies.
During that press conference, Garland insisted that Weiss had complete independence over all aspects of the investigation.
“As I said at the outset, Mr. Weiss, who was appointed by President Trump as the U.S. Attorney in Delaware and assigned this matter during the previous administration, would be permitted to continue his investigation and to make a decision to prosecute anyway in which he wanted to and in any district in which he wanted to,” Garland said.
https://www.themainewire.com/2023/06/ne … -cover-up/
"A second former I.R.S. official, who has not been identified,"
Really?
Again with the whistleblowers. Where is the comment from attorney Weiss himself? Has he made a statement? Has he accused Garland of blocking him and has he specified how?
Why would Garland be impeached based on unidentified people, whistleblowers who have questionable backgrounds and commentary from the New York times? Why isn't Gym Jordan dragging Weiss before one of his committees?
Yes, he did make a statement it is offered in the very first paragraph of this thread.
"Then on June 7, "I want to make clear that, as the attorney general has stated, I have been granted ultimate authority over this matter, including responsibility for deciding where, when, and whether to file charges and for making decisions necessary to preserve the integrity of the prosecution, consistent with federal law, the Principles of Federal Prosecution, and Departmental regulations,” Weiss wrote to Jordan on June 7" https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/26/politics … index.html
This statement is very carefully worded, and one can I am not sure anyone disputes his statement. Only when Weiss tried to bring charges into different states, he was panned... These allegations have been confirmed by the New York Times.
One can only guess that Congress will request Weiss to be interviewed, to get a full statement under oath. He is the main character that the Whistleblowers allegations take issue with. Not to mention the various tax crimes that Mr. Shapley is accusing Hunter of being guilty of.
Why would anyone dispute the man's own statement? This makes no sense. If he felt like he was hamstring somehow by Garland then he should say so very clearly. What are people digging for? Am I missing something? Where does he specifically say he was panned or blocked from doing what he wanted to do?
I am not questioning his statement. His statement deals with one subject. "I want to make clear that, as the attorney general has stated, I have been granted ultimate authority over this matter, including responsibility for deciding where, when, and whether to file charges"
Weiss did not in any respect touch on the subject if he presented his desire to charge Hunter Biden with Tax crimes in DC and Cal. This question is the question that needs to be answered. If he did and was shot down -- it will show someone interfered with his given authority. I am sure Weiss will be questioned and asked the questions. I find the Whistleblower very articulate, and I would not think he would come forward with these accusations if he could not prove them. In an interview on CBS he said 6 others were in the room when Weiss made his statements, He claimed 4 have volunteered to come in for questioning. I have good faith the truth will be discovered. Whatever that truth may be.
This whistleblower has a good reputation and should be believed unless his accusations are proven to be untrue. It is obvious there were many other witnesses present in the Weiss meeting, as well as Weiss. The truth will surface. Hunter Biden is not above the law, and the many accusations are true, he needs to be charged accordingly. If not, many will owe him an apology.
Not sure you can really know anything about the whistleblower but the fact that the Trump hand-picked appointed prosecutor hasn't said anything speaks volumes to me. It would be a little more than shocking that someone appointed and hand-picked by Trump himself wouldn't be screaming bloody murder at this point is beyond me. What is wrong with this attorney Weiss? Trump picked the wrong person? Why isn't he screaming at this point that he was hamstrung by Garland????
I am not sure when Weiss will offer his truth. I know he has until sometime next week to return questions that Congress has asked. In my view, he will be requested to go under oath to answer the questions. The truth should either put an end to this or it will start a firestorm, in my view.
I have noted McCarthy talking about impeachment of Garland if he lied to Congress. It would be very simple to question the AGs in DC and Cal --- just asking did Weiss want to indict Hunter for tax crimes or not. It certainly could get to the accusations quickly and efficiently.
Trump has no power to demand anything.
At any rate, In my view, this all needs to be looked at, and answers obtained. If the Whistleblower is being truthful, many were at the meeting where Weiss shared his problems with bringing charges against Hunter Biden. It would appear the DOJ may have been weaponized to bury charges against Hunter. I don't feel it fair to just say "Weiss" was appointed by Trump. There were many IRS agents that worked on the Hunter Biden tax case, and Shapley has well laid out the many crimes that he felt Hunter committed.
I am not of the mind to insult the abilities of the agents that worked on this case, nor am I to disrespect Weiss, due to be appointed by Trump. I can respect you have another opinion of the man.
