Hunter Biden’s attorney says DOJ prosecutors ‘changed their decision on the fly’ on plea deal

[Social Media]

 

Hunter Biden’s attorney on Sunday criticized Justice Department (DOJ) prosecutors for changing “their decision on the fly” regarding a plea agreement reached between federal prosecutors and the president’s son, a deal that was ultimately put on hold after a hearing last month.

Abbe Lowell, who represents Biden, said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” that there were three possibilities for why both sides didn’t leave a July 26 hearing with a plea deal secured by a judge.

“One, they wrote something and weren’t clear what they meant. Two, they knew what they meant and misstated it to counsel. Or third, they change their view as they were standing in court in Delaware,” Lowell said, speaking of the DOJ prosecutors.

When pressed further by CBS’s Margaret Brennan on whether he thought the prosecutors were “incompetent,” he wouldn’t use that characterization.

He instead said prosecutors “changed their decision on the fly standing up in court.”

Hunter Biden’s plea deal involving tax and gun charges was put on hold last month after the judge presiding over the case questioned the parameters of the agreement reached with the Justice Department.

President Biden’s son was expected to plead guilty to two misdemeanor counts of willful failure to pay income taxes as part of a deal announced last month with the DOJ, but instead pleaded not guilty after the plea deal was placed on hold.

 

 

FULL STORY

[SunnyinBangrak]

quote "When pressed further by CBS’s Margaret Brennan on whether he thought the prosecutors were “incompetent,” he wouldn’t use that characterization.

He instead said prosecutors “changed their decision on the fly standing up in court.”

 

Don't mistake corruption for incompetence. The normal situation has the prosecution working for the state/the people in trying to show evidence of guilt, while the defence tries to get their client off. In this case however both the defence and the prosecutor were working in tandem trying to show the subject's innocence against mountains of evidence that serious crimes did in fact take place.  Much thanks goes to the heroic whistle-blowers for outing the truth about this corrupt investigation.

 

 Luckily thanks to Garrett Zeigler and the Marco Polo institute's incredible work, we know exactly how many crimes Hunter and his family perpetrated and also their exact nature. 

 

 Corruption, for the record, is still as bad as we were told it was from 2016 to 2020. Although you would not have thought that to be the case considering all the diversions and excuses.

Edited August 14, 2023 by SunnyinBangrak

[placeholder]

52 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

quote "When pressed further by CBS’s Margaret Brennan on whether he thought the prosecutors were “incompetent,” he wouldn’t use that characterization.

He instead said prosecutors “changed their decision on the fly standing up in court.”

 

Don't mistake corruption for incompetence. The normal situation has the prosecution working for the state/the people in trying to show evidence of guilt, while the defence tries to get their client off. In this case however both the defence and the prosecutor were working in tandem trying to show the subject's innocence against mountains of evidence that serious crimes did in fact take place.  Much thanks goes to the heroic whistle-blowers for outing the truth about this corrupt investigation.

 

 Luckily thanks to Garrett Zeigler and the Marco Polo institute's incredible work, we know exactly how many crimes Hunter and his family perpetrated and also their exact nature. 

 

 Corruption, for the record, is still as bad as we were told it was from 2016 to 2020. Although you would not have thought that to be the case considering all the diversions and excuses.

"The normal situation has the prosecution working for the state/the people in trying to show evidence of guilt, while the defence tries to get their client off."

So plea-bargaining is abnormal. Wow! I thought plea-bargaining was a major feature of how the Justice Dept settles  prosecutions. Apparently, not.

 

As for Garret Ziegler:

Former Trump White House aide who met with January 6 panel attacks witnesses, lawmakers in profane and sexist rant

He also accused the January 6 House select committee of being “anti-White,” without any evidence. (The nine-member panel is led by Rep. Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat, who is Black.)

“They’re Bolsheviks,” Ziegler said in the stream, referring to the far-left communists who led the Soviet Union, “so, they probably do hate the American founders and most White people in general. This is a Bolshevistic anti-White campaign. If you can’t see that, your eyes are freaking closed."

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/20/politics/garrett-ziegler-rant/index.html

 

Ziegler then went on to complain he was seen by the committee to be a young Christian and easily scared. Clearly, he's a loon.

