Three House committees say the Justice Department bent its own rules for Hunter Biden. In an interim staff report released December 5, the Judiciary, Oversight and Accountability, and Ways and Means committees, all under Republican control, argue that the department gave the president’s son preferential treatment during its criminal investigation of him.
The report is titled “The Justice Department’s Deviations from Standard Processes in its Investigation of Hunter Biden.” It is the committees’ account of their findings so far, and the allegations in it are theirs, not established facts.
The whistleblowers
The inquiry grew out of two IRS whistleblowers who went to Congress in the spring of 2023. They said the Justice Department had impeded, delayed and obstructed the case, and that it had departed from the normal process in ways that favored Hunter Biden. According to the committees, they described how prosecutors let the statute of limitations run out on certain charges, barred line investigators from mentioning President Biden in witness interviews, and held back evidence from those investigators. They also said the investigative team was shut out of meetings with defense lawyers, and that defense counsel was tipped off about pending search warrants.
On September 12, 2023, the Speaker of the House told the committees to examine whether grounds existed to impeach the president. A memorandum followed on September 27 setting out three lines of inquiry: foreign money received by the Biden family, Joe Biden’s involvement in the family’s foreign business dealings, and steps the administration took to slow or hamper the case against Hunter Biden.
What the committees say they found
For the third strand, the committees have collected hundreds of pages of documents from the whistleblowers and held transcribed interviews with ten officials from the Justice Department, FBI and IRS. Among them were Special Counsel and Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss, D.C. U.S. Attorney Matthew Graves, and Central District of California U.S. Attorney E. Martin Estrada. FBI agent Thomas Sobocinski and IRS field operations director Michael Batdorf were also interviewed.
The report says witnesses described the case as “sensitive” or “significant,” and that department officials slow-walked it and let the limitations period lapse on the most serious potential charges. The committees say several witnesses called these tactics unusual and in some cases unprecedented.
They also say Weiss lacked “ultimate authority” over the case, contrary to what he told Congress. Witnesses told them he had to win agreement from other U.S. attorneys to bring cases outside his own district and needed approval from the department’s Tax Division for particular charges or investigative steps.
The report further charges that after the whistleblowers came forward, the department worked with Hunter Biden’s lawyers on a plea deal so lopsided it collapsed in open court. When a federal judge rejected it, Attorney General Merrick Garland named Weiss special counsel and declined to answer questions, citing an “ongoing investigation.” The committees say that label has been used to limit testimony and document production.
What is still missing
The committees say the department has not fully complied with their requests. They accuse it of blocking two Tax Division officials, Senior Litigation Counsel Mark Daly and Trial Attorney Jack Morgan, from testifying despite subpoenas.
The inquiry continues. The committees say they will keep gathering evidence to decide whether to draft articles of impeachment against President Biden for the full House.
