Hunter Biden Sues the IRS
I can’t help but wonder whether the lawsuits Abbe Lowell is filing on behalf of Hunter Biden are preparation for an assault on the criminal charges against the President’s son.
Last week, for example, Lowell alleged that Garrett Ziegler had criminally hacked an iPhone encrypted on “the laptop” and had altered information on it. Whatever else the lawsuit will do, it will establish that DOJ chose to charge a non-violent recovering addict for owning a gun for 11 days in 2018, but has yet to do anything about the people who’ve serially compromised the digital life of the President’s son.
Lowell already has a bunch of other information to substantiate a selective prosecution case. But if he can demonstrate that DOJ ignored more serious felonies while still pursuing Hunter, it would only add to the evidence.
Today, Lowell sued the IRS for the media tour that Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler have conducted since April, enumerated as follows (note, this only includes live appearances; Tristan Leavitt has made obviously problematic claims to print journalists as well):
Attorney A’s public statements in a letter to the Committee on Ways and Means on April 19, 2023.
Attorney A’s public statements to Mr. Solomon of John Solomon Reports on April 19, 2023.
Attorney A’s public statements to Mr. Axelrod of CBS News on April 19, 2023.
Attorney A’s public statements to Mr. Baier of Fox News on April 20, 2023.
Mr. Shapley’s public statements to Mr. Axelrod of CBS News on May 24, 2023.
Mr. Shapley’s public statements to Mr. Baier of Fox News on June 28, 2023.
Mr. Shapley’s public statements to Mr. Axelrod of CBS News on June 28, 2023.
Mr. Shapley’s public statements to Mr. Solomon of John Solomon Reports on June 29, 2023.
Mr. Ziegler’s public statements to Jake Tapper of CNN on July 20, 2023.
Mr. Shapley and Mr. Ziegler’s public statements to Megyn Kelly of the Megyn Kelly Show on July 20, 2023.
Attorney B’s public statements to Mr. Solomon of John Solomon Reports on July 21, 2023.
Mr. Ziegler’s public statements to John Solomon of John Solomon Reports on July 24, 2023.
Attorney A’s public statements to Martha MacCallum of Fox News on July 26, 2023.
Attorney A’s public statements on Fox News on July 31, 2023.
Mr. Shapley’s public statements to Kaitlan Collins of CNN on August 11, 2023.
While statute permits and Hunter Biden did ask for punitive damages, ultimately he only asked for attorneys fees and $1,000 per disclosure — just $15,000 for this listed disclosures, as well as a program to ensure that IRS uphold the Privacy Act.
He’s not going to get rich with this lawsuit.
But Lowell also asked for all information in the IRS’ possession relating to these disclosures.
Ordering Defendant to produce to Mr. Biden all documents in its possession, custody, or control regarding the inspection, transmittal, and/or disclosure of Mr. Biden’s confidential tax return information;
If successful, this request would generate a good deal of information about the IRS tracking of these leaks (and any earlier ones). It might provide proof, in the form of metadata, showing when the IRS agents accessed this information and under what circumstances, including Ziegler’s overt promise to go back and find more data in response to demands from members of Congress. It might obtain information on the IRS’ own investigation of this leaking.
If DOJ is going to charge Hunter with tax charges, they’re going to need to present the investigation as conducted by Shapley and Ziegler — a point Abbe Lowell made in a letter to David Weiss last month.
Among other ways, these agents, sill employed by the Government, would likely be witnesses should any tax charge you file ever be tried. It is unprecedented for Government officials who are the investigators or prosecutors in the case and would be witnesses and rial counsel to conduct themselves in this manner which seks to try the issues in the court of public opinion rather than properly in a court of law. That conduct itself (in addition to the various other infirmities with the Government attempting to bring charges against Mr. Biden26) would support dismissal of any charges you have fled or would try to so file in the future.27
26 To be clear, we do not believe the Government could validly bring charges against our client concerning these issues given the express language of he agreed-upon Diversion Agreement.
27 Courts recognize that the crime of leaking or disclosing such information by Government agents sworn to uphold the law is often more egregious than the crimes those agents are charged with investigating. See, e.g., United States v. Walters, No. 17. 2373 (2d Cir. Dec. 4, 2018) Jacobs, J. concurring) ([Tlhe leak of grand jury tesimony in some respects more egregious than anything [Defendant] did (insider wading) — the FB supervisor took an oath to uphold the law and was acting in a supervisory capacity to discharge an important public function.” (emphasis ddd).