Weiss was in charge of everything if he felt like this whistleblower shapley had any credibility at all why wouldn't he have brought it up especially under Trump and Barr?? Why didn't they nail Hunter Biden to the wall at that time when they had the opportunity? But seriously, why are we listening to what people surmise about attorney Weiss rather than his own statements which he hasn't made???
Hey, we agree -- we need to hear from Weiss. He is key to all. Or the AGs that Shapley has named that he claims Weiss said denied him a venue to charge Hunter. If this is all true, this bunch was mighty sloppy.
Hunter Biden prosecutor denies retaliating against IRS whistleblower
U.S. Attorney David Weiss also reiterated that he commands "ultimate authority" over the investigation, including "deciding where, when and whether to file charges."
Weiss, in a letter sent Friday to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said that the Justice Department did not retaliate against any IRS official “for making protected disclosures to Congress,” and that he believes he could file charges outside his home district if the investigation leads in that direction.
At the outset, I would like to reaffirm the contents of the June 7 letter drafted by my office and reiterate that I am not at liberty to provide the materials you seek. The whistleblowers’ allegations relate to a criminal investigation that is now being prosecuted in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. At this juncture, I am required to protect confidential law enforcement information and deliberative communications related to the case. Thus, I will not provide specific information related to the Hunter Biden investigation at this time. But I will provide some general insight on two issues.
First, the Department of Justice did not retaliate against “an Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) Criminal Supervisory Special Agent and whistleblower, as well as his entire investigative team… for making protected disclosures to Congress.”3 Second, in my June 7 letter I stated, “I have been granted ultimate authority over this matter, including responsibility for deciding where, when and whether to file charges and for making decisions necessary to preserve the integrity of the prosecution, consistent with federal law, the Principles of Federal Prosecution, and Departmental regulations.”4 I stand by what I wrote and wish to expand on what this means.
As the U.S. Attorney for the District of Delaware, my charging authority is geographically limited to my home district. If venue for a case lies elsewhere, common Departmental practice is to contact the United States Attorney’s Office for the district in question and determine whether it wants to partner on the case. If not, I may request Special Attorney status from the Attorney General pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 515. Here, I have been assured that, if necessary after the above process, I would be granted § 515 Authority in the District of Columbia, the Central District of California, or any other district where charges could be brought in this matter.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congre … -rcna92326
Kevin McCarthy hints at impeachment inquiry into AG Merrick Garland
"Speaker Kevin McCarthy hinted Sunday that the House could launch an impeachment inquiry into Attorney General Merrick Garland — following bombshell whistleblower testimony that the top US attorney interfered with the investigation into first son Hunter Biden.
“We need to get to the facts, and that includes reconciling these clear disparities. U.S. Attorney David Weiss must provide answers to the House Judiciary Committee,” McCarthy, 58, tweeted.
“If the whistleblowers’ allegations are true, this will be a significant part of a larger impeachment inquiry into Merrick Garland’s weaponization of DOJ,” he continued.
The California Republican’s threat comes on the heels of damning IRS whistleblower testimony alleging that Justice Department officials hampered the tax fraud investigation of Hunter Biden."
https://nypost.com/2023/06/25/mccarthy- … g-garland/
It will be interesting to see where this all ends up. It is clearly up to Congress to investigate this matter and find the truth, the facts.
So this all actually began under Trump?
"The whistleblower, Gary Shapley, testified that investigative leads that might have led to Joe Biden were not pursued in the late summer and fall of 2020. At the time, Donald Trump was president and the attorney general was Bill Barr.".
So why didn't barr follow up? This was Trump's attorney. This really isn't adding up to making much sense that Trump's own attorney would not have followed these leads. And his own attorney general Barr ignored them also? I mean we all know Trump has a tendency to hire inept attorneys but something doesn't seem right about this.
Jonathan Turley https://jonathanturley.org/2023/06/28/w … nt-page-3/
Was Garland Lying? New York Times Confirms Weiss was Blocked from Bringing Additional Charges
I recently wrote a column entitled “Who is Lying? Merrick Garland or the Whistleblowers?” after the allegations of IRS whistleblowers and the categorical denial of Attorney General Merrick Garland on the Hunter Biden investigation. I noted that it would not be a difficult question to answer given the highly specific account of the whistleblowers of meetings, including witnesses. Now the New York Times has confirmed one of the key allegations. While the newspaper buried the major fact in the 21st paragraph of the story, it confirmed that U.S. Attorney David Weiss did attempt to bring additional charges in California and D.C. but was blocked.
