US Attorney David Weiss is stuck between a whistleblower and Attorney General Merrick Garland, and has a problem. He let Hunter Biden walk away with a sweetheart deal, and everyone knows it.

Remember, Gary Shapley, one of the whistleblowers at the IRS, documented that Weiss told him and five other witnesses directly that he had asked for special prosecutor status because he was not being allowed to charge Hunter Biden in either Washington DC or in California.

Shapley’s lawyer Mark Lytle, who was speaking to the press on Shapley’s behalf before his identity was revealed, also said that Shapley and his team had been fired off the Hunter Biden case specifically at the request of the Department of Justice.

The House Judiciary Committee has asked Weiss for answers. He’s clearly not prepared to give any, but hopes that this letter, addressed to Representative Jim Jordan, chair of the House Judiciary Committee, and delivered on the Friday of a holiday weekend, will cover his ass for now.

Breaking:

David Weiss letter to Rep. Jim Jordan regarding Hunter Biden probe pic.twitter.com/BXrghajmH3

— Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) July 1, 2023

Weiss tells Jordan in the letter that he really can’t answer any questions because the case is still pending (remember, that sweetheart plea deal has not been signed off on by a judge yet), but wants to address “two issues” that have been raised by Shapley’s allegations.

In the letter to Jordan, Weiss said that he could not address specifics at this time about the whistleblowers’ allegations that pertain to the “criminal investigation that is now being prosecuted in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.”

While he said he could not divulge information related to the investigation at this time, he did say that he wanted to “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,’” he wrote.”

“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,’” he continued. “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,” he said. “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.”

“At the appropriate time, I welcome the opportunity to discuss these topics with the Committee in more detail, and answer questions related to the whistleblowers’ allegations consistent with the law and Department policy,” he concluded. “It is my understanding that the Office of Legislative Affairs will work with the Committee to discuss appropriate timeline and scope.”

Let’s look at the “two issues” that Weiss claims he really can’t talk about, but then tries to spin or deny what Shapley said. First, Weiss claims that Shapley and his team were not “retaliated” against. So, is Weiss disputing that Shapley and his team were fired from the case? That’s pretty easy to prove or disprove. Either Shapley is still working the case, or he’s not. Now, is Weiss trying to claim that Shapley and his team were done with their work, so they were off the investigation because it was complete? If that was the case, then why wouldn’t Weiss say THAT? But he doesn’t. He just carefully restates Jordan’s question back to him and denies that the DOJ “retaliated.” My guess is that a court will eventually have to determine if being dismissed before the investigation was complete was retaliation or not.

Then, Weiss reasserts that he had the “ultimate authority” over Hunter Biden and the charges filed, in direct contradiction to Shapley’s testimony, interviews, documentation, another unnamed IRS whistleblower, and whatever source the New York Times used. Remember, the NYT buried the lede, but independently confirmed through another source that Weiss did tell his staff that he was being blocked from bringing charges in other districts.

“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,” The Times wrote Tuesday. “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.”

But if Weiss had “ultimate authority” and had been “assured” that he could charge in another district, then what happened? Was Weiss blocked, or did he just go soft on Hunter Biden? Either answer is extremely disturbing and problematic. If Weiss was blocked, and is now covering his ass – as well as Merrick Garland‘s – then he’s trying to throw Shapley under the bus to save his own career. If Weiss went all mushy on Hunter Biden, and decided to give the poor baby a break because he’s had such a hard life and “Big Guy” Daddy is president right now, then we really do have a “two tier” system of justice and Shapley is right that Hunter got the kid-glove treatment. But why would Weiss give Hunter Biden a break? Could it have anything to do with Joe apparently telling aides “hands off” when it comes to Hunter? Never take sides against the family.

Something very much stinks here, and Weiss’s letter does nothing to convince anyone who isn’t under an obligation to protect Precious Baby Hunter that something isn’t rotten in the state of Denmark. And I don’t think that Jim Jordan is going to be satisfied with Weiss’s attempt to explain without actually explaining anything. Sounds exactly like a lawyer, right?

Featured image: original Victory Girls art by Darleen Click