Again, on top of all the other things Lowell could point to to substantiate a claim that Hunter was being selectively prosecuted, Lowell might ask why Hunter is being prosecuted but not Shapley and Ziegler.
For five years, the government has (apparently) chosen to relentlessly pursue pickayune charges against Hunter Biden while ignoring the crimes committed to try to set up those charges.
And Abbe Lowell may be preparing to make that case in the case of any trial.
The inclusion of two guys with the last name Ziegler as shady characters ratfucking Hunter Biden (one of whom was anonymous for some time) has made this story confusing. The writers are messing with us.
Does anyone know if either of these Zieglers is related to Bridget Ziegler, one of the Moms for “Liberty” founders? She’s married to Florida Republican Party Chairman Christian Ziegler.
As par for the Ziegler field Follies
In Pare 27, is the “insider wading” in the original? Or is the Martha Stewart crime wave of yore implied?
I’ve not heard of an insider trading charge against Hunter; I think that phrase is describing his “illusion of access” to Joe in pitches, etc, that he engaged in.
Its not HB being mentioned re. insider trading, its
an example of “disclosing such information by Government agents sworn to uphold the law [being] more egregious than the crimes those agents are charged with investigating.” from United States v. Walters, No. 17. 2373 (2d Cir. Dec. 4, 2018 per Lowell’s filing.
Comparing to the original (see link here: https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/09/15/after-threats-elicited-by-gary-shapleys-misleading-testimony-hunter-biden-prosecutors-reneged-on-the-plea-deal/) (and copying and pasting into Word), I think it’s twitchy OCR.
Which would also explain all the missing ts. Because otherwise “rial counsel” has a funny meaning regarding Iranian currency.
I read the original Lowell filing and as near as I could tell it was 100% spelling and grammatically correct like a relic from pre digital, fire the underlings America.
Why are people in these comment sections so mind numbingly concerned about minor typos? It is maddening. The contentment matters, not some innocuous typo.
Is that what you really ment? ;-)
Not at owl.
Yes.
I’m content with that.
Lol, that’s what I ment.
It’s missing a t: it’s supposed to be ‘insider twading’.
It is a ‘vewy vewy quiet’ t.
When I read “insider wading,” I delightfully imagined stepping barefoot into a black cavern’s pool.
Isn’t that what Boebert and date were committing in the theater?
Reading about Abbe Lowell reminds me of something said by Bob Hamman, America’s multiple winner of contract bridge world championships and considered one of the greatest players of all time, when asked about the diference in playing regular tournaments compared to the major championships: About the major championships, Hamman said, “We play hardball here.”
To the dismay of those involved in the prosecution of Hunter Biden, it seems Abbe Lowell also plays hardball here.
Are you a serious bridge player?
(Sorry, don’t mean to digress from the topic… I just love bridge…)
I am a used to be.
Where’s Rayne now?
What’s the sitch? Besides OldTulsaDude forgetting his name and going all lower case?
Sorry, I was on Iphone and forgot to capitalize. I wondered why my e-mail had stopped self-filling.
I keep trying to teach every group of friends I make. Addicted since childhood, learned from reading the column in the Chicago Sun-Tumes.
Sun-Times.
Got so excited about contract bridge my fingers were jumping.
I could be wrong (first time for everything!!!) but this strikes me as not-to-be-taken-lightly shot across Weiss’ bow, warning what (not may, but…) will happen if he tries to bring tax charges.
May serve two purposes, first as a message to Weiss. Second, putting the IRS on notice that they will not wait for their IG’s to issue a report on a later date that whitewashes the whole affair.
Nothing will happen to Weiss for bringing the charges. However, one thing that comes out of these cases that Lowell has been filing is the discovery process which will no doubt be highly embarrassing to certain characters in the previous administration’s orbit.
This episode has Roger Stone’s stench all over it, for example, and the decision-making machinery will become more apparent not just for Hunter’s team but also Jack Smith’s team as well..
So, not only will we see more people join Garrett Ziegler in the barrel on the civil side (incompetence isn’t actionable but illegality such as hacking is something to be sued over) but Lowell discovery process will essentially eviscerate any substance that Weiss might have for his charges.
Selective prosecution can be cited, perhaps, but if the supporting evidence to bring Weiss’ charges are all barred from the trial for search / custody / traceability / etc. violations the cases against Hunter collapse without the selective prosecution claim being needed.
Any discovery would be no time remotely soon. There will be a motion to dismiss filed including a demand for civil immunity, and that will be a bigger argument than most probably think. Only after that is litigated would there be discovery.
