Biden’s bribery breadcrumbs point to one conclusion: Deep-state partisans concealed the evidence.

The Federalist’s blockbuster exclusive on Tuesday revealed U.S. Attorney David⁤ Weiss was spoonfed The New York Times’ false narrative that the Pittsburgh U.S. attorney‌ had pushed‍ the Delaware office to investigate Rudy Giuliani’s claims ​of‌ Biden family corruption. That revelation adds new⁢ texture to the IRS whistleblowers’ earlier testimony. More importantly, it⁣ suggests a select ​few DOJ and FBI agents buried the FD-1023 ​sent to Delaware for further investigation — a ⁣report memorializing a “highly credible” ​FBI confidential human source’s claims that Burisma paid⁤ $5 million bribes each to Hunter and Joe Biden.

On‍ Dec. 11, 2020, The New​ York Times‍ ran an article titled, ⁣“Material ​from Giuliani Spurred a Separate Justice ‍Depart. Pursuit of Hunter ⁣Biden.” As​ I previously detailed, the Times’ reporting was ‍“replete with falsehoods ​and deceptive ‌narratives,”‍ and sought to paint the “then-U.S. Attorney for ‍the Western District of⁢ Pennsylvania, Scott Brady,⁢ whom Barr had tasked with screening any new material related to Ukraine,” as ⁢a ⁣partisan hack out⁣ to get the⁢ Bidens. The article falsely represented ⁣Brady⁤ as ⁣pushing the Delaware‍ U.S. attorney’s office to investigate‍ the‌ Bidens based on material ‌provided by‍ Rudy Giuliani.

However,⁢ as a whistleblower would later confide in ⁣Sen. Chuck Grassley,⁢ the ‍Pittsburgh U.S. attorney’s office had sought the investigation not of Giuliani⁤ material, but of ⁣separate ‌intel provided by ​a longtime and “highly ⁢credible” confidential human ⁤source (CHS) on which agents briefed the Delaware office.

As⁣ Grassley explained in a July⁤ 2023 letter to​ Weiss, “[O]n October 23, ⁣2020, Justice Department and FBI ​Special Agents from the Pittsburgh⁤ Field Office briefed Assistant⁣ U.S. Attorney Lesley ‍Wolf, ⁣one of your top prosecutors, ⁤and FBI Special Agents from the Baltimore Field Office with respect to the contents ‍of⁢ the FBI-generated ​FD-1023 alleging a criminal bribery scheme involving then-Vice⁣ President Biden and ‍Hunter Biden.”

Grassley would later ⁢release a⁢ minimally redacted copy of the FD-1023, which ​confirmed ⁤the information provided to the⁤ Delaware‍ office came not‌ from Giuliani, but from the CHS.

An individual familiar with that Oct. ‍23 meeting previously confirmed to The Federalist that Weiss⁤ was ⁢not present for it. That detail gained new significance last week when FOIA documents, obtained ⁣by the Heritage Foundation following its lawsuit against the DOJ, revealed that one ‌of Weiss’s ​top assistant ⁣U.S. attorneys forwarded him the Times article portraying the Pittsburgh evidence​ as originating from ​Giuliani.

With‍ the Times piece purportedly sourced to “five current and former‌ law ‌enforcement officials and others with knowledge ⁣of F.B.I. interactions‌ with⁤ the Justice Department,” unless someone⁣ told Weiss⁣ about the FD-1023 or its ⁤contents, Weiss would have had no basis to know the Pittsburgh office had ⁣given the Delaware office independent evidence of Biden family corruption. And this was evidence that had already been partially corroborated, as the Pennsylvania-based agents detailed in the briefing on Oct. 23,⁢ 2020.

So the key question, as ‍Grassley asked Weiss,‍ is when did he first learn of ​the FD-1023?

Weiss has yet to answer that ⁤question. But IRS whistleblower⁣ Gary Shapley’s testimony and supplemental‍ affidavit ⁤suggest Wolf and⁢ the Baltimore agents ​briefed by Pittsburgh about the⁢ FD-1023⁣ buried that⁤ evidence.

During Shapley’s testimony to the House Ways and ⁤Means Committee, the IRS​ special agent made no mention of​ the FD-1023. Later, though, after former Attorney General William ‌Barr confirmed to The Federalist that the⁤ FD-1023 had been sent to Delaware for further investigation, Shapley submitted a ⁤supplemental affidavit.

In it, Shapley said no one provided him, the line IRS⁢ agents acting under his⁣ supervision, or the FBI agents working‌ with​ the ⁢IRS the FD-1023 or any ‌of the⁤ details included in the ⁢FD-1023. Shapley ‌further stated ⁣that‍ he and other IRS investigators had requested to be included in the ⁤briefing from the Pittsburgh office but their requests⁣ were denied.

One tidbit​ from Shapley’s testimony to the‍ House Ways and Means Committee further suggests Wolf and whoever else from the FBI Baltimore field ‍office attended the ⁣October briefing buried the FD-1023.

In discussing a Dec. 3, 2020,⁣ meeting of the Delaware prosecution team — a meeting⁤ Weiss ⁢was in and out of — Shapley noted⁣ his team wanted to interview‌ one of Hunter ⁢Biden’s associates to ask him, among other ‍things, what “Ten held ‍by H⁢ for the big guy” referenced.

“But⁣ AUSA Wolf interjected and⁢ said she did not want to ask about the big guy,” Shapley explained. Then ⁤when, as the IRS whistleblower put it, “multiple people in the room spoke up and objected that‌ we had to ask,” Wolf responded, “there’s no⁣ specific criminality to that line of questioning.”

While “multiple people in ⁢the room” allegedly objected to Wolf’s limits on⁣ questioning, none of them apparently challenged Wolf’s claim that there was “no specific criminality.”​ Nor did ⁤anyone present raise ‍the FD-1023 or the CHS.

Surely, ⁤they would⁢ have, though — if they‍ knew about its existence.

This again ⁣raises the question: Who knew ‍of the​ FD-1023, and when​ did Weiss learn of its existence?

From Grassley’s whistleblower, it appears Wolf included at least⁣ two Baltimore field office agents in the brief. However, from Shapley’s testimony, ⁢it appears the Baltimore‌ field agents Wolf allowed to participate​ in ⁤the briefing were not⁢ the ones working Hunter’s case — which makes no sense.

That is, unless you are trying to bury ‌the evidence.