A day after testifying on Capitol Hill, IRS whistleblower Joseph Ziegler appeared with CNN’s Jake Tapper to face further questioning.
Ziegler, a registered Democrat who has over a decade of experience as an IRS case agent, laid out the corruption he saw involving the Hunter Biden investigation. At every turn, he and his team were hamstrung, with the DOJ refusing to even allow questions surrounding Joe Biden. Ziegler also testified that interviews of Hunter Biden’s adult children were also placed off limits. Other damning allegations include Hunter Biden’s legal team being tipped off to searches and U.S. Attornies in districts outside of Delaware refusing to allow well-evidenced prosecutions.
Tapper opened his interview with a resounding defense of U.S. Attorney David Weiss. Ziegler pushed back on the framing, noting that he and others were in the room with Weiss when the prosecutor made specific claims.
TAPPER: Right. And the suggestion is that Hunter Biden was given special treatment and the U.S. attorney did not go — proceed as aggressively as he would have had Hunter Biden been someone else.
So David Weiss, as you know, the U.S. attorney, said in a letter to Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan — quote — “I have been granted ultimate authority over this matter, including responsibility for deciding where, when, and whether to file charges.”
I read that earlier. It wasn’t just in this letter. He said it in multiple letters. Do you think he’s not telling the truth?
ZIEGLER: So, it’s not — I don’t know his intentions with what he stated there, but what I can tell you is the facts.
I know, based on conversations I had with assigned prosecutors, that he went to the Washington, D.C., U.S. attorney’s office bringing the case there. They told him no. He had to bring…
TAPPER: He wanted to charge Hunter Biden here in D.C., you mean?
ZIEGLER: So, he wanted to bring the case there in D.C. to charge for the 2014 and 2015 tax years. They told him no.
And I think it’s important that, in his letter, he said that his authority is geographically restricted to the district of Delaware. And if he needs to go outside of that, he needs to ask to partner with these other U.S. attorney’s offices. And if they say no, then he needs to ask for that special attorney authority. And he was assured that.
TAPPER: It’s not counsel authority.
ZIEGLER: No, he says special attorney authority.
TAPPER: Special attorney, OK.
ZIEGLER: And I think it’s important that you understand that they haven’t turned over a document that says, here’s the letter where we gave him the special attorney authority.
And all we’re trying to do is say that, if this were anyone else, if this were Joe Taxpayer, he would be getting a much different treatment than what was at place here.
Tapper tried to bolster Weiss’ clean-up effort by stating that he put it in multiple letters after the fact, yet telling a lie multiple times does not make it any more true. You have not just one, but at least three people (the two IRS whistleblowers and an FBI whistleblower) testifying they were in the room with Weiss when he allegedly said the DOJ denied him special counsel status.
On the other hand, Weiss and the DOJ have played word games in an attempt to counter the whistleblowers. Ziegler noted that neither Weiss nor anyone else at the DOJ has actually produced a letter showing he was given special counsel status.
Tapper next tried to suggest that Hunter Biden didn’t receive special treatment because he was ultimately charged with two misdemeanors.
TAPPER: Well, you’re saying that there would be other charges in other jurisdictions. Is that what I’m taking from this?
ZIEGLER: So, the prosecutors assigned to this case…
TAPPER: Because he was charged. I mean, he did have a plea agreement, and he is going to go before a judge. I mean, it’s not like he’s not facing anything. I’m not excusing it, but I’m just saying there are these allegations and he is going to face a courtroom proceeding, et cetera.
There is ample evidence that Hunter Biden committed multiple tax-related felonies, and that’s not even including other possible crimes like FARA violations. That he ultimately got a sweetheart deal, receiving no jail time (unless the judge ultimately steps in and rejects the plea deal) does not support Tapper’s contention. It actually counters it.
Ziegler made that point in response.
ZIEGLER: So, the four signed prosecutors of the case agreed with recommending felony and misdemeanor tax charges for Hunter Biden. David Weiss also agreed with that. And I know that from a meeting that I had with him in late August, early September.
And on top of that, you have David Weiss essentially — so they all agreed to charging this — the felony and misdemeanor. So DOJ policy on this is that their tax policy is that, if you have a felony with a misdemeanor, you have to charge the felony, and that’s to prevent inequitable treatment of taxpayers.
TAPPER: And they didn’t do that, is what you’re saying?
ZIEGLER: And according to the charging document, they only charged two misdemeanors, and one of those tax years related to 2018.
Tapper then asked Ziegler about Democrat obfuscations regarding Weiss.
TAPPER: So let me just give you an opportunity to respond to some of the things that Democrats on Capitol Hill are saying.
First of all, they’re saying, why would a Trump-appointed U.S. attorney, David Weiss, lie?
ZIEGLER: So I have no idea what his motives or what his beliefs are. All I can do is present the facts to Congress, and it’s for them to determine and the American people and the administration to make the proper decision on how to move forward.