I’m actually waiting for some Speedy Trial issue to hit the docket.
In the civil IRS case? There 21 days to respond to a civil complaint. Could probably be extended a little before default would be contemplated. But in this case I suspect the government will file a 12b6 motion to dismiss, which would get litigated before an answer is even required.
Whoever above said it was a shot across the bow at Weiss is probably right. Lowell is setting the stage for the future. And doing so quite well, the complaint is really good work.
No. The gun case.
They’re fighting over whether Hunter has to show up in person for initial hearing. Which I assume is a pissing contest over whether this is a civil case challenging the indictment or an actual indictment.
Ah, okay, thought the IRS civil case was the topic. But, yes, he should have to appear initially, even if by remote video.
I’ve been thinking about that gun case. Has Hunter ever been arrested for drugs? This would be before he filled out the application.
Apparently Hunter has admitting to using illitcite drugs, and then checked the box that he is not using drugs (as many gun toting owners have previously done before) on a gun application form. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/11/us/politics/hunter-biden-legal-troubles-timeline.html
It appears that he was caught testing positive for cocaine and discharged by the Naval Reserve, but was not indicted for drugs in the past.
I asked, because the judge asked Hunter’s lawyers specifically if he was aware that one of the agreed immunities he was getting would be for no future prosecution(s) for any drug related charges for that time period. Now she could have asked that as a matter of course, but a drug charge with physical proof as evidence would cause real problems for the defense. Especially if they can nail a specific time and date the offense(s) occurred (both before and after), instead of a vague notion of it occurring. It’s sort of like arresting you for driving under the influence based solely on you bragging on a video where you stated that you did. No breathalyzer, no roadside test, no lab results, no pulling you over while actually driving under the influence.
Especially given the modest damages request, I’m kinda curious at what point/whether IRS leadership might ever welcome such a suit as aiding internal means toward disciplining/ridding themselves of problem agents? Along those lines, while I’m unsure the office who’d respond here (whether the DC USAO or Main Justice civil division), having a separate case with the potential to ultimately reach a discovery phase, where the office(s) overseeing that discovery are outside of David Weiss’ control, seems a strategically meaningful reseeding of the grounds.
” I’m kinda curious at what point/whether IRS leadership might ever welcome such a suit as aiding internal means toward disciplining/ridding themselves of problem agents? ”
Oh boy, is this a can of worms. It’s a perfectly valid question. Keep in mind however if Trump or an R is elected president everyone in the civil service will be considered a probable “problem agent” and for starters 50,000 of them are, according to the plan, going to lose Civil Service status.
We are talking then that in 16 months you may be out of a job, or worse. If huge swaths of Civil Service employees are not doing some strategic planning around that they are making a big mistake. This is all worst case scenario stuff but It needs mention. And let’s not forget there is plenty of MAGA within the Civil Service. Is there some much higher level of personal and political distrust in the Civil Service any level now? How could there not be. Doesn’t anyone talk out of school?
It would also do well to consider that millions of MAGA’s believe down to their bones that most everyone in Government on any level is a “problem employee”, woke in the parlance of the day. Best to let Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler be discredited or not in the public arena and leave it at that.
To your point, ‘problem agent’ is whatever the administration says it is, and FWI let’s not forget the Schedule F play made at the end of the prior administration.
Essentially that would bring back the spoils system at best, which was a direct cause of Garfield’s assassination in 1881.
Depends on whether Shapley or Zeigler committed a crime or should be subject to dismissal for their conduct.
Lol, anytime I see Shapley’s name, I think of the character Oscar Shapeley in It Happened One Night.
And for anybody here who has never seen It Happened One Night, you absolutely should, it is one of the greatest movies ever.
More so if you ever hitchhiked.
Just terrific.
Not until I hear the walls of Jericho come tumbling down. :-)
Believe you me!
You have to admit, Colbert was better at hitching rides than Gable.
And good thing it was pre-code, or that blanket-on-a-clothesline would have been a brick wall, as in Butch and Sundance in Bolivia with Etta.
12b6 is failure to state a claim, right? I understand that they can do that. Any defendant in a federal civil case can. But the government isn’t just any defendant. They created the mechanism for taxpayers to be able to sue. Arguing that a complaint that tracks the statutory language like this one does “fails to state a claim” is just gross.
Oh, I would do it in a heartbeat.
Interesting point, in that for suing a governmental entity in CA one must be denied justice using the redress process such as arbitration or administrative hearing. If that fails to correct the issue, then litigation is permitted at that point.
Since a process does exist for tax issues, does the same concept apply at the federal level?
