November 16, 2025 • 35 mins
Newt talks with IRS special agents Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler about their new book, “The Whistleblowers vs. The Big Guy: Two Special Agents, the Biden Crime Family, and a Corrupt Bureaucracy.” They describe the testimony they gave before Congress about political interference and obstruction in the Hunter Biden criminal case, revealing how the IRS, FBI, and DOJ failed to act independently. Despite overwhelming evidence, they faced retaliation and isolation for exposing corruption. Their investigation led to Hunter Biden's federal conviction, but President Joe Biden later pardoned his son and issued blanket pardons to other family members. Shapley and Ziegler's experiences are detailed in their new book, profits of which will support future whistleblowers. They emphasize the importance of treating all taxpayers equally and ensuring no preferential treatment in investigations. Their actions highlight the potential for citizens to influence government and address corruption, embodying the American tradition of truth and justice.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:04):
On this episode of News World, Gary Shapley and Joseph
Ziegler made headlines when they testified before Congress, revealing political interference,
bureaucratic stonewalling, and outright obstruction in the Hunter Biden cominow
case despite overwhelming evidence. They watched as the system bent
(00:25):
to protect the powerful, with the IRS, FBI, and DOJ
failing to act as independent institutions. Their investigation ultimately led
to Hunter Biden's federal conviction, but in a stunning last
minute move, President Joe Biden pardoned his son then when
even further issuing blanket pardons to other family members before
(00:48):
leaving office. But this isn't just about Hunter Biden. It's
about two public servants who risked everything to expose corruption,
facing Rotelli isolation and intense public scrutiny. Chaplin and Ziegler
take us inside the high space battle between truth and
(01:09):
power here to discuss their new book, The Whistleblowers Versus
the Big Guy. I'm really pleased to welcome my guests
Gary Shapley and Joseph Sniegler here, and Joe welcome and
(01:32):
thank you for joining me in the News World.
Speaker 2 (01:34):
Thank you, sir. Great to be here. Great to meet you.
Speaker 3 (01:36):
Yeah, thank you so much for having us.
Speaker 1 (01:38):
Let's start Joe with you. Can you start by telling
us a little bit about your own background, how you
get started at the IRS, and how you first became
connected to what became the Hunter Biden case. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (01:50):
Absolutely so. I grew up in a small town in
northeast Ohio. I'm an Ohio native. While I was there,
worked at Ernst and Young prior to coming to the government.
Decided to make the move into federal service. Moved over
the IRS in twenty ten. Worked a variety of cases,
from pharmaceutical drug diversion cases to captive insurance investigations. Worked
(02:13):
a plethora of things, and then I was fortunate enough
to join what is called the International Tax and Financial
Crimes Group. It's a specialty group of agents, some of
the best around the nation that work high wealth individuals
who are potentially offshoring their assets to evade their income taxes.
When it became a part of that group, was looking
(02:35):
into another investigation. It was a social media company, foreign
social media company and reviewing bank reports. In that case,
Hunter Biden was allegedly paying some Russian prostitutes that were
also a part of that social media company. So his
name came up in the bank reports. Normal course of
(02:57):
what I do in my normal job was like, this
is unusual. In the bank report, it cited that his
ex wife and their divorce and their divorce proceedings claimed
that her husband had tax issues got a diamond, very
rare diamond that was high value. It really led into
more kind of evidence. Started looking at the tax filings
(03:21):
and he had unfiled tax returns for multiple years. So
I'm like, this looks like a pretty good case. So
I elevated it up through the process and that's where
the story unfolds.
Speaker 1 (03:32):
Gary, the same question for you, mean, what led you
from AmeriCorps and the Inspectors Generals off of that NSA
to IRS criminal investigations.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
Yeah, I mean it's really a call of service. We
live in the greatest country on earth, and I always
wanted to do the best for this country and provide
my services this country, and federal law enforcement seemed to
fit where my educational background was and where I found
some interest in while I was in the AmeriCorps doing
volunteer work and of violence tier income tax assistance site.
Oddly enough, so I came over to IRS Criminal Investigation
(04:05):
in two thousand and nine. From NSA very quickly got
into the Swiss Bank program in about twenty thirteen. I
worked at a Department of Justice Tax division for over five years,
working in cases like Credit Swiss, you know, the resolved
for two point six billion, and then another Credit Swiss
for five hundred and eleven million recently, and HSBCPBRS and UBS.
