Prosecutor Who Interfered in Hunter Biden Investigation Stonewalls Congress

Former assistant US attorney says she’s ‘not authorized’ to answer questions.
Prosecutor Who Interfered in Hunter Biden Investigation Stonewalls Congress
President Joe Biden's son Hunter Biden talks to reporters outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington, on Dec. 13, 2023. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
Zachary Stieber
1/2/2024
Updated:
1/2/2024
0:00

A former top prosecutor on the investigation into President Joe Biden’s son has repeatedly told members of Congress she could not answer their questions.

Lesley Wolf, who told FBI agents in 2020 to remove references to the president from an affidavit for a search warrant, said she was “not authorized” to talk about how she and others handled the probe into Hunter Biden, according to a transcript of the December 2023 testimony reviewed by The Epoch Times.

Ms. Wolf said she was “significantly constrained” by guidance from the Department of Justice.

After being questioned about her email to agents, Ms. Wolf said that she was “not able to answer questions about this particular search warrant or this particular draft.”

Ms. Wolf wrote in the email, released by the House of Representatives, that the affidavit should be altered to remove references to “political figure 1.”

That figure was President Biden, who at the time was a former vice president, Ms. Wolf confirmed.

She declined to say why she instructed the agents to remove references to President Biden.

“In any given case, as you’re revising both an affidavit and the accompanying attachments to the warrant, you’re working through all of that. And you will frequently take things out more often. It’s actually usually a process of removing certain things, as often as it is a process of adding in other things,” she said.

Documents and previous testimony also show that Ms. Wolf also rejected an attempt to obtain a search warrant for a guest house at President Biden’s home, where Mr. Biden lived for a time, and told Mr. Biden’s attorneys about an impending warrant to search a storage unit he owned, which IRS whistleblowers said scuttled the opportunity to obtain evidence from the unit.

Ms. Wolf’s actions made clear that prosecutors were “providing preferential treatment” to Mr. Biden, Joseph Ziegler, one of the whistleblowers, he said.

“Without commenting on the particulars of any investigation, all appropriate policies and procedures and professional responsibility obligations were followed in the case,” Ms. Wolf told members during the recent closed-door session.

She pointed members to a 2020 memorandum issued by then-Attorney General William Barr that outlined how officials should take care in investigating political candidates or officials due to the upcoming presidential election.

Ms. Wolf is the former assistant U.S. attorney for the district of Delaware. She departed the departed the Department of Justice in late 2022.

Ms. Wolf said her decision to leave the agency was not connected to what she described as “baseless allegations” against her and that she actually remained for several months longer than she planned because she received threats and thought she and her family would be safer if she were still employed by the department.

Ms. Wolf was subpoenaed in November by the House Judiciary Committee. Lawmakers said they wanted her to appear because she has “first-hand knowledge” of the investigation into Mr. Biden.

Ms. Wolf was the top deputy to U.S. Attorney David Weiss, appointed under President Donald Trump and asked to stay on by President Biden.

Mr. Weiss was investigating Mr. Biden for years but only brought charges in 2022 after the whistleblowers came forward. Mr. Biden is now facing tax charges in California and charges related to a firearm in Delaware. He has pleaded not guilty.

Ms. Wolf was questioned over her connection to Alexander Mackler, who was employed by Mr. Weiss after the investigation into Mr. Biden started.

“Can I answer?” she asked attorneys. “I’m not authorized to answer that question,” she then said.

Ms. Wolf did maintain that Mr. Weiss had the “necessary authority” to bring charges against Mr. Biden, even though multiple other people have acknowledged that he needed approval from Department of Justice officials before bringing charges outside Delaware.

Mr. Weiss himself told lawmakers that he asked for special status in order to prosecute Mr. Biden but was denied. He then asked two different U.S. attorneys to partner with him to bring charges, but the officials—both of whom were appointed by President Biden—rejected the requests.

Ms. Wolf did say that prosecutors are typically aware of the statute of limitations after Mr. Weiss allowed the statute to lapse on possible crimes by Mr. Biden in 2014 and 2015.

“As a general matter, as a prosecutor, you have some sense of what the statute is, and if you’re coming up on a statute of limitations, you’re aware of it,” she said.

Ms. Wolf said that generally if the statute was allowed to lapse, it would not be by mistake. “I am quite sure that on occasion, it happens. But as a general matter, you’re aware of the statute and when it’s due to run,” she said.

Mr. Weiss has said that he would address letting the statute lapse in the report he delivers to Attorney General Merrick Garland. It’s not clear when the report will be delivered.

Mark Tapscott contributed to this report.