You folks are the pros, and I’m not even sure that nesting blockquotes works – apparently we can’t edit our posts any more – but here goes nothing.
As I read the “it might”s, I found myself wondering, “but what if it doesn’t?”.
I’m sure the IRS was told lots of things, but it will be interesting to see if there are at least a few things the “whistleblowers” said the IRS knew, but that that the search inside the IRS doesn’t confirm.
If the “whistleblowers” got out in front of what the IRS had been told, and they can’t prove that “the IRS knew this and sat on it, so we had no choice but to go public”, I wonder what happens next. For example: does that mean they can’t shield themselves as whistleblowers, on those specific claims?
It’s unfortunate that the government was bent to the will of Defendant-1 with all kinds of RW characters inside the civil service. Some are Bushies, some are EJ Hooverites (looking at you SDNY FBI, for example) out to bag some DFHs, and there are doubtless a few in the IRS as well.
All of them will try to avoid being exposed in the discovery process to come even on bmaz’s time line. The Biden administration on the other hand may decide to come clean to help purge out the burrowers but there are a lot of moving pieces here, too many to engage in wishful thinking about how soon the discovery gets out.
Am I correct that Weiss can’t proceed without Lowell getting his discovery, either as docs or as rulings denying them?
No, he is now a “Special Counsel”, he can do whatever he wants. But don’t conflate the civil with the criminal case, they are truly different.
And does the current state of legal wrangling in the Hunter arena qualify as “In the weeds? This is some convoluted, and mirey shit when looked at as a whole. .
I wonder if Garland would have been a better Justice than he’s been an AG? That it’s taking lawsuits to get all this obvious, rampant sketchiness looked at is disturbing. FBI agents have called out S&Z’s (under oath) misrepresentations (themselves under oath) for chrissake. And that’s just the S&Z aspect of it.
They’re blowing something, but it’s not whistles.
Garland was fine as a judge. He has not made a good AG.
In order to appear unbiased, Garland avoided investigating the instigator of the insurrection for a year, only opening up an investigation after Schiff and Raskin publicly shamed him.
Garland should have known the history here. Implicating Joe through Hunter was Trump’s election strategy in 2020. After TFG was elected the first thing he did was to get Rudy over to Ukraine looking for dirt on Hunter. For the last five years, Hunter has been the focus of the House GOP caucus.
So Weiss asked to be special counsel and Garland went along. He gave Weiss wide leeway to investigate, with no controls to keep him from pressing his investigation, Starr-like, into Joe.
I expect Weiss to stretch out the investigation as close to the election as possible, and then hand over an innuendo-filled evidence-free besmirching of both Bidens.
We’ve seen how Republican Special Counsels go. From Mueller’s weakness through to Durham’s perfidy, these Republican holdovers have knifed us repeatedly. Joe also has a Comey-like situation with Wray at the FBI.
I was very upset with the special counsel Garland named for the documents Joe found in storage. Special Counsel Robert Hur should act soon. We deserve to know why his investigation into the documents hasn’t concluded. Mike Pence’s extremely similar case was resolved 3 1/2 months ago.
[Welcome to emptywheel. Please use the same username and email address each time you comment so that community members get to know you. (I point this out because there is a possibility your email address contains a typo.) Thanks. /~Rayne]
Your opening is absolute bullshit. DOJ opened the J6 investigation immediately. Schiff, Raskin and the all holy “J6 Committee” not only did not embarrass Garland, they hindered DOJ’s efforts. By the way, who are “us” Kemosabe?
We don’t hear much about the original investigation into Hunter “Sportsman” Biden. I have to wonder if that might have anything to do with other well-known persons identified in that foreign porn ring, or if was a non-starter that served as the vehicle look at other aspects of Hunter Biden’s life. Discovery should shed light on why that part has gone dormant.
Are they perhaps trying to set up a trap using discovery on civil cases to demonstrate Brady violations in the criminal cases, as well as any selective prosecution and undue political influence considerations?
NAL so I could be totally off base.
Just speculating, but if IRS launches and internal investigation into the conduct of the two agents, could they argue for a delay in case the results of such an investigation rendered some parts of the suit moot?
TIGTA (IRS’ IG) was alaready investigating, as is DOJ IG. This is a way to say they’re going to come after the results.
By these IRS agents’ logic – it was proper to release Hunter’s personal tax information because they did it through a whistleblower process – then some IRS whistleblower could similarly release Trump’s tax information to the public via a Senate committee, no?
Marcy touched on your question in her article that follows.
