House Republicans Accuse Weiss of Giving Hunter Biden ‘Special Privileges,’ Demand Info on Special-Counsel Appointment

The Republican chairmen of three House committees on Monday demanded answers and documents surrounding the Justice Department’s appointment of David Weiss to serve as special counsel in the ongoing Hunter Biden probe, which critics have argued represents a glaring conflict of interest.

Signed by Judiciary committee chairman Jim Jordan, Ways and Means committee chairman Jason Smith, and Oversight committee chairman James Comer, the letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland questions Weiss’s impartiality given his recent history of approving “an unusual plea deal that disintegrated under judicial scrutiny.”

“The Department agreed to an apparently unprecedented plea deal with Hunter Biden after his attorneys threatened to call his father, President Biden, as a witness in the case,” the chairmen wrote in a letter first reported by the Plain Dealer. “Now you have appointed as special counsel an individual who oversaw all the investigation’s irregularities, who spent the past two months claiming that he did not need special counsel status, and who was responsible for the plea agreement that collapsed in court and is widely viewed as an embarrassment for the Department.”

Earlier in August, Garland announced Weiss’s selection, allowing him to continue his investigation into Hunter free from standard Justice Department oversight. Weiss had requested the special counsel authority, which shields him from being forced to testify before the Oversight Committee, and was granted it.

While Weiss maintained publicly that he had the authority to bring charges against Hunter in whatever jurisdiction he felt appropriate, FBI and IRS whistleblowers revealed to Congress several months ago that Weiss privately told them he had been blocked from bringing charges in Washington, D.C.

Just weeks before, a plea deal that Weiss brokered with Hunter Biden’s attorneys collapsed. Under the agreement, Hunter was to plead guilty to misdemeanor tax charges and submit to a diversion agreement related to a felony gun charge in exchange for broad immunity from future charges, including those arising out of the Biden family’s allegedly corrupt overseas business entanglements. Judge Maryellen Noreika challenged the structure and constitutionality of certain provisions in court. She noted that blanket protection from future prosecution was unprecedented, prompting prosecutors to rescind the original deal and offer a more narrow agreement.

Weiss did not offer a thorough description of the immunized crimes but instead implied that everything was covered under the term’s umbrella. “Exhibit A” of the diversion agreement instead included a “statement of facts” of Hunter Biden’s professional ventures and personal pursuits from 2014 to 2019, leaving the reader with the burden of deducing potential serious felonies.

Special counsels are typically brought in from outside the government to ensure impartiality. Weiss, however, will remain in his role as Delaware U.S. Attorney.

Whistleblowers who worked on the Hunter Biden investigation with Weiss identified deviations from standard procedure. Some peculiarities, the chairmen said, included the fact that attorneys from the DOJ’s tax division suggested the removal of Hunter’s name from documents, including subpoenas, and prosecutors at the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Delaware prohibiting IRS and FBI investigators from asking about or referring to “the big guy” or “dad” in witness interviews.

“Since the early days of its investigation concerning Hunter Biden, DOJ has deviated from its standard investigative procedure and afforded Hunter Biden special privileges not afforded to other Americans,” the chairmen wrote. “These deviations took place while Mr. Weiss, with the full support and backing of the Department, oversaw the Hunter Biden investigation as U.S. Attorney—prior to receiving special counsel status.”