There was really only one story in American politics last week. It came with the release of the IRS whistleblower transcripts on Thursday on Thursday by House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith. I wrote about Smith’s press conference in “Is the cover-up unraveling?” and noted the availability of the whistleblower transcripts online. They are posted here (Gary Shapley) and here (witness name redacted, supplemental submission here). These materials can be accessed via the committee press release.
In advance of Chairman Smith’s scheduled press conference, the Biden Department of Justice announced the lenient deal it had arranged for Hunter Biden. With that announcement the Biden team sought to distract from the news it knew was coming. Any intelligent observer would infer that the whistleblower materials are devastating to the defense of President Biden’s representations regarding the Biden family business.
The whistleblower testimony also open several avenues of investigation into the scandal. Washington Free Beacon reporters Chuck Ross, Joe Simonson, and Andrew Kerr compiled a handy list of “16 Bombshells on Hunter Biden From The IRS Whistleblowers.” For “Hunter Biden,” read “the Biden family business.”
John Hinderaker posted the emails that powerfully undermine the story of the supposed independence of prosecutor David Weiss, the meritless Merrick Garland to the contrary notwithstanding. They are included in John’s post here. Chuck Ross addresses this element of the story in “This IRS Email Corroborates Whistleblower’s Claims About Biden DOJ Interference in Hunter Probe.”
Garland subsequently proclaimed that to question his line on this point is to attack the Department of Justice (video below) and, indeed, to attack democracy itself. One might translate Garland’s point into the apocryphal formulation attributed to Louis XIV: le département, c’est moi. Or better yet: la démocratie, c’est moi. Any intelligent observer would infer that Garland is full of it.
The testimony of the IRS whistleblowers outlines the suppression of the investigation into the Biden family business. Any intelligent observer would infer that the powers that be are helping Biden — Joe Biden, that is — hide something seriously incriminating, just as they did in the matter of Hunter Biden’s laptop.
If the New York Times and Washington Post wanted to do their thing to a Democratic president, it would be over. They would tap into their sources in the deep state on a daily basis and trumpet their leaks.
I’m not optimistic on that front. Timesman Nicholas Kristof seems to have a somewhat deficient nose for news. Indeed, he has given us a triumph of self-parody, MSM style. Putting it colloquially, he doesn’t get it. He doesn’t want to get it.
The real meaning of the Hunter Biden saga, as I see it, isn't about presidential corruption, but is about how widespread addiction is–and about how a determined parent with unconditional love can sometimes reel a child back: https://t.co/NvxVLECZvF That can give others hope.
— Nicholas Kristof (@NickKristof) June 24, 2023
My point here, and I do have one, is this. You may have wondered where those whistleblower emails came from. They are embedded in the transcript of Gary Shapley’s testimony along with other relevant exhibits. Scroll through the transcript of Shapley’s testimony here. The emails are Shapley Exhibit 10 following page 148 of the transcript. They are discussed in the pages immediately following page 148 and at pages 178-179. Shapley attorney Mark Lytle has now added the pertinent statement below.
IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley testified that US Atty in charge of Hunter investigation, David Weiss, said he wanted to bring charges in DC but was denied. Many of you balked. Didn't happen! No way Shapley could know that! Now, here's some more from Shapley: pic.twitter.com/m2Z8nUqEeU
— Byron York (@ByronYork) June 25, 2023
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.