She suggests within the IRS whistleblowers here only claimed that status after their actions had them removed from the case. I might be adding to what Marcy says but the implication is that they also feared internal investigation so they claimed to be acting in the public interest. At the same time they have been suspiciously refusing to provide their own documents which would ordinarily be turned over without any delay.
https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/07/01/republican-house-chairmen-are-resorting-to-immunizing-crimes-to-gin-up-their-fake-scandals/
Never posted here before but wondered (since yours is the only website where I’ve seen anyone be consistently skeptical of the story surrounding the “laptop” and its origins) if you caught this report on pro-Trump bias in the FBI.
https://www.businessinsider.com/fbi-whistleblower-exposes-alleged-pro-trump-bias-at-the-bureau-2023-8
If the link doesn’t work, it’s about an agent named Johnathon Buma who was told to stop investigating Giuliani right after they grabbed up everything they could on Hunter Biden.
Pretty sure you’ll see something published here soon in reference to Buma — stay tuned.
And welcome to emptywheel!
is Buma in for a close shave?
I dunno but it may yet become clear what the Mission of Buma is. And when it does… that’s when I reach for my revolver?
[Moderator’s note: Let’s avoid references to taking action in the form of violence. /~Rayne]
“That’s When I Reach for My Revolver” is a well-known song by Mission of Burma, probably their most well-known one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaQqshZbtEQ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/That's_When_I_Reach_for_My_Revolver
So much so that it was (in)famously covered by Moby:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Nt5by-TsUw
[Moderator’s note: This is a perfect example of why including a source link in the original post would have better. /~Rayne]
MoB is one of my favorite bands. Saw them twice in tiny venues in Somerville and will never forget those sweaty, raucous nights. I haunted record stores looking for “That’s when I reach…” until I found it on vinyl. Still have it.
I’m so old.
They’re also one of my favorites, though I didn’t get to see them until they reunited. But when that happened, I saw them multiple times and even got to work on the reissue campaigns about 15+ years ago. And I did see R.E.M. cover “Academy Fight Song” at, of all places, Rupp Arena in 1989.
Good song – how did I never hear of this group? At first blush, kind of reminds me of a slightly rougher-edged Plimsouls.
When I was younger it was nearly impossible to find any of their records outside of New England, though there was a Rykodisc compilation available for a good chunk of the late 80s and early 90s. I heard of them via other bands like R.E.M. covering them long before I actually heard ’em.
Comfortable shoes, those.
Heh, just for you and Rayne. Here is a Burma Shave post I did over 15 years ago.
linky-dink?
This might be it:
https://www.emptywheel.net/2008/05/06/burma-shave-bush-busts-out-a-compassion-beard/
Hi Everyone!
My computer broke, and we moved.
I missed you! Glad to be back. :-)
Merci, harpie1
good luck with move and tech.
Crikey, thought inserted it. Operator error apparently. Sadly the cool graphics in the original did not transfer with the text. Those old road signs were awesome. And, again, welcome home!
I scoffed out loud just now. I don’t know why I didn’t expect that one.
Roll, Crime–son Tied!
Learn to work the ballot box
And I’ll cheat just how I feel
Drink scotch whiskey (with Rudy) all night long
And die behind the wheel, er read “The Art of the Deal”
They got a name for the winners in the election (Biden!)
And I want a name when I lose
They call Alabama the Crimson Tide
Call me Trumpy Blue
I am trying to understand the whole picture of the Hunter Biden investigation and indictment. There are a lot of posts about the Hunter Biden investigations, the “whistleblowers” testimonies etc., but I’m there is so much information, it is easy to loose the big picture.
For example: how the investigation started? I remember reading Joseph Ziegler started the investigation tracking prostitutes, but Biden deals etc. are always part of the media narrative. And also: when did the “whistleblowers” claim there was alleged “interference”?
I wish there was a timeline/summary that would make it easier to make sense of all of it. Anything I could find online so far is pretty useless.
It does not make a lick of sense, so trying to really understand it is probably an impossible quest.
So you’re saying this is all based on the Chewbacca defense[1]?
[1] In the South Park episode, it was employed by the prosecutor.
HB was always a vulnerable adult the radical right wanted to push to get at Biden. If it couldn’t find something, it would invent something, Dirty Tricks 101 for the Roger Stones of the world. Imagine what the current radical right media and GOP would do with Billy Carter today.
If it helps, Hunter is not the ultimate target. It is his father. They’re just using Hunter as a proxy, and it would not surprise me if they are working off a psychological profile targeting weakness for applying pressure. Which is what all this is about, after breaking him, get him to implicate his father in a crime (most likely FARA related).
