The prosectutor in the Hunter Biden case said he wasn't the deciding person as to whether to charge the president's son

The prosecutor assigned to the investigation against Hunter Biden has stated that he wasn't the "deciding person" on whether or not to charge the president's son, and the "Main DOJ" has denied his request for special counsel status in Washington, DC: Disclosure of explosive notes by an IRS agent raises even more doubts about the investigation.

In October of 2022, Shapley made the following entry in the notebook: "Weiss stated that he is not the deciding person."

An further FBI agent who was working on the investigation stated that Shapley was incorrect and that no one in authority over Weiss would have told him "no."

In addition, Shapley made a note that the "Main DOJ" turned down Weiss' request for special counsel designation in the District of Columbia.

The back-and-forth takes place only one day after House Speaker Kevin McCarthy initiated an impeachment investigation of President Biden on his own initiative.

Newly leaked notes on the Hunter Biden investigation that were collected by IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley suggest that lead prosecutor David Weiss was refused special counsel status in D.C. by 'Main DOJ,' which raises suspicions about the inquiry being politicized.

The handwritten notes provide evidence that supports Shapley's earlier assertions that Weiss stated that he was not the 'deciding person' on the matter. In addition, they explicitly disprove an opposing assertion that was made by an FBI agent who was also working on Hunter's case.

We were able to receive the handwritten notes that IRS Supervisory Agent Gary Shapley took at a meeting on October 7, 2022 with the United States Attorney for the District of Delaware, David Weiss, who had been chosen as the chief prosecutor on the Hunter case.

He recalls Weiss as saying during the discussion that he was "not the deciding person" on prosecuting Hunter Biden with tax offenses. This raises doubts about whether or not the DOJ may have handled the case in an inappropriate manner. In addition, Shapley made a note that the "Main DOJ" turned down Weiss' request for special counsel designation in the District of Columbia.

After receiving a rebuttal from an FBI agent, the legal representatives for Shapley forwarded a copy of his notes from the meeting to the House Judiciary Committee. The counterclaim said that Weiss had never conceded that he was not the one who decided the case.

On Tuesday, the Washington Post published an account that contradicts the statements made by Shapley by FBI agent Thomas Sobocinski. The narrative was based on a congressional transcript that was acquired. The attorneys for Shapley have stated that Sobocinski's statements are not true.

The back-and-forth takes place only one day after House Speaker Kevin McCarthy unilaterally initiated an impeachment investigation of President Joe Biden for his suspected links to his son's business operations. In addition, as part of this probe, the Republican Party is looking into the possibility of political involvement by the Justice Department in the criminal investigation of Hunter Biden.

The letter written by Shapley's counsel adds, "Yesterday, the Washington Post published a story reportedly based on a transcript it obtained of the Committee's interview of Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Special Agent in Charge Thomas J. Sobocinski."

The letter goes on to say that Sobocinski was one of seven people who attended the meeting that took place on October 7, 2022.

According to statements made by his legal representatives, Shapley sent an email to his chain of command using the notes he had prepared while attending the conference nearly as soon as it had finished.

The House Ways and Means Committee was provided with a copy of Shapley's email from October 7 that provided a detailed account of the events that took place at the meeting. These events included Weiss' comments that he did not have the final judgment on the issue.

"However, it appears that Mr. Sobocinski has admitted that he did not take any notes during the meeting, nor did he document it in any contemporaneous manner after it had concluded." On the other hand, SSA Shapley took notes as the meeting was going on.

The original version of the 'contemporaneous handwritten notes' that includes redactions of information that has not yet been made public by the Ways and Means Committee is included in the document that was attached by Shapley's legal team.

A scribbling concerning a statement that Weiss made during the meeting can be seen in the notes, which have the date 10/7 scribbled in the upper left corner of the page.

In the notepad, Shapley jotted down the following: "Weiss stated: He is not the deciding person."

This obviously contradicts what Sobocinski claimed in his evidence, which was that he would have recalled if Weiss had told him that he was not the person who made the decision.

In the evidence that was acquired first by the Washington Post, Sobocinski stated that he 'never believed that [Weiss] required consent' to pursue charges.

In addition, according to what he believed, Weiss 'had the power to bring anything he needed to accomplish.'

He continued, saying, "I never thought that anybody was there above David Weiss to say no." [Citation needed]

"I went into that meeting believing he had the authority, and I have left that meeting believing he had the authority to bring charges," you say.

Weiss was elevated to the position of special counsel one month after Attorney General Merrick Garland announced the promotion of Weiss to that position.

In the notes that Shapley took, he wrote the following: "Weiss requested Special Counsel status in DC + Main DOJ said 'no.'"

After almost a whole year had passed, Garland made the decision to elevate Weiss to the position of special counsel.

The decision to fire Hunter was made by Garland following rising pressure and reports from an IRS whistleblower that Hunter received'special treatment' throughout the criminal investigation.

For a number of months, Garland had insisted that Weiss has the 'complete power' to pursue charges against Hunter without being constrained by any limitations and in any district.

However, Weiss contradicted himself when he testified before the House Judiciary Committee. At first, he stated that it was his "responsibility to decide where, when, and whether to file charges," but later, he stated that his charging power "is geographically limited to my home district."

In the same letter from July, he also stated that he had not approached Garland about becoming a special counsel.

This contradicts what Shapley has written in his notes, which state that he was turned down for the promotion by the "Main DOJ."

However, given that he now has the position of special counsel, he is able to bring charges against Hunter in any district in the country.

IRS agents Joe Ziegler and Gary Shapley said under oath to House Republicans that their investigation'supported felony and misdemeanor tax charges,' which ultimately were not pursued against the president's son Hunter due to political constraints. This testimony was given in response to questions posed by the Republicans.

They stated that Weiss attempted to pursue criminal charges against him in Washington, D.C., but those attempts were thwarted by the chief federal prosecutor for the district, Matthew Graves, who was appointed by Biden.

During the course of their inquiry, the whistleblowers were warned that they would find themselves in "hot water" if they attempted to talk with any of President Joe Biden's adult children or grandkids. According to the whistleblowers, the "special treatment" that was given to Hunter established a pattern that continued occurring over and over again.

On July 26, Hunter made an appearance in federal court where he was prepared to plead guilty to two tax-related misdemeanor offenses in exchange for a light sentence that would not include any time spent in jail.

The'sweetheart arrangement' that Biden's Department of Justice (DOJ) put up to safeguard the president's son was criticized as unfair by Republicans.

However, once Judge Maryellen Noreika questioned the 'diversion agreement' of Hunter's plea deal, which was a condition that provided him blanket immunity for a wide range of other potential offenses, including unlawful foreign lobbying, the arrangement imploded dramatically. Specifically, the phrase in question gave Hunter immunity from a wide variety of other prospective accusations.

After receiving demands from the prosecution in Delaware a month ago, Noreika dropped all of the accusations against her.

The federal prosecutors suggested that they will prosecute Hunter with a new firearms offense before the end of the month, as was said in a statement that was made public last week.

However, they might potentially file new accusations against him in the future that are connected to his international business operation.