Calling Weiss a “Trump-appointed” U.S. attorney is a red herring. David Weiss is a career prosecutor at the DOJ who was once appointed by Barack Obama as well. There is no evidence that he is a Trump supporter. He was simply a prosecutor in a long list of prosecutors who received a promotion to the position of U.S. attorney under the Trump administration. In no way does that actually demonstrate a lack of bias on his part. In fact, Weiss seems rather chummy with Attorney General Merrick Garland.
Ziegler did the right thing not taking the bait, though. He’s a whistleblower, not a partisan, and speculating on motive isn’t his job.
Tapper then pressed the notion that Hunter Biden’s adult children didn’t need to be interviewed.
TAPPER: So, another — you testified yesterday you wanted to interview President Biden’s grandchildren, Hunter’s grown children, right?
They’re adults. But you we’re told, no, you couldn’t. Even without those interviews, you still had enough evidence, in your view, to recommend charges, because he was deducting things related to them that he wouldn’t be allowed to deduct in his taxes, right?
So you already knew the crime had happened. You didn’t — the argument would be, you don’t need to talk to Hunter’s adult children. You already have the evidence that what he did was wrong. So tell me why that’s not a satisfactory answer.
ZIEGLER: So, when we work our tax cases, and it’s an expense that is deducted for — as a business expense on someone’s tax return, you have to — essentially, they’re presumed that that’s a business expense until you prove that it’s not.
So, part of it is going to the third party to get those records. That’s one step, and then interviewing that person to determine, why was that — why was that expense made? And then a lot of times, those witnesses could lead you to other things. They could lead you to other evidence, expenditures that might have been made related to them.
I’m trying not to turn this article into a rant about Tapper being a hack, but that framing is just ridiculous. What investigator in their right mind leaves evidence on the table because they feel they’ve already got enough other evidence to charge a crime? You always want to bolster your case further and cover every base. Further, as Ziegler notes, when you pursue leads, they can reveal even more crimes that weren’t even on the table. Honestly, I’m just astonished Tapper thought that was a good argument.
Later in the interview, Ziegler was again presented with the idea that the treatment of Hunter Biden isn’t out of the ordinary. He debunked that notion.
TAPPER: Do you know of criminal charges against Hunter Biden that were not filed that, definitively, there is evidence, proof that they should be filed, that he should be facing justice for?
ZIEGLER: So, again, meeting with the attorney, assigned attorneys, we all — and that included Department of Justice tax attorneys, all agreed for felony and misdemeanor tax charges related to 2017, 2018, and 2019.
I didn’t see that in the charging document that was filed in Delaware.
TAPPER: And those charges would have been for, what, undeclared income?
ZIEGLER: So it would have been a false return tax charge. So it’s 72061 and a false — or — I’m sorry — tax evasion, so 7201, so evading your income taxes.
TAPPER: So you tell me, because you’re the expert, not me, is it not possible that, in the dealings with the Hunter Biden attorneys, they just agreed, OK, we will drop this in exchange for a plea of guilty? Because that does happen.
ZIEGLER: So I can tell you there’s a lot of cases around the U.S. right now where people are being charged with both the felony and misdemeanor and not having the felony dropped off.
So I think it’s important that it’s in the — it’s in the — it’s in the tax manual their policy that states that, if you have the felony and you have the evidence there, and there is also a misdemeanor, you have to charge the felony in order to not have an equitable treatment of taxpayers.
Lastly, Tapper suggested that all high-level politicians and their children might be treated the way Hunter Biden was treated.
TAPPER: Do you think that it’s possible that, because this was the president’s son, there were extra sensitivities and extra protocols because of that that would have been extended to an investigation of a Republican president’s son or daughter as well, but — and since this is the highest-profile, biggest, most sensitive investigation you ever were part of, you weren’t used to that, but that really is just generally what happens when it has to do with any powerful family, any powerful — and, again, I’m not excusing it.
But I’m just saying, like, I’m wondering if this is just how, like, the DuPonts would be treated — you know, because you’re from Delaware.
ZIEGLER: No, I’m from Georgia.
Before I get to Zeigler’s full answer, can we just marvel at how shameless that suggestion is? The DOJ had no problem raiding a former president’s home, but we are supposed to believe that not even being able to ask questions about Joe Biden or interview Hunter Biden’s children was normal procedure. No one is going to buy that.
Here’s what Ziegler had to say.
TAPPER: Like, that any powerful family might be treated with kid gloves like this.
Again, I’m not saying that’s right, but maybe that’s what happened.
ZIEGLER: Yes.
And, to that point, I think it’s important that I understood that it was a politically sensitive case. I’m completely aware that he was an attorney. Records had to go through a filter review, so I’m completely aware of all those problems. And that’s why I think it’s important that we have an independent attorney who has authority, so a special counsel, independent attorney, that can get in there and make sure that things are done correctly, and that the proper charges are brought.
That would restore faith in our justice system.
In the end, I think Ziegler navigated the often disingenuous questions well and was able to get the facts out there. He’s obviously a serious person who is speaking out for the right reasons. I just hope his bravery and commitment to his job are rewarded with some accountability.