An IRS criminal supervisory agent seeking whistleblower protections, has claimed the investigation into Hunter Biden is being mishandled by the Biden administration. The whistleblower’s letter states “clear” conflicts of interest, including by giving the president’s son “preferential treatment,” and says politics are “improperly infecting decisions and protocols that would normally be followed by career law enforcement professionals in similar circumstances if the subject were not politically connected.”
The White House has released its first comment on the matter Thursday, dismissing the allegations, stating President Biden has upheld his commitment to ensure the investigation is “free from any political interference.”
White House spokesman Ian Sams told Fox News Digital on Thursday, “Since he took office and consistent with his campaign promise that he would restore the independence of the Justice Department when it comes to decision-making in criminal investigations, President Biden has made clear that this matter would be handled independently by the Justice Department, under the leadership of a U.S. Attorney appointed by former President Trump, free from any political interference by the White House.”
“He has upheld that commitment,” he added.
The whistleblower’s attorney, Mark D. Lytle of the Washington, D.C.-based law firm Nixon Peabody LLP, wrote to lawmakers in both the House of Representatives and the Senate to say his client has been overseeing the “ongoing and sensitive investigation of a high-profile, controversial subject since early 2020 and would like to make protected whistleblower disclosures to Congress.” The letter was sent to top Republicans and Democrats on the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, the Senate Finance Committee, and the House Ways and Means Committee.
Lytle informed lawmakers that his client has “already made protected disclosures internally at the IRS, through counsel to the U.S. Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, and to the Department of Justice, Office of Inspector General.”
Lytle said the protected disclosures “contradict sworn testimony to Congress by a senior political appointee” and involve “failure to mitigate clear conflicts of interest in the ultimate disposition of the case.”
Lytle also said his client has also detailed examples of “preferential treatment and politics improperly infecting decisions and protocols that would normally be followed by career law enforcement professionals in similar circumstances if the subject were not politically connected.”