 

Edited August 14, 2023 by placeholder

[SunnyinBangrak]

6 minutes ago, placeholder said:

"The normal situation has the prosecution working for the state/the people in trying to show evidence of guilt, while the defence tries to get their client off."

So plea-bargaining is abnormal. Wow! I thought plea-bargaining was a major feature of how the Justice Dept settles  prosecutions. Apparently, not.

 

As for Garret Ziegler:

Former Trump White House aide who met with January 6 panel attacks witnesses, lawmakers in profane and sexist rant

He also accused the January 6 House select committee of being “anti-White,” without any evidence. (The nine-member panel is led by Rep. Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat, who is Black.)

“They’re Bolsheviks,” Ziegler said in the stream, referring to the far-left communists who led the Soviet Union, “so, they probably do hate the American founders and most White people in general. This is a Bolshevistic anti-White campaign. If you can’t see that, your eyes are freaking closed."

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/20/politics/garrett-ziegler-rant/index.html

 

Ziegler then went on to complain he was seen by the committee to be a young Christian and easily scared. Clearly, he's a loon.

 

He and his team did a forensic analysis of Hunter's laptop. Nobody is claiming his findings are false.

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

He and his team did a forensic analysis of Hunter's laptop. Nobody is claiming his findings are false.

Well, if nobody is claiming his findings are false, maybe that's because no one would waste their time challenging an investigation conducted by a loon.

In addition, is it known that any conclusive evidence of criminality has been found on the laptop? Sleaziness is not a crime. 

[Bkk Brian]

9 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

He and his team did a forensic analysis of Hunter's laptop. Nobody is claiming his findings are false.

Worth a read on the laptop analysis although its rather a deep dive:

 

https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/07/18/wapo-is-suppressing-information-that-might-debunk-devlin-barretts-latest-spin/

[SunnyinBangrak]

16 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Worth a read on the laptop analysis although its rather a deep dive:

 

https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/07/18/wapo-is-suppressing-information-that-might-debunk-devlin-barretts-latest-spin/

From your link

 

"James Comer has stumbled over and over in his unabashed effort to manufacture a scandal "

 

Oh dear! Back to Hunters laptop being a product of MAGA repubicans. No way the author could be this uninformed.

[Bkk Brian]

13 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

From your link

 

"James Comer has stumbled over and over in his unabashed effort to manufacture a scandal "

 

Oh dear! Back to Hunters laptop being a product of MAGA repubicans. No way the author could be this uninformed.

The author does not have all the information but they do point out the inconsistencies in the forensics that even Marco Polo, headed by former Trump White House aide Garrett Ziegler published.

 

At what point does it claim to be a product of the MAGA republicans?

Edited August 14, 2023 by Bkk Brian

[earlinclaifornia]

Probably if Hunter agrees to jail time everybody wins. Look drug addiction has three possibilities.

Most likely they die from taking hard drugs, Secondly they dry out doing jail time. Lastly they themselves enlist in a recovery program. imho

 

[Longwood50]

As I have read it the evidence of money being paid to Hunter for what really can only be described as influence peddling is in the millions. 

It is my understanding that he both failed to pay taxes on that, did not register as a foreign agent and deliberately filed false deductions.  Just one notable one is he hired "escorts" then used those payments as deductions on his tax return.  THAT IS FRAUD

They were going to let him off pleading guilty to two misdemeanors.  That unquestionbly smacks of favoritism.  These were not honest mistakes.  

The Democrats keep beating the mantra that No One Is Above The Law.  But when it came to Hunter they wanted exactly that. 

Treat Hunter no differently than the Trump associates that have been fined and jailed for various breaches of the law including tax evasion. 

[illisdean]

6 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

From your link

 

"James Comer has stumbled over and over in his unabashed effort to manufacture a scandal "

 

Oh dear! Back to Hunters laptop being a product of MAGA repubicans. No way the author could be this uninformed.

The Hunter B laptop in FBI possession is confirmed to be legitimate and tied to Hunter Biden via his iCloud account on the laptop. No one questions who was the owner of the laptop when the repair shop took possession and subsequently gave it to the FBI, or authenticity of its contents.

