The Republican-led House Judiciary Committee filed a lawsuit on Thursday against a pair of Department of Justice officials alleged to have defied subpoenas relating to the department’s prosecution of President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden.
The civil complaint, filed in a Washington federal court, seeks a judge’s order compelling DOJ tax division attorneys Mark Daly and Jack Morgan to testify before the House committee. The committee is specifically seeking answers about decisions made within the DOJ that allowed the statute of limitations to lapse on potential charges that might have been brought against Hunter Biden related to his 2014 and 2015 tax filings.
The House Judiciary Committee, led by Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), has sought testimony from the two DOJ tax division attorneys for months. According to the complaint, Mr. Daly and Mr. Morgan were present for multiple discussions about potential tax charges that could be brought against Mr. Biden, including a June 2022 meeting at which they were described as advocating against charging the president’s son with tax violations for the 2014 and 2015 tax years.
Did President Biden Sway Investigations Into His Son?
The Judiciary Committee first reached out in June 2023, asking the DOJ to make Mr. Daly and Mr. Morgan available for interviews. According to the complaint, the DOJ appeared to attempt to sidestep the request for Mr. Daly and Mr. Morgan’s testimony, instead offering up an interview of Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss, who led up the investigation of the president’s son. In July, the DOJ reportedly said its policy is to ensure “that appropriate supervisory personnel, rather than line attorneys and agents, answer Congressional questions.”
Judiciary Committee Republicans were not satisfied with being limited to Mr. Weiss’s testimony and instead continued to press for answers directly from Mr. Daly and Mr. Morgan. The DOJ reportedly agreed to make some other officials available for Congressional interviews, but not Mr. Daly and Mr. Morgan.
By September the Republican-led House committee issued its first round of subpoenas for the two tax division attorneys. According to the complaint, testimony from Mr. Daly and Mr. Morgan is crucial to an ongoing impeachment inquiry of President Biden and his family and could help lawmakers “determine whether President Biden abused his power by obstructing, or attempting to obstruct the DOJ investigation into his son.”
Mr. Weiss had initially pursued charges against Mr. Biden in Delaware and, for a time, there appeared to be an agreement made by which the president’s son would plead guilty to two misdemeanor tax charges and enter into a pre-trial diversion program to avoid a conviction on allegations he lied about his drug use when filing out a federal firearm purchase form.
Republicans cast doubt on this initial plea arrangement, in which Mr. Biden appeared unlikely to see prison time, calling it a “sweetheart deal.” Republicans have argued further that Mr. Weiss was limited in his ability to pursue a more extensive set of charges against the president’s son.
There had been some debate about Mr. Weiss’s ability to pursue certain charges outside Delaware until Attorney General Merrick Garland granted him special counsel status in August. Mr. Weiss has since brought a more expansive set of tax charges against Mr. Biden in California. Mr. Weiss is also actively pursuing separate criminal charges in Delaware, alleging Mr. Biden lied about his drug use on a federal firearm purchase form and possessed a firearm for a period of time when his drug use would have made him a prohibited person under federal law.
Committee Battled DOJ Over Presence of Agency Lawyers
After the House Judiciary Committee issued its first round of subpoenas in September, the DOJ allegedly reached out to the committee, expressing concerns about “a few timing conflicts.” According to the complaint, “after some back-and-forth,” the DOJ admitted there hadn’t actually been any scheduling conflicts.x
On Oct. 24, a personal attorney for Mr. Daly told the Committee his client would be willing to testify before Congress on Oct. 26 so long as the DOJ did not object. On Oct. 25, the DOJ allegedly directed Mr. Daly not to obey the subpoena and to skip the Oct. 26, hearing. The DOJ is alleged to have told Mr. Daly the hearing couldn’t go through because agency counsel could not accompany him.
Mr. Morgan had also obtained personal representation and was initially set to testify before Congress on Nov. 6, but the DOJ similarly intervened in his case, arguing that agency counsel ought to be present for his testimony.
On Dec. 13, the House passed resolutions formalizing the impeachment inquiry focused on President Biden and his family. The complaint states one resolution, H.R. 917, affirmed the subpoena powers of the House Judiciary, Oversight, and Ways and Means Committees.
The House Judiciary Committee sent a second round of subpoenas on Feb. 22, seeking March 1 depositions.
The complaint states that while the House Committee’s majority doesn’t believe the DOJ has a right to demand agency counsel be present, they would allow an “extraordinary accommodation,” by which agency counsel could remain physically present just outside the Committee room during the deposition and allow Mr. Daly and Mr. Morgan to recess at any time to confer with agency lawyers before returning to their interview. The arrangement did not appear to satisfy the DOJ, and on Feb. 29, the department directed Mr. Daly and Mr. Morgan not to attend their deposition the next day.
NTD News reached out to the DOJ for comment about the lawsuit, but did not receive a response by press time.