(04:28):
So my path took me into the international route. Especially
Ziegler had already initiated this investigation when I was a
manager elsewhere, and then became the manager of the International
Tax and Financial Crimes Group, and then I became Joe
supervisor and the supervisor of the Hunter Biden investigation. That's
my path.
Speaker 1 (04:47):
There's a hunter Byen investigation begat into unfold. Did that
surprise you, guys? Was that different when you're spending all
your time tracking down people who are breaking the law anyway?
So was this in any way different? Just one more
guy breaking the law?
Speaker 3 (05:02):
I actually didn't even know who Hunter Biden was. I
saw the last name, I didn't know if it was
a nephew, I didn't know if it was a brother.
So name really didn't mean anything to me. It was
facts of the case, evidence that was in front of me.
It really didn't at any point early on in the
investigation it really the name Hunter Biden. I mean it
(05:24):
was former vice president. Really, when I started digging into
the facts, reading the news articles, reading all the information,
it really started to become a parent that all the
different things that Hunter was involved in, from Ukraine to
Romania to China. I mean, what it also said to me,
or what it also showed to me, is a lot
(05:45):
of the money that he was making just didn't make
any sense.
Speaker 1 (05:49):
If I understand it in just straightforward practical ways, here's
the guy who's not filing his income text. That's not
a complicated idea.
Speaker 3 (05:59):
Not filing his income taxes. And then you also had
for one of the early on years twenty fourteen, there
was a significant amount of money he was earning a
million dollars a year from Barisma, and that income was
a reporter on a sack return. So now that elevates
into a felony crime, a potential tax evasion.
Speaker 1 (06:16):
What do you think goes on in somebody's mind that
they have a million dollars coming in and they don't
report it. You know, if you're a real crook, if
you're the MAF, if you're a drug cartel. But I mean,
here's the guy who, at least at one level was
ostensibly normal, and yet he thinks he can take a
(06:37):
million bucks and not have to tell anybody about it.
Speaker 3 (06:41):
That's what goes into our investigations. Is an aspect of
evading your income taxes is wilfulness. What was their mensrael,
what was their mindset when they decided not to report
this income? And that's what elevates something from being a
civil issue to being criminal and into our hands. And
that's part of what we have to look at. And
(07:03):
I mean, like when you look at what's in someone's mind,
you look at the evidence, you look at did they
take acts to further hide their money from the IRS
so that they don't have to pay income taxes on it.
We had put forward evidence that showed that Hunter Biden
had done that.
Speaker 1 (07:20):
Do you think people and that just kind of think
like they're invisible.
Speaker 2 (07:24):
I think it's likely that it was purposeful to not
report that Ukraine income, right, because they knew that the
engagement of his father in Ukraine, and they knew what
that looked like, right, And It's similar to why the
Department of Justice let the statue limitations toll on the
tax charges for twenty fourteen and fifteen, which those were
the years that Ukraine Beresma income had come in. So
(07:46):
they were trying to hide all the aspects of information
coming from Ukraine because they knew underlying what was happening there.
And look like, we have to treat all these taxpayers
the same at the end of the day, and the
wilfulness and the knowledge that he was evading his income
taxes was clear by him pleading guilty to all the
charges that Joe Ziegeler recommended in the report in California.
Speaker 1 (08:10):
Do you think that people like that just think that
they're in vulnerable.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
Yeah, I mean at some level they don't believe they're
going to get caught. And you know, it's possible that
with his connections, he thought that it was never going
to come to his front door. And the problem is
that the Department Justice did everything they could to make
that come true.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
That's the second big surprise to me. And where your
books really important, because you guys, I mean, if you
hadn't had the courage to stick to what you were doing,
a lot of us would never have shown up because
they were trying so hard to bury it. Given all
the other big cases you'd handle and the kind of
crimes you've been dealing with, were you surprised by the
(08:52):
degree to which the Justice Department was actively trying to
discourage this case and trying to basically we cover it up.
Speaker 2 (09:02):
I was very surprised, so surprised that it took us
over two years of seeing this preferential treatment and stopping
investigative steps from happening and removing political figure number one
from our documentary quests and search warrants for us to
finally get to the point where we knew the Department
of Justice was trying to hide this investigation. And their
(09:24):
conduct afterwards after I became a whistle blower and was
coming forward, and after especially Ziegeler did as well, shows
what their intent was.
Speaker 1 (09:33):
Right.