"When the FBI took possession of the device in December 2019, they notified the IRS that it likely contained evidence of tax crimes."

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2023/06/the-biden-family-is-in-some-serious-trouble/

 

However, the IRS investigators testified they were prevented from examining the computer evidence as prosecutors refused to share the laptop.

 

https://waysandmeans.house.gov/smith-testimony-of-irs-employees-reveals-biden-irs-doj-interfered-in-tax-investigation-of-hunter-biden-revealing-preferential-treatment-for-wealthy-and-politically-connected/

 

Edited August 14, 2023 by illisdean

[bamnutsak]

In the meantime Hunter Biden's Felony firearm charge (lying on the application) may have been impacted owing to a ruling last week.

 

 

Appeals court strikes gun restriction implicated in Hunter Biden case

 

Right-wing courts are expanding the Second Amendment. That's good news for the president's son.

 

https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/hunter-biden-gun-drug-charge-ruling-rcna99188

 

 

 

 

Drug user cannot be barred from owning guns, US court rules

 

Aug 9 (Reuters) - A federal appeals court on Wednesday ruled that a decades-old law prohibiting users of illegal drugs from owning firearms was unconstitutional as applied to the case of a marijuana user, the latest fallout from a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last year that expanded gun rights.

 

A three-judge panel of the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that the federal law violated a Mississippi man's right to "keep and bear arms" under the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment.

 

https://www.reuters.com/legal/drug-user-cannot-be-barred-owning-guns-us-court-rules-2023-08-10/

 

 

[placeholder]

14 minutes ago, illisdean said:

The Hunter B laptop in FBI possession is confirmed to be legitimate and tied to Hunter Biden via his iCloud account on the laptop. No one questions who was the owner of the laptop or authenticity of its contents.

"When the FBI took possession of the device in December 2019, they notified the IRS that it likely contained evidence of tax crimes." However, the IRS investigators testified they were prevented from examining the computer evidence as prosecutors refused to share the laptop.

 

https://waysandmeans.house.gov/smith-testimony-of-irs-employees-reveals-biden-irs-doj-interfered-in-tax-investigation-of-hunter-biden-revealing-preferential-treatment-for-wealthy-and-politically-connected/

 

 

 

The first link goes to a report on MSNBC written by the editor of the Daily Signal. Hardly an impartial source. And when it comes to testimony that supports his beliefs, he's completely unskeptical.

 

As for the second it's document released by the Republican majority on the Committee. It reports the claims of the witnesses as though they were uncontested. Again, entirely skeptical.

 

Finally, I saw no reference in either source to anything about the agents being denied access to the laptop. And why would it matter? Aren't the contents out in the public domain already?

 

[Chomper Higgot]

7 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

He and his team did a forensic analysis of Hunter's laptop. Nobody is claiming his findings are false.

No, but are they admissible?

 

If my laptop went missing for months, was handled by countless people and then ‘stuff’ was found on its hard drive I’d be making to obvious observation that the laptop was handled by countless people.

 

Don’t tell me you wouldn’t make the same observation if it were you.

 

In the case of the subject laptop, numbers of these people were affiliated with Trump and or the Republican Party.

 

I smell a lot of accusation confession going on.

 

 

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

No, but are they admissible?

 

If my laptop went missing for months, was handled by countless people and then ‘stuff’ was found on its hard drive I’d be making to obvious observation that the laptop was handled by countless people.

 

Don’t tell me you wouldn’t make the same observation if it were you.

 

In the case of the subject laptop, numbers of these people were affiliated with Trump and or the Republican Party.

 

I smell a lot of accusation confession going on.

 

 

Even if admissible, was there any clear evidence of criminality on the laptop?

[Bkk Brian]

32 minutes ago, illisdean said:

The Hunter B laptop in FBI possession is confirmed to be legitimate and tied to Hunter Biden via his iCloud account on the laptop. No one questions who was the owner of the laptop when the repair shop took possession and subsequently gave it to the FBI, or authenticity of its contents.

"When the FBI took possession of the device in December 2019, they notified the IRS that it likely contained evidence of tax crimes."