Many have observed that the placement of the disclosure in the Times is a classic example of “burying the lede.” If this were Bill Barr, the confirmation of the story would have been a banner headline. Instead, the confirmation is found in with the baggage 21 cars down the train. That is where you will find this bombshell:
“But in mid-2022, Mr. Weiss reached out to the top federal prosecutor in Washington, Matthew Graves, to ask his office to pursue charges and was rebuffed, according to Mr. Shapley’s testimony. A similar request to prosecutors in the Central District of California, which includes Los Angeles, was also rejected, Mr. Shapley testified. A second former I.R.S. official, who has not been identified, told House Republicans the same story. That episode was confirmed independently to The New York Times by a person with knowledge of the situation.”
If the New York Times is confirming that the “episode” was the repeated blocking of Weiss, Garland stands contradicted in statements that he has made for months, including just days ago. Garland appeared irate at the suggestion that Weiss was denied any opportunity to bring charges anywhere:
He stated
“As I said at the outset, Mr. Weiss, who was appointed by President Trump as the U.S Attorney in Delaware and assigned this matter during the previous administration, would be permitted to continue his investigation and to make a decision to prosecute any way in which he wanted to and in any district in which he wanted to… I don’t know how it would be possible for anybody to block him from bringing a prosecution, given that he has this authority.”
He also denied the allegation that Weiss asked for special counsel status.
I am not sure what is worse: that Garland was clueless or duplicitous. Despite my support for his nomination, Garland has not been a success at Justice. Indeed, from the start, he seemed to shrink from view.
There is also a danger of willful blindness on the part of Garland in avoiding such knowledge as underlings undermined Weiss. We simply do not know, but we need to know.
In speaking with people at Justice, Garland does not appear to be a hands-on manager in the model of Bill Barr. While he cannot be called a figurehead, he is certainly not someone who conveys operational or active control of the department.
If Weiss was refused the ability to charge in two other jurisdictions, the key question is whether he did in fact ask for special counsel status. If so, Garland could be facing serious consequences, even an impeachment effort.
The coverage by the New York Times suggests that the media may be forced to cover this story albeit reluctantly. For Democratic members, it is now becoming even more embarrassing. Democrats unanimously opposed the release of the recent evidence and have opposed efforts to investigate the Biden corruption scandal.
What is clear is that Congress now has ample basis to pursue these answers fully and aggressively. With both potential criminal and impeachable questions, the authority of Congress is at its apex in using subpoenas to get to the bottom of this scandal.
I'd still like to hear it from the handpicked Trump appointed attorney Weiss himself make these comments. We have yet to hear that. I don't think it really matters what the New York times says. Where is Trump's attorney's statement on this? If I were him and slighted by the opposition I would be screaming the loudest right now. I'm also still wondering why Bill Barr didn't bring it up when all of this happened under the Trump administration. You literally have Trump's own attorney not saying anything at this point so again that is very questionable.
I too would like to hear from Weiss. As I said he can supply the truth in regard to the meeting that Shapley has openly claimed he made claims that he could not bring charges against Hunter Biden in DC or California. Shapley has claimed openly in several interviews that there were six other agents at that meeting, and four have agreed to speak with Congress. There also is another whistleblower that remains undercover, that was at the meeting and backs Shapley's story. But I am with you Weiss needs to come forward.
Not sure why you feel Trump's attorneys have any skin in this. These charges are being levied at Hunter Boden in regard to tax problems.
I have not caught any comments from Trump on this issue. I use Truth Social, and I would think he would've left a comment on Truth.
In regard to Bill Barr --- It has been reported he knew about both Hunter and Joe's investigations before the 2020 election, and never comment on either. I guess only he could explain his reasoning.
I my own opinion, I do feel it's odd Trump did not put out a statement -- I guess I could have missed it.
They are Trump's own handpicked appointed attorneys who are bringing these charges and who are not corroborating with shapley in any way. Weiss is Trump's attorney and he is not bringing any of the accusations of this so-called whistleblower so I don't know how you reconcile that?
I think you might want to do further research into Shapley's accusations. The IRS put him in charge of investigating Hunter Biden. He found that Hunter has committed several serious tax crimes, He claimed at many turns he was shut down, and that it was not a common procedure that he should have been denied what he was asking. I suggest listening to several of his interviews which can be found on youtube.