Or getting HB to suicide, with the intent to use that to either get Biden to step down, or destroy confidence in “grieving Biden” immediately prior to the election when there’s minimal chance of replacing him with another Dem (thus giving Trump a clear lane into office)?
Just a (very dark) thought. Sorry, took a sec to get that door nailed shut again.
PLEASE, never do that again. What is wrong with you?
Again, my apologies. That said, I hold zero doubt that the people we are talking about would consider and execute such plans without hesitation or reservation if they believed it could get them what they want.
Do you honestly believe otherwise?
I think Hunter realizes that Abbe Lowell will be his sheet anchor through this storm. It also doesn’t hurt that his dad is behind him while things are cleared up, so while the GOP does what it does, Hunter I think will be all right knowing he’s got a team too.
It is comforting to know that President Biden will stick by his son despite all his missteps. Although it has caused The GOP great glee, and Democrats terrible pain, I am glad for this loyalty to his only living son.
If you think it’s too suggestive or too explicit, please feel free to remove it.
Unfortunately, I think their scenarios around HB may actually run even darker, but not willing to go there. I believe the worst of these people are not in any way the tiniest bit constrained by any positive attributes of personality, and they’re the ones doing the ratfucking (and worse).
Hope for the best. Plan for (and against) the WORST.
Please stop with this line of commentary. Else you be gone.
I think you meant to say fall off the wagon. That’s really what the GOP wants to do to the Bidens. Those sadistic tools want Hunter to end up in rehab before November 2024.
I don’t think Hunter would take that route, he would have done so back in 2018 when he had the chance. You could say he survived that crucible. Plus he’s finally fighting back, we’ll see what happens if he draws blood.
I think you’re correct there, and actually believe they (the Stone,Bannon&co Ratfucker Corps) may have made a grave strategic error in their target and approach, exposing a critical “leverage” enterprise they could not afford to expose under any circumstances. We’ll see.
No matter what evil psy-ops intent (if any) is intended by going after HB, I think his current metal state is much better then it has been. I saw somewhere that he is currently sober. His conditions of release include no alcohol or drug use and he must check in regularly and have screening tests. If he were to screw this up it would be all over the news and we haven’t heard anything so far.
I think his new legal moves are evidence he is actively in recovery. Instead of being passive and trying to cut a deal he is defending himself. Taking control of one’s life and being responsible is a hallmark of recovery. How likely is it that switching to Abbe Lowell as lead attorney is the only reason his legal response has changed so dramatically? I see it as a sign.
As why move against HB, in Trumpworld any accusation is a confession. Although mostly un-indicted, Trump’s adult children and Jared are known members of his corrupt crew. Trying to smear President Biden through his family is a knee-jerk counter claim. If you have the stomach to ingest right wing propaganda, references to the Biden crime family are routine. It’s by-the-book slander from the right.
Abbe Lowell was always the lead, whether formally presented as such or not. There is no significant “switch”. “Don’t consume alcohol or drugs” is a fairly standard condition of release. The problem here is that Hunter is being treated differently than any other citizen would be as to charges.
Ok, I think I now have a slightly better idea what’s going on there. I had to re-read the following three posts here:
https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/07/03/on-bill-barr-and-sex-workers-whistleblower-x-called-hunter-bidens-baby-momma-a-prostitute/
https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/07/26/cover-up-joseph-ziegler-provided-a-different-explanation-why-hunter-wasnt-charged/
https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/07/28/david-weiss-is-wrecking-the-the-right-wing-story-and-likely-sandbagging-hunter-biden/
As well as a transcript of Joseph Ziegler’s testimony, to be able to connect at least some of the dots together. Still not sure about a lot of things, but at least I understand now what are the main “whistleblowers” complaints, some of the issues that cast doubt about their complaints, and the indications that the investigators may have possibly fucked up and ended up with a plea.
I’m extremely busy right now but thought I would comment about this suit, addressing some of the comments made above. Keep in mind that I know next to nothing about the Privacy Act. I am very well acquainted with section 6103 and 7431 of the Tax Code. Have handled litigation arising under 7431.
IRS will be represented by a DOJ Tax Division line attorney. Just as a DOJ Tax Division attorney represented IRS in the collection lawsuit brought by IRS against Roger Stone. (Note: I’m curious about how much $$ Stone has paid toward the judgment in that case. We can’t find that out from IRS because, ta-dah, that is confidential “tax return information” disclosure of which would be improper.)
