California U.S. Attorney's Decision to Not Charge Hunter Biden Raises Questions

California U.S. Attorney’s Decision to Not Charge Hunter Biden Raises Questions

California US Attorney E. Martin Estrada’s decision not to charge Hunter Biden has ignited scrutiny due to his ties with Biden’s campaign donations and potential conflicts of interest.

Los Angeles, California – The decision of E. Martin Estrada, the U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California, to not move forward with charges against Hunter Biden has ignited scrutiny. 

Critics argue that Estrada’s nomination and prior connections raise questions about possible conflicts of interest.

Estrada’s Ties with Biden’s Campaign

Before he was nominated U.S. Attorney, Estrada was associated with the prestigious law firm Munger, Tolles & Olson. 

This law firm has reportedly donated significant sums to President Joe Biden‘s 2020 election campaign. 

According to OpenSecrets, members from this firm contributed over $120,000 to Joe Biden’s election endeavor and gave an additional $156,000 to the Democratic National Committee in the same year. 

Estrada is said to have donated to Vice President Kamala Harris in 2015. 

However, the law firm declined to comment on these allegations.

Background of the Investigation

Recent testimonies by IRS whistleblowers highlight that Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss held back several months from presenting evidence related to Hunter Biden’s tax investigation to the California office. 

The evidence was presented only days after Estrada assumed office. Several witnesses have confirmed that Estrada did not allow Weiss to charge Hunter Biden within his jurisdiction.

Joseph Ziegler, an IRS agent who has testified before Congress, said that the Hunter Biden defense team had several taxpayer conferences with the Justice Department lawyers to discuss the ongoing case. 

Also Read:   Vice President Kamala Harris Lauds Young Leaders in Nashville, Tennessee

While the norm is usually one conference, Hunter Biden’s attorneys were given four, which Ziegler found unusually high.

Delays and Nominations

Gary Shapley, another IRS whistleblower, expressed concerns over delays. 

According to Shapley, after the case was declined in D.C. for alleged violations from 2014 and 2015, it took several months before it was presented to the Central District of California. 

This delay coincided with Estrada’s confirmation as U.S. Attorney.

Despite the controversies, Estrada’s office has denied any wrongdoing. 

A spokesperson clarified that U.S. Attorney Weiss had the complete authority to file charges in any jurisdiction and did not require any approval from Estrada’s office.

Implications and Further Actions

The timeline of events, including Estrada’s nomination and his decision not to move forward with the case, has sparked attention from House Republicans

They are keenly investigating if Weiss faced any undue hurdles during his prolonged investigation into the president’s son.

House Republicans are seeking detailed interviews from Weiss, Estrada, and Matthew Graves, the U.S. attorney for Washington, D.C.

The White House, when asked for a comment, did not respond.

Get our best stuff sent straight to you! Join our WhatsApp Channel.

Post's Author

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top