Weiss has not thus far talked with Congress. It has been reported he has been approached to speak with Congress and sort out what went on in the meeting with Shapley, and I believe 6 other IRS agents. If Shapley is being truthful, it most likely will be a problem for many -- Garland, the AG of DC, the AG in California, and most of all Hunter Biden. The bottom line is Shapley and his agents found Hunter had some very serious tax violations.
As I said, it will all depend on what the 6 IRS agents say, as well as Weiss.
I feel Shapley is being truthful, he has one other agent that backed him up that was at the meeting and 4 other agents will be meeting with
Congress. The sheer numbers of witnesses spell trouble. This is all conjecture. We need to wait and see what the Congress does. I mean I think we can agree, they do little, and drag their feet.
The thing is that shapley wasn't the head of this investigation. Trump's hand-picked appointed attorney Weiss was in charge of the investigation so I'm not sure it matters what shapley has to say at this point.
Shapley was in charge at the IRS working alongside Weiss, handling the investigation with a team of IRS agents.
Weiss was nominated to be U.S. attorney in Delaware by Trump in 2018 with the support of Delaware’s two Democratic U.S. senators. He previously served as the top deputy in the office and was interim U.S. attorney during the early years of the 2009-2017 Obama administration.
Lawmakers credited Weiss with prosecuting corruption, money laundering, drug offenses and helping secure federal funding to combat illegal drug trafficking in Delaware.
Weiss, as the top U.S. prosecutor in the Biden family's home state, SUPERVISED the investigation from its start in 2018, focusing initially on potential violations of tax and money laundering laws in Hunter Biden's foreign business dealings, particularly in China, Reuters has reported.
He worked with the IRS. He was appointed to do so by AG Garland in 2018.
"If Shapley is being truthful, it most likely will be a problem for many -- Garland, the AG of DC, the AG in California, and most of all Hunter Biden.'
Why would it be a problem for garland? Or the other AG's? It was Weiss who headed, directed and had complete control over the investigation. He has stated just that himself. I think trying to pin the work of attorney Weiss on Garland is a stretch. Especially with no evidence.
If the accusations are true and the AGs in Cal, and DC did deny Weiss the ability to charge Hunter Biden for tax crimes, on orders from the DOJ --- what is being reported is Garland will have on at least two occasions lied to Congress. It is not very likely he would not have known about the actions of the AGs refusals --- If the allegations are true. As I said three people can clear this up -- Wess, and the two AGs
Shapley has evidence of all the tax problems in regard to Hunter, he has been very vocal about listing them. He has been the lead investigator in the IRS investigation working alongside Weiss. My source at this point, the only one I am going with is House Judiciary Committee.
https://judiciary.house.gov/media/in-th … 0was%20%22
Shapley was appointed to the case in 2018 to work with Weiss.
Honestly this was all under Trump's administration and should have been brought at that time.
I am not even sure if Trump was told about all of this. I mean I think he would have blown something like this up big time.
The credible witness
GOP House 'informant' indicted on allegations he was an agent for China
Federal prosecutors in Manhattan have indicted the co-director of a Maryland-based think tank on a host of charges stemming from what they allege was his unregistered advocacy of Chinese causes while trying to sell weapons on behalf of a Chinese company to a number of foreign countries.
Gal Luft, a dual Israeli and American citizen and co-director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, was also charged with violating Iranian sanctions and making false statements to federal agents, according to the November 2022 indictment that was unsealed Monday.
Luft, 57, is currently a fugitive, prosecutors said. He was arrested on the charges in Cyprus in February but fled after posting bail.
In recent months, Luft has made headlines by alleging in so-far unsubstantiated public statements promoted by House Republicans that the Biden family received payments from Chinese nationals tied to Chinese intelligence and that Hunter Biden had a mole inside the FBI.
"He is very credible," House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer told Newsmax last week.
Prosecutors allege he's been engaged in "multiple international criminal schemes" spanning several years.
"He subverted foreign agent registration laws in the United States to seek to promote Chinese policies by acting through a former high-ranking U.S. Government official; he acted as a broker in deals for dangerous weapons and Iranian oil; and he told multiple lies about his crimes to law enforcement," said Damian Williams, U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York.