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2023/06/the-biden-family-is-in-some-serious-trouble/

 

However, the IRS investigators testified they were prevented from examining the computer evidence as prosecutors refused to share the laptop.

 

https://waysandmeans.house.gov/smith-testimony-of-irs-employees-reveals-biden-irs-doj-interfered-in-tax-investigation-of-hunter-biden-revealing-preferential-treatment-for-wealthy-and-politically-connected/

 

The question of whether it was Hunters laptop is not really relevant, I think just about everyone knows it was including Hunter who is suing computer repair shop owner, alleging invasion of privacy in response to an ongoing defamation suit filed by the shop owner last year.

 

The question is whether it was compromised and whether he had full control of the contents found on there because there is plenty of evidence that is not the case.

 

Has Comers team carried out a full forensic analysis of the hard drive and have they published the results?

[ozimoron]

39 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Even if admissible, was there any clear evidence of criminality on the laptop?

It largely won't be admissible as there is no chain of custody.

[illisdean]

3 hours ago, placeholder said:

 

 

The first link goes to a report on MSNBC written by the editor of the Daily Signal. Hardly an impartial source. And when it comes to testimony that supports his beliefs, he's completely unskeptical.

 

As for the second it's document released by the Republican majority on the Committee. It reports the claims of the witnesses as though they were uncontested. Again, entirely skeptical.

 

Finally, I saw no reference in either source to anything about the agents being denied access to the laptop. And why would it matter? Aren't the contents out in the public domain already?

 

Sworn testimony, to Ways & Means committee, under penalty of perjury, from IRS whistleblower, attesting to facts and details surrounding the events between them the FBI, & fed prosecutors during the Biden investigation that is uncontested, stands as factual evidence despite your attempt to question and cast doubt on the reporter who quoted the same witness testimony on pages 12, 16 and pages 107 to 109 (inference to FBI's failure to share laptop evidence)  of the attached link. If IRS Shapely lied under oath about his interactions with the FBI he'd still be in jail. So, take it for what sworn testimony implies from seemingly very credible evidence from equally credible IRS investigators.

 

https://waysandmeans.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Whistleblower-1-Transcript_Redacted.pdf

[placeholder]

5 minutes ago, illisdean said:

Sworn testimony, to Ways & Means committee, under penalty of perjury, from IRS whistleblower, attesting to facts and details surrounding the events between them the FBI, & fed prosecutors during the Biden investigation that is uncontested, stands as factual evidence despite your attempt to question and cast doubt on the reporter who quoted the same witness testimony on pages 12, 16 and pages 107 to 109 (inference to FBI's failure to share laptop evidence)  of the attached link. If IRS Shapely lied under oath about his interactions with the FBI he'd still be in jail. So, take it for what sworn testimony implies from seemingly very credible evidence from equally credible IRS investigators.

 

https://waysandmeans.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Whistleblower-1-Transcript_Redacted.pdf

As Weiss pointed out, they don't have to be lying. They can be mistaken.

Prosecutor Rebuts I.R.S. Official’s Account of Request in Hunter Biden Case

David C. Weiss, the federal prosecutor in Delaware who has led the criminal investigation of Hunter Biden, on Monday rebutted a key element of testimony to Congress by an Internal Revenue Service official who said that Mr. Weiss complained about being blocked from pursuing the case the way he wanted.

In a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mr. Weiss said that he had never asked Justice Department officials to give him special counsel status to pursue the case, contradicting testimony to the House Ways and Means Committee by the I.R.S. official, Gary Shapley, who said Mr. Weiss had sought that status and been turned down.

Mr. Weiss suggested that Mr. Shapley might have misunderstood him during an October 2022 meeting. Mr. Weiss, the U.S. attorney for Delaware, who was appointed to the role under President Donald J. Trump, said in the letter that he had approached a department higher-up about the possibility of requesting status as a special attorney, not as a special counsel.

https://archive.ph/qmWsY

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/10/us/politics/david-weiss-hunter-biden-irs.html

 

In addition, IRS investigators are not prosecutors. Investigators are not privy to the reasons why decisions are made at the prosecutorial level. In fact, the IRS doesn't even have the power to prosecute Federal prosecutors are very reluctant to bring cases to court unless they have an overwhelming case. As John Durham should have known. Tax fraud cases are particuarly difficult to prosecute.

