Fourth IRS official confirms prosecutors in DC and California declined Hunter Biden case.

A Fourth IRS Official Reveals Roadblocks ⁣in Hunter Biden ⁢Investigation

A ‌fourth IRS official⁤ has come forward to Congress, shedding light on the challenges faced by ‍special counsel David Weiss in his attempt to bring charges against Hunter Biden. Darrell ​Waldon, the former IRS⁢ special agent in charge of​ the agency’s Washington field office, shared his insights during a‌ closed-door interview with the House Ways and Means ‍Committee. Waldon discussed various obstacles encountered during⁤ his two years on the case, including the ⁣removal ⁤of whistleblower Gary Shapley and ‌his investigative team from the investigation.

Challenges and Controversies

According to Waldon, Weiss approached⁤ the U.S. Attorney’s Office to ‌prosecute the case in Washington, D.C., but they declined. The case was then presented to the Central District of‌ California. Waldon⁣ also attended a crucial meeting in October 2022, which Shapley described⁣ as a ‌turning point in the ⁤investigation. While Waldon disagreed with some⁤ of Shapley’s notes from the meeting, he acknowledged differences of opinion but did not ‌find it as contentious as Shapley had portrayed.

Waldon’s Role and‍ Perspective

Waldon, who was not initially involved in the⁣ Hunter Biden investigation, assumed a supervisory role in April 2021. He heard from Shapley about roadblocks encountered‍ during the investigation,⁢ but he‍ believed that blaming political bias was unsubstantiated.‍ Although he did not recall when ‍the U.S. attorney in California decided not to allow Weiss to charge ‍Hunter ​Biden in his district, Waldon expressed confidence in ⁣the strength of the case.

Confirmation from Other Officials

Waldon’s testimony⁣ aligned with that of another IRS agent, Michael Batdorf, who also stated that ‌U.S. attorneys in Washington, D.C., and California declined to partner with Weiss on charges. This hindered the progress of⁢ the case for several months.⁣ The involvement of Joe⁤ Biden-appointed U.S. attorneys raised concerns about⁣ potential bias, despite claims that the‍ case was insulated​ from‍ political influence.

Shapley’s Removal and Tensions

Waldon revealed that Weiss’s strained relationship with Shapley led to the decision to remove Shapley and his investigative team. The U.S. ⁣Attorney’s Office stopped communicating with Shapley, and Waldon believed that resolving the‌ issue would‍ take time.⁣ To ensure the investigation could ⁤move forward, Waldon recommended Shapley’s⁤ removal. Both Waldon and Batdorf expressed ‍concerns that Shapley’s presence might hinder Weiss’s ⁢progress ​in the case.

Discovery Requests and Controversy

The tensions between Weiss and⁢ Shapley escalated when the Delaware U.S. attorney’s office demanded all emails and records from the IRS investigative team. Shapley viewed this as a⁤ fishing expedition‌ to uncover his documented complaints about the case. However, Waldon and Batdorf did not characterize the discovery requests ⁤in ⁤the same way.

Garland’s⁢ Statements and Special Counsel Appointment

Some Justice Department officials argued that seeking permission from ‌a fellow U.S. attorney to charge a defendant in a different jurisdiction is standard practice. However, Attorney General ⁢Merrick Garland had previously stated that Weiss had the authority ​to bring charges‍ in any district. This statement was only validated ⁣when ⁢Weiss requested ‍a special counsel appointment in August.

How⁢ did Waldon emphasize the importance of maintaining transparency and the​ rule of law in the investigation, despite allegations ⁣of political bias

He first learned of ‍the investigation, ‌he stated that it was common for there to be communication gaps within the agency. Waldon’s main focus⁢ during his‍ involvement in the case was to ensure that all proper⁢ procedures and protocols were followed, ‌in order to have a ⁣fair and thorough⁤ investigation.

During his interview, Waldon spoke about the removal⁤ of Gary Shapley and his investigative team from the Hunter Biden case. ‌Shapley had been ‌a ​whistleblower,⁤ bringing attention‌ to ⁢potential wrongdoing by Hunter Biden. However, ‍according to Waldon,⁤ Shapley and his team were removed ⁣from ​the investigation due to concerns about their handling of the case,​ rather than any political bias or interference.

The decision to remove Shapley was made ⁤by Weiss, who believed that the team’s approach was not in line with⁢ the agency’s standards. Waldon supported Weiss in⁣ this decision and insisted ‌that proper ‍procedures were‍ followed​ throughout the investigation. He reiterated that ​any challenges or roadblocks faced during the investigation were a result of proper⁢ oversight and adherence to professional standards.

Waldon also addressed the ⁤criticism that the investigation was ⁣politically motivated ‌or‍ influenced by external pressures. He stated that ​while political interests ⁤may exist, they⁤ should not impact the impartiality and integrity of the investigation. Waldon emphasized the importance of maintaining ‍transparency and ⁢the‌ rule of law ‍in​ order to ensure fair investigations ⁤and prosecutions.

The Hunter ‍Biden investigation has been a⁣ subject of‍ intense scrutiny and controversy, with⁤ allegations of​ political bias⁤ and interference. Waldon’s testimony provides additional insight into the challenges ⁢faced by special counsel David Weiss and the ‍motivations behind certain decisions made in the course of the investigation. ‍While the⁣ investigation is⁣ ongoing, Waldon’s testimony sheds light‍ on the⁢ efforts made ‍to maintain⁢ professionalism and uphold the⁣ integrity of the process.

As the ‌investigation into Hunter Biden continues, it ⁤is crucial ⁢that all parties involved remain focused on the evidence and facts, without⁤ succumbing to political pressures. ⁢The ‍IRS⁣ plays a vital role‌ in enforcing tax laws and ensuring accountability, and it‍ is imperative ⁤that investigations‍ are‍ carried out impartially and thoroughly. Only by adhering to the highest standards of ​professionalism and integrity can the‌ IRS fulfill its duty to the American people and maintain the ⁢public’s trust.