(Ken Silva, Headline USA) The Judiciary Committee has sued to Justice Department lawyers for refusing to comply with congressional subpoenas issued in its ongoing investigation into whether the DOJ gave Hunter Biden preferential treatment.
The Judiciary Committee’s lawsuit, filed Thursday, stems from the DOJ treating the President’s son with kid gloves when investigating his alleged tax crimes.
As the lawsuit notes, in the spring of 2023, two IRS whistleblowers who were intimately involved in that investigation came forward and exposed several ways that DOJ had deviated from its standard processes during the Hunter Biden investigation.
Several months later, a DOJ prosecutor admitted that DOJ had offered Hunter Biden a diversion agreement that was unlike any other he was aware of: an agreement that, as judge presiding over Hunter’s trial said, would have given him broad immunity over “crimes that have nothing to do with the case or the charges being diverted.”
Now, the Judiciary Committee is seeking to depose Mark Daly and Jack Morgan, two current or former Tax Division attorneys who purportedly have firsthand knowledge of the irregularities in DOJ’s investigation.
The Judiciary Committee said in its lawsuit that Daly and Morgan initially agreed that DOJ should file charges for tax crimes related to 2014 and 2015. “But months later, they gave a key presentation and argued just the opposite—that Hunter Biden should not be charged for tax crimes related to those years,” the committee said.
“Daly and Morgan are thus crucial to the Committee’s investigation,” the committee said. “After DOJ refused to make Daly and Morgan available for voluntary interviews with the Committee, the Committee subpoenaed them to appear for depositions. But they defied the Subpoenas because their employer, DOJ, directed them not to appear.”
The Judiciary Committee is seeking a court order for Daly and Morgan to comply with its subpoenas.
The committee’s lawsuit follows a similar lawsuit filed last month against Elvis Chan, the assistant special agent in charge of the FBI’s cyber branch in San Francisco, who was a key FBI official involved in pressuring social media companies to censor content.
That lawsuit was filed after Chan repeatedly refused to be interviewed by the committee.
“Neither Chan nor DOJ has disputed that the Committee’s investigation is lawful. Nor have they disputed that Congress has the authority to pass legislation addressing the topic of the Committee’s investigation. Indeed, multiple other Executive Branch officials have appeared before the Committee as part of its inquiry,” said the lawsuit, which is ongoing.
“Rather, DOJ has directed Chan to defy the Committee’s Subpoena only because, under House Rules, agency counsel (a lawyer who represents the Executive Branch’s interests, not Chan’s) cannot attend.”
Ken Silva is a staff writer at Headline USA. Follow him at twitter.com/jd_cashless.