 

Why Hunter Biden wasn’t charged with felony tax evasion after years-long probe

Former federal prosecutor Maureen Ruane told The Post she also wasn’t surprised by prosecutors offering the misdemeanor plea deal.

In general, she said, tax evasion charges “are very infrequently sought” because of the difficulty of showing intent. She said that a plea deal “avoids the risks” of going to trial and the “resources and time and energy” required to follow a case through appeals.

https://nypost.com/2023/06/21/why-hunter-biden-wasnt-charged-with-felony-tax-evasion/

 

And you still haven't offered any evidence that the FBI denied IRS investigators access to the laptop, or why that even matters, considering its contents have are in the public domain.

 

[illisdean]

3 hours ago, placeholder said:

As Weiss pointed out, they don't have to be lying. They can be mistaken.

Prosecutor Rebuts I.R.S. Official’s Account of Request in Hunter Biden Case

David C. Weiss, the federal prosecutor in Delaware who has led the criminal investigation of Hunter Biden, on Monday rebutted a key element of testimony to Congress by an Internal Revenue Service official who said that Mr. Weiss complained about being blocked from pursuing the case the way he wanted.

In a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mr. Weiss said that he had never asked Justice Department officials to give him special counsel status to pursue the case, contradicting testimony to the House Ways and Means Committee by the I.R.S. official, Gary Shapley, who said Mr. Weiss had sought that status and been turned down.

Mr. Weiss suggested that Mr. Shapley might have misunderstood him during an October 2022 meeting. Mr. Weiss, the U.S. attorney for Delaware, who was appointed to the role under President Donald J. Trump, said in the letter that he had approached a department higher-up about the possibility of requesting status as a special attorney, not as a special counsel.

https://archive.ph/qmWsY

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/10/us/politics/david-weiss-hunter-biden-irs.html

 

In addition, IRS investigators are not prosecutors. Investigators are not privy to the reasons why decisions are made at the prosecutorial level. In fact, the IRS doesn't even have the power to prosecute Federal prosecutors are very reluctant to bring cases to court unless they have an overwhelming case. As John Durham should have known. Tax fraud cases are particuarly difficult to prosecute.

 

Why Hunter Biden wasn’t charged with felony tax evasion after years-long probe

Former federal prosecutor Maureen Ruane told The Post she also wasn’t surprised by prosecutors offering the misdemeanor plea deal.

In general, she said, tax evasion charges “are very infrequently sought” because of the difficulty of showing intent. She said that a plea deal “avoids the risks” of going to trial and the “resources and time and energy” required to follow a case through appeals.

https://nypost.com/2023/06/21/why-hunter-biden-wasnt-charged-with-felony-tax-evasion/

 

And you still haven't offered any evidence that the FBI denied IRS investigators access to the laptop, or why that even matters, considering its contents have are in the public domain.

 

Does testimony count as evidence?

"Testimony is a kind of evidence, and it is often the only evidence that a judge has when deciding a case. When you are under oath in court and you are testifying to the judge, what you say is considered to be truthful unless it is somehow challenged (“rebutted”) by the other party. If the other party can show the judge that you aren’t telling the truth, through testimony, evidence, or effective cross-examination, s/he can “rebut” your testimony. Then a judge has to make a decision on who s/he thinks is being more truthful (“credible”)"

 

If you read IRS testimony on the the pages I listed previously and quit tying to change the topic and create childish distractions about your inherent self serving bias and confusion tactic you will see witness testimony giving evidence of FBI refusing to provide access to the laptop evidence  to the IRS for their examination based on the FBI informing them there is :likely evidence of tax crimes..." 

 

As I said, if the IRS lied about his testimony (which he also mentioned that he made contemporaneous notes & files) he would be in jeopardy of indictment for perjury. He was not, and his testimony stands to this day and is therefore entered on the record as evidence. Try not go off topic so much, it seems to be a chronic ailment and tactic with you at least in this posting.

[placeholder]

5 minutes ago, illisdean said:

Does testimony count as evidence?

