NY Times drops bombshell, confirms key whistleblower allegation directly contradicting Garland's sworn testimony

The New York Times independently confirmed a key whistleblower allegation about the Hunter Biden investigation, but buried the revelation deep in a new story.

Attorney General Merrick Garland insists the Justice Department did not interfere in the investigation and claims U.S. Attorney David Weiss had sole authority to charge Hunter Biden in any district he saw fit. But two IRS whistleblowers alleged under criminal penalty last month that the DOJ slow-walked the probe and hamstrung Weiss.

In one particular allegation, IRS criminal supervisory agent Gary Shapley claims Weiss told six people in a meeting last October that "I'm not the deciding official on whether charges are filed."

Even worse, Shapley explained there was evidence of crimes to bring charges in three districts: Delaware, the Central District of California, and the District of Columbia. But the other two U.S. attorneys, both Biden appointees, didn't play ball.

The Times confirmed this allegation, burying it in the 21st paragraph of a new story:

[I]n mid-2022, Mr. Weiss reached out to the top federal prosecutor in Washington, Matthew Graves, to ask his office to pursue charges and was rebuffed, according to Mr. Shapley’s testimony.

A similar request to prosecutors in the Central District of California, which includes Los Angeles, was also rejected, Mr. Shapley testified. A second former I.R.S. official, who has not been identified, told House Republicans the same story. That episode was confirmed independently to The New York Times by a person with knowledge of the situation.

The bombshell confirmation directly contradicts what Garland said last Friday, and more importantly, it contradicts what he claimed under penalty of perjury.

At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on March 1, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) asked Garland very specific questions about whether Weiss could charge outside his district and whether he had requested special counsel powers.

In response, Garland said:

The United States Attorney had been advised that he has full authority to make those referrals you're talking about or to bring cases in other districts if he needs to do that. He has been advised that he should get anything he needs.

In fact, Grassley eventually asked whether Weiss had been denied from bringing charges against Biden in D.C. and the Central District of California. Garland, though denying intimate knowledge of the situation, claimed that Weiss had not been denied.

Garland later reiterated during that hearing, "[Weiss is] not restricted in his investigation in any way."

Weiss himself told House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R) earlier this month that he held "ultimate authority" over the investigation. Jordan has since asked Weiss to clarify what "ultimate authority" means.

TheBlaze reached out to the Delaware U.S. Attorney's office. A spokesperson declined to comment.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!