I would not want to be the DOJ attorney defending this suit. This suit will be one of the hottest potatoes around for some time. I don’t see DOJ prevailing on a 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss if they actually file one. Likely a giant waste of time and resources to file such a motion,, but they could file such a motion with the knowledge that resolving that motion will slow things down and give them some time to decide how to respond to all of the allegations in the complaint, and hope that the Judge handling the case makes a mistake by dismissing some or all of the complaint brought under section 7431. (Again, I can’t speak to the Privacy Act.)
There is no issue of “qualified immunity.” The complaint refers to the most common defense in these types of suits, namely, that the disclosure, if erroneous, was made based on a good faith interpretation of the law. That defense can’t be raised in a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, as it requires the introduction of evidence extraneous to the complaint.
To the extent tax return information was properly disclosed in court or in another public setting, there is an issue as to whether subsequent disclosure of tax return information that is already in the public realm is an improper disclosure of tax return information. Courts are split on that issue.
The complaint seeks $1K per unauthorized disclosure. There is a very interesting issue of whether making an unauthorized disclosure on TV .is a single disclosure or is a disclosure to everyone who watched the program. The definition of “disclosure” is “the making known to any person in any manner whatever a return or return information. to make return information known to any person in any manner.” Section 6103(b)(8). “Return information” means just about anything associated with an individual’s tax situation. Section 6103(b)(2). You can figure out for yourself what that language means to normal humans, but but some courts have taken the view that disclosing return information to someone who you know will repeat this information to the public through a newspaper is a single disclosure. If it is NOT a single disclosure, the statutory damages will be huge. (That’s the good news, The “bad news” is that HB will have to report the damages received as taxable income.)
When IRS employees testify in court or in a deposition, they are provided with a written authorization describing exactly what they can testify about. They can’t testify beyond the scope of the written authorization. I have no idea if there were written authorizations specifying what the relevant IRS employees could testify to when appearing before Congress — I suspect that there were such written authorizations. HB’s counsel should seek any such authorizations through discovery. I can’t imagine that there were any written authorizations permitting public disclosure of return information while appearing on TV, etc.
IRS employees are provided extensive training on the disclosure laws. HB’s counsel should seek those training materials through discovery. There are literally dozens of IRS attorneys who provide advice to IRS employees on the disclosure laws. The IRS, as an institution, is generally paranoid about violating the disclosure laws. In individual cases that can be maddening, but looking at the “big picture,” this is a good thing, generally.
Will this suit muck up the criminal tax prosecution? Yes, it should.
BTW, thank Richard Nixon for the existence of section 6103.
Why would the US not file such a motion??
Because they will understand that they will lose such a motion if the Judge follows the law. The complaint states a valid cause of action under 7431. But, again, they could file a 12(b)(6) motion for tactical reasons.
Nobody cares if they lose a 12b6 motion. You use it to flush out what you are facing and reset the timeline. I would already be preparing it.
How complete must the government be in answering a 12b6 motion, do they have to show all of their cards or enough to establish probable cause to proceed?
The government would not be answering such a filing, they would be the defendant bringing it.
Sorry about that. It would seem a bit silly to me since the IRS already has the records Abbe Lowell would cite during the trial. So unless Lowell has some of his evidence stricken (I’m assuming he brought the receipts because he’s good and thorough) which ought to require a hearing I do not see how such a demurrer would succeed.
With this complaint, there is nothing to flush out. All the government will get in response to a regular 12(b)(6) motion is a recitation and discussion of the elements of the cause of action followed by a repetition of the allegations in the complaint that satisfy those elements.
The person who likely most needs education about 7431 actions is the Judge. These types of actions are not common. If I were HB’s attorney I would welcome the opportunity to educate the Judge early on by responding to a 12(b)(6) motion.
BTW, despite the jury trial demand, any trial will be a bench trial. No right to jury trial here. Government will move to strike the jury demand. So educating the Judge is important.
Eh, I would file it anyway were I the government. There are always things to learn.
Thank you, very interesting.
At least Nixon did something right.
“”The definition of “disclosure” is “the making known to any person in any manner whatever a return or return information. to make return information known to any person in any manner.” Section 6103(b)(8). “”
It would truly be ironic if every Fox News viewer ended up contributing $1,000 to the Hunter Biden Fund.
This is such a mess and an embarrassment for the President. Democrats need a candidate that is youthful and doesn’t have an albatross like Hunter hanging around his neck. Obviously, the GOP will try and dig dirt up on anyone but that doesn’t mean they will be successful. Obama was President for 8 years, and the best they could do was Benghazi and Fast and Furious…people understood those were non issues. It is time for Joe to announce he isn’t running and pass the baton over to Kamala, Gavin or anyone under the age of 65 who has no skeletons in closet.