"Testimony is a kind of evidence, and it is often the only evidence that a judge has when deciding a case. When you are under oath in court and you are testifying to the judge, what you say is considered to be truthful unless it is somehow challenged (“rebutted”) by the other party. If the other party can show the judge that you aren’t telling the truth, through testimony, evidence, or effective cross-examination, s/he can “rebut” your testimony. Then a judge has to make a decision on who s/he thinks is being more truthful (“credible”)"

 

If you read IRS testimony on the the pages I listed previously and quit tying to change the topic and create childish distractions about your inherent self serving bias and confusion tactic you will see witness testimony giving evidence of FBI refusing to provide access to the laptop evidence  to the IRS for their examination based on the FBI informing them there is :likely evidence of tax crimes..." 

 

As I said, if the IRS lied about his testimony (which he also mentioned that he made contemporaneous notes & files) he would be in jeopardy of indictment for perjury. He was not, and his testimony stands to this day and is therefore entered on the record as evidence. Try not go off topic so much, it seems to be a chronic ailment and tactic with you at least in this posting.

Again, perjury is about lying. Being mistaken is not perjury. Expressing an opinion is not perjury. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

And taking reports from 2 highly biased sources is not convincing.

Here's a link to an article that's far more objective

Five takeaways from Hunter Biden IRS whistleblower hearing

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4106883-five-takeaways-from-hunter-biden-irs-whistleblower-hearing/

 

As for this:

 

"If you read IRS testimony on the the pages I listed previously and quit tying to change the topic and create childish distractions about your inherent self serving bias and confusion tactic you will see witness testimony giving evidence of FBI refusing to provide access to the laptop evidence  to the IRS for their examination based on the FBI informing them there is :likely evidence of tax crimes..."

 

it's always revealing when someone engages in personal insults. Revealing about the person who makes them. You actually offered no specifics to back up your claims about my "childish distractions". What "confusion tactic" did I employ?" It looks to me like anyone throwing our accusations without specifics to back them up is the one engaging in a "confusion taxtic".

You still haven't offered any evidence of the FBI denying IRS investigators access to the laptop. Where's your evidence? 

Why would it even be necessary given that its contents have been widely disseminated and are in the public domain?

 

 

[placeholder]

42 minutes ago, illisdean said:

Does testimony count as evidence?

"Testimony is a kind of evidence, and it is often the only evidence that a judge has when deciding a case. When you are under oath in court and you are testifying to the judge, what you say is considered to be truthful unless it is somehow challenged (“rebutted”) by the other party. If the other party can show the judge that you aren’t telling the truth, through testimony, evidence, or effective cross-examination, s/he can “rebut” your testimony. Then a judge has to make a decision on who s/he thinks is being more truthful (“credible”)"

 

If you read IRS testimony on the the pages I listed previously and quit tying to change the topic and create childish distractions about your inherent self serving bias and confusion tactic you will see witness testimony giving evidence of FBI refusing to provide access to the laptop evidence  to the IRS for their examination based on the FBI informing them there is :likely evidence of tax crimes..." 

 

As I said, if the IRS lied about his testimony (which he also mentioned that he made contemporaneous notes & files) he would be in jeopardy of indictment for perjury. He was not, and his testimony stands to this day and is therefore entered on the record as evidence. Try not go off topic so much, it seems to be a chronic ailment and tactic with you at least in this posting.

As for those fearless IRS investigators. Why is it that Gary Shapley refused to testify before the Senate Finance Committee?

IRS ‘whistleblower’ who claimed Hunter Biden case was mishandled won’t cooperate with Senate probe

An Internal Revenue Service criminal investigator who has accused Justice Department officials of slow-walking a long-running probe into President Joe Biden’s son Hunter’s tax affairs has cut off communication with a key congressional committee amid questions about the veracity of his claims and his motivations for coming forward.

The special agent, Gary Shapley, is a veteran of the IRS criminal investigations department who on Thursday revealed his identity in an interview with CBS News.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/irs-whistleblower-gary-shapley-hunter-biden-b2346365.html

He had no problem testifying before a committee run by Republicans but not one run by Democrats. Hmmm...

[Chomper Higgot]

The pushback against the Hunter Biden evidence void allegation confession thing has started.

 

Pretty boy Kushner isn’t going to like it.