Former DOJ tax enforcement official Eileen J. O’Connor didn’t mince words this week when addressing the perceived mishandling of the Hunter Biden probe. She spoke openly of her astonishment at IRS whistleblower testimonies. She highlighted her deep-seated concerns surrounding the integrity of the investigation.
O’Connor’s reaction was spurred by the testimony of IRS whistleblowers, suggesting both Attorney General Merrick Garland and IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel misled Congress concerning the Hunter Biden probe. O’Connor credits Special Agent Shapley for his bravery in bringing these allegations to light, a move that underscores the necessity of transparency in upholding justice.
Attorney reveals 'jaw-dropping' Hunter Biden information
Attorney Eileen J. O'Connor breaks down the investigation into the president's son on 'Jesse Watters Primetime.'
https://t.co/VoVE1W3E6o #FoxNews— JOHN NOBLE (@JOHNNOB35752453) June 29, 2023
The twist lies in the statements by U.S. Attorney David Weiss, who professed he was not the deciding authority regarding the decision to charge Hunter Biden. This stark contradiction to Garland’s previous claims under oath raises pressing questions about the operation and validity of the entire probe.
There’s an element of urgency to this matter that’s amplified by the Justice Department’s announcement on June 20. Hunter Biden would plead guilty to two misdemeanor tax charges, with a separate felony charge relating to the purchase of a firearm dealt with via a pre-trial diversion program. According to O’Connor, that agreement should be relegated to the “trash can.”
This plea deal, due to be presented in late July, represents a disturbing turn of events, considering the extensive taxable income reportedly received by Hunter Biden in 2017 and 2018. O’Connor cites IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley’s account of “roadblocks” he faced while investigating Biden, which served only to compound her concerns and make clear the inadequacies of the current agreement.
The deep-seated implications of the alleged misconduct are clear. The DOJ’s apparent reluctance to allow IRS agents to pursue the evidence could have led to a statute of limitations expiration for 2014 and 2015. Furthermore, in O’Connor’s opinion, Garland’s failure to designate Weiss as special counsel essentially assured Biden’s exemption from prosecution for his alleged tax crimes.
Supporting O’Connor’s stance, former Director of National Intelligence and U.S. Attorney John Ratcliffe weighed in. He suggested that the presiding judge reject the plea, given the need for all of the defendant’s conduct to be taken into account.
As the July 26 hearing approaches, the plea deal hangs in the balance. Yet, what the public craves is not just a decisive action on Hunter Biden’s fate but a comprehensive examination of what allowed this complex judicial scenario to evolve.
This ongoing narrative only accentuates the role of informed citizens in ensuring the smooth operation of our government. The need for transparency and accountability in public offices is pivotal. This case serves as a potent reminder of the importance of robust oversight mechanisms in maintaining the integrity of our institutions and trust in our justice system.
