As the investigation into Hunter Biden’s alleged gun and tax crimes continues, numerous questions remain unanswered. House Republicans are asking for clarity about the decision-making process, while the prosecutor leading the investigation has been tight-lipped about the details. Recent revelations and a letter from US Attorney David Weiss have raised concerns about whether Attorney General Merrick Garland misled Congress about Weiss’ authority to charge Hunter Biden in other jurisdictions.
Hunter Biden, son of President Joe Biden. (AP)
With Weiss and Garland expected to testify before Congress and Hunter Biden’s upcoming plea deal, here are some key questions that linger:
Did Weiss seek permission from the US Attorneys in California and Washington DC to file charges against Hunter Biden in those districts? Did Weiss intend to file charges in California or DC, as the IRS whistleblower claimed? Did Weiss request special prosecutor status from the Attorney General to help in the Hunter Biden investigation? Will the Justice Department release correspondence between Weiss and US attorneys about the case? Does Hunter’s plea deal mark the end of the criminal investigations or is there more to come? President Joe Biden was involved in Hunter’s case. business? When will Weiss and Garland testify before Congress?
The Hunter Biden investigation has been a source of political controversy since President Biden took office. Republicans are scrutinizing Weiss’ authority, questioning whether he had the autonomy Garland claimed he had. Although Hunter Biden has reached an agreement with Weiss’ team, many uncertainties remain.
Disputes over Weiss’s authority
IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley alleged that Weiss tried to bring charges against Hunter Biden in Washington DC, but was obstructed by Matthew Graves, the top DC federal prosecutor appointed by President Biden. Weiss, however, refuted that claim, saying he had the ultimate authority to decide on charges and preserve the integrity of the prosecution.
He explained that his charging authority is generally limited to the District of Delaware where he serves as U.S. attorney, but claimed that Garland had promised him special counsel status to bring charges in other districts. Weiss’ ability to press charges in California and DC would require the cooperation of the respective US Attorneys’ offices.
Requests for witnesses and documents
House Republicans have asked Weiss to clarify his authority, citing Shapley’s email and Garland’s statements. Weiss’ letter to Republicans said he had not asked California or D.C. for permission, but believed it would have been granted if needed.
However, Weiss rejected Republican demands for documents and records related to interactions between the DOJ and the IRS in the Hunter Biden case. He cited the need to protect confidential law enforcement information and deliberative communications. Weiss expressed his willingness to discuss the matter in more detail with the Committee at the appropriate time.
Next agreement and testimony
Hunter Biden is scheduled to appear in federal court on July 26 for his plea agreement. The deal involves pleading guilty to minor tax offenses and avoiding charges related to illegal possession of a firearm as a drug user, as long as he complies with the agreed terms.
Meanwhile, both Weiss and Garland are expected to testify before Congress, likely after the trial. These witnesses could shed more light on the investigation and address lingering questions surrounding the Hunter Biden case.
Also read | Speculation grows as bookies point to Hunter Biden as White House cocaine culprit
The Hunter Biden investigation has been a contentious issue, raising concerns about the integrity of the Justice Department’s handling of the case. With significant policy implications, the research findings and upcoming testimony could have far-reaching consequences.