The indictment alleges he struck a $350,000-a-year deal with the head of a Chinese energy company-affiliated non-governmental organization in 2015 to promote Chinese causes.
One of the things Luft was later tasked with doing was working to "recruit" and "educate" a "former high-ranking U.S. Government official" to make public statements that were in China's interest for a fee, the indictment says. That official became "an adviser to the then President-elect," Donald Trump, in 2016, the indictment says.
The indictment does not name the former official, identifying him only as "Individual-1," but it makes reference to pro-China articles written by James Woolsey.
Woolsey was the director of the CIA from 1993 to 1995 under then-President Bill Clinton, and he joined the Trump campaign as a senior advisor prior to the 2016 election and had a stint on the Trump transition team, public reporting shows.
Luft also allegedly "conspired with others and attempted to broker illicit arms transactions with, among others, certain Chinese individuals and entities" and foreign countries, including Libya, the United Arab Emirates and Kenya, prosecutors said.
The deals took place between 2014 and 2017, with munitions that included bombs, rockets and grenade launchers, the indictment says.
Luft also allegedly worked on a plan for China to buy Iranian oil, despite U.S. sanctions against Iran. The indictment says he instructed a co-conspirator to identify the oil as coming from Brazil, not Iran.
Luft is also charged with making false statements to federal agents when they questioned him about the allegations of arms trafficking and sanctions evasion during an interview in Brussels in March of 2019.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justic … -rcna93633
This is madness.
by Sharlee 18 months ago
This man has been investigating Hunter for Five years... Ask yourself why?Newsweek "Numerous Republicans and pundits are questioning U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland's Friday appointment of U.S. Attorney David Weiss as special counsel to oversee the yearslong investigation involving...
by Sharlee 18 months ago
U.S. Rep. Greg Steube Files Articles of Impeachment Against Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., President of the United States, For High Crimes and Misdemeanors"118th Congress State of the Union Address, President Joe Biden – February 7, 2023WASHINGTON — U.S. Representative Greg Steube (R-Fla.)...
by Readmikenow 18 months ago
Note: This is from a left-wing publication.FBI Document Reveals Biden Family’s International Bribery SchemeIn a stunning turn of events, an unclassified FBI document has been released, implicating President Biden and his son, Hunter Biden, in an alleged international bribery scheme. The document,...
by Readmikenow 23 months ago
The House Oversight Committee has asked Hunter Biden’s business associate Rob Walker testify before the panel, following information from subpoenaed financial documents revealing that he transferred more than $1 million to members of the Biden family after receiving a $3 million wire from a Chinese...
by Castlepaloma 13 months ago
1 day ago — House approves impeachment inquiry into President Biden as Republicans rally behind investigation.Sounds too good to be true. Considering Three presidents have been impeached, although none were convicted: Andrew Johnson was in 1868, Bill Clinton was in 1998, and Donald Trump twice, in...
by Tim Mitchell 2 months ago
Trump announces Matt Gaetz as his pick for attorney general by NBC News (Nov 13, 2024)Gaetz, a Florida lawmaker who has been under federal investigation, is a staunch Trump ally on Capitol Hill.https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justic … rcna180042"WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald...
Copyright © 2025 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
Copyright © 2025 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective owners.
As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.
For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy
Show DetailsNecessary | |
---|---|
HubPages Device ID | This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons. |
Login | This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service. |
Google Recaptcha | This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy) |
Akismet | This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy) |
HubPages Google Analytics | This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy) |
HubPages Traffic Pixel | This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized. |
Amazon Web Services | This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy) |
Cloudflare | This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy) |
Google Hosted Libraries | Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy) |
Features | |
---|---|
Google Custom Search | This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy) |
Google Maps | Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy) |
Google Charts | This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy) |
Google AdSense Host API | This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy) |
Google YouTube | Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy) |
Vimeo | Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy) |
Paypal | This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy) |
Facebook Login | You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy) |
Maven | This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy) |
Marketing | |
---|---|
Google AdSense | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Google DoubleClick | Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Index Exchange | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Sovrn | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Facebook Ads | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
AppNexus | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Openx | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Rubicon Project | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
TripleLift | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Say Media | We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy) |
Remarketing Pixels | We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites. |
Conversion Tracking Pixels | We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service. |
Statistics | |
---|---|
Author Google Analytics | This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy) |
Comscore | ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy) |
Amazon Tracking Pixel | Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy) |
Clicksco | This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy) |