Do you know anyone who doesn’t have any skeletons in their closet? I don’t. Especially when those closets are subjected to the scrutiny of a presidential campaign under the ruthless media/political conditions we have now.
Quite a back-to-back combo by the Bidens today
Brandon should just go big and pardon him already.
No, he should not.
| White House rules out Joe Biden pardon for son Hunter
Spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre says no possibility of president pardoning son, who pleaded not guilty to tax charges Wednesday|
Martin Pengelly
The Guardian
July 27, 2023
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jul/27/hunter-biden-trial-presidential-pardon
In the event you couldn’t find your snark tag, you could try something less uninformed.
Hunter sues IRS hit my Man Bites Dog funnybone. I’m sure it happens but still enjoyable to see.
Lowell isn’t just a hardball player, he can hit the corners.
It will be poetic justice if MAGAt House clowns bollox the weak case against Hunter. I don’t think the gov has much chance to go 12 for 12 with Hunter jurors – unless Chief Justice trump can assign this case to W Va too.
Or SDFL.
“Rudy Giuliani’s former attorneys sue him for more than $1.3 million in unpaid legal fees.” Live by the sword, eh? Maybe we will be able to say that also of Mr. Weiss, after this is over.
I’ll tell you though, Trump sure is a big benefactor of the legal profession. I’m not sure that is a good thing, but then my opinion doesn’t mean anything on that point.
No, that will not work as to Weiss.
Is this a typo, or are we missing something: “([Tlhe leak of grand jury tesimony in some respects more egregious than anything [Defendant] did (insider wading)
— the FB supervisor took an oath to uphold the law and was acting in a supervisory capacity to discharge an important public function.” (emphasis ddd).”
What is “insider wading”?
At the club, there are inside wading pools and outside wading pools.
Or you could trade places with Martha Stewart.
That’s an example of the OS clipboard not handling translation of a binary based document to a ASCII text based one very well. I had one time where it removed the white space between words in certain portions of the body leaving the rest perfect readable. So “this is text I wish to directly quote” became “thisistextIwishtodirectlyquote”.
Mark Meadows latest filing at the 11th Circuit, in his appeal against remand of his case to state court. He thinks, “The district court unnecessarily complicated a straightforward [sic] federal officer removal case, and in the process, committed errors that raise serious constitutional concerns.”
Somebody is paying big money for Mark Meadows to pay four lawyers at McGuire Woods, who seem better than the ones representing Jeff Clark.
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23980501/georiga-v-meadows-11th-cir-brief.pdf
The short version is that the CoS’s job is vital and historically important, it’s hard, and it’s to do whatever the president tells him. The district court fucked up beyond belief in concluding whatever Meadows did was outside his role as a federal officer.
” … do whatever the president tells him.” Too bad (for him) that the president didn’t tell him to go jump in a lake; he’d be better off.
It’s a smooth job, but it’s replete with mischaracterizations and missing agency. Meadows, for example, immediately after the election, was “inundated with allegations of voter fraud.” What Meadows doesn’t say is that Trump was responsible for most of the inundation.
Meadows just heard that there was this meddlesome priest so he was looking into the allegations.
Thanks for that reference. Not much has changed in 1,000 years.
Comey replied: “Yes. Yes, it rings in my ear as kind of, ‘Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?’ ”
King said: “I was just going to quote that in 1170 [of] Dec. 29 Henry II said, ‘Who will rid me of this meddlesome priest?’ And then the next day he was killed. Thomas A Becket. That’s exactly the same situation. We’re thinking along the same lines.”
That’s similar to the phrase Ginni [SCOTUS Spouse] THOMAS texted to MEADOWS on 11/19/20:
11/19/20 [THOMAS]: “Mark (don’t want to wake you) … Sounds like Sidney and her team are getting inundated with evidence of fraud. Make a plan. Release the Kraken and save us from the left taking America down.” […]
Then there was this:
11/22/20 [THOMAS] “Trying to understand the Sidney Powell distancing.”
[MEADOWS]: “She doesn’t have anything or at least she won’t share it if she does.”
[THOMAS]: “Wow!”
[MEADOWS does not respond.]
harpie! Glad you’re back. I’ve been sending kind thoughts your way. Missed you.
Seconded!
Thank you both!
I missed you all, too.
It’s good to be back. :-)