Speaker 2 (09:34):
Their intent was to not charge. They were going to
offer a non prosecution agreement to him on May fifteenth,
twenty twenty three. And then that was right when I
was coming forward to testify in front of Congress. So
David Weiss and Delaware said to his ausa, said, we
have to get him to plead guilty. So that's when
the two misdemeanor plea deal came up, and Chriman Jason Smith,
(09:56):
the House Ways and Means Committee put in an amicust
brief that had about a thousand pages that were Joe
Ziegeler in mind's testimony and the evidence that we provided,
so that judge in Delaware throughout that plea deal, I've
never seen that. I'm sure it's happened, but I've never
seen that happen. This is what DJ tried to do
with the case. And then at that point when the
(10:17):
judge threw it out, the Department of Justice was completely stuck.
They knew we were coming forward with the evidence, so
that's when they started doing the right thing, which was
charged him with a gun charge. A jury of his
peers found him guilty, charged him in California. He pleaded
guilty to those violations. So if not for Joe Ziegeler
and I risking absolutely everything, this would have never happened.
(10:40):
They would have never known what Hunter bind did and
President Biden wouldn't have had to lie about pardoning him
and then pardon him.
Speaker 1 (10:49):
I mean, here you are, as individuals up against a
huge machine and up against the enormous amount of political power.
How did you manage yourselves during this pretty much have
been treminiousment of stress.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
Yeah, there was not only that, but we were facing
retaliation at our job, Like there were multiple points to
where we were isolated. A lot of the things that
we were trying to do, we're just not getting approved,
flat out not getting approved. I think that the way
Gary and I handled ourselves in the best way possible.
We had an extremely good group of attorneys at Empower Oversight,
(11:26):
my attorney Dean Zerby.
Speaker 2 (11:28):
Mark Lydel.
Speaker 3 (11:29):
We had a great team around us that I think
helped us work through the process. But from Gary and
I's perspective, we viewed this as a non partisan issue.
This was something that is very middle of the road.
You have a Department of Justice that's protecting one family
from any of this coming to the light of day,
(11:49):
and I think that they did not expect Gary and
I to be so buttoned up. And I mean we
heard from James Comer and various members of Congress that we,
who are the best witnesses whistleblowers that they have ever had,
testified in front of their committees. Everything we said stood up.
Speaker 1 (12:07):
When you are working on a large system large bureau
credit system and you suddenly stand out and you're prepared
to take on the system, and you go out there
in public. It's a real risk and it creates real
tensions in the larger system. What was it like after
you had testified in front of ways and means to
(12:30):
go back into the building and to go back into
working with the people who realized that you were pursuing
the truth in a way that many of them had not.
Speaker 2 (12:42):
It was actually split right. There's the leadership that is
entrenched in the bureaucracy right that they're just going to
stay status quo and they can't think outside the box,
and they're just really just following whatever Department Justice told
them to do. They weren't thinking what was right and wrong.
The undercurrent of age and the working folks that create
(13:04):
the advantage to complete our mission on a daily basis,
they were incredibly supportive, covertly right overtly. No one would
say anything, no one would provide any support. No one
was really there to help us mentally or to help
us down the past. So that was very difficult, a
(13:25):
very very difficult time, just being isolated and people fearing
to come out and support us.
Speaker 1 (13:50):
First of one was a great tribute to your personal credibility,
in your personal sense of honor and duty. Do you
think this is a unique problem that involved the president's
son or do you think there's an underlying pattern of
hiding from law breaking and protecting powerful people who otherwise
(14:12):
would be in deep trouble.
Speaker 2 (14:15):
I'm not tainted on the system. To me, was hopefully
an anomaly, but that's one of the things that the
process and procedures that we're going to follow moving forward
are going to ensure that no one has given preferential treatment.
Everyone goes through the process right and I won't be
bullied into not working a case that should be worked.
(14:37):
And we're just going to do the right things moving forward.
So are there people that do the wrong things that
don't get caught. Yeah, that happens every day. But if
they come across my desk and Joe Ziegler's desk, I
can absolutely guarantee you they'll be treated the same as
any other person that comes in front of our desk.
This engaged in wrongdoing, and we're going to make sure
that the right thing's done.
Speaker 1 (14:56):
Given the lessons we're learning from this, Congress should do
to strengthen the protection of whistleblowers and to strengthen the
ability to surface these things and bring them in public position.
Speaker 2 (15:11):
Senator Grassley has been fantastic. He's the patron saint of
whistleblowers and he's a guy that supports people coming forward
and getting the protections that they need that become whistleblowers
and the protections. You think that there are protections for whistleblowers,
but the actual process and procedures of whistleblowers or that
(15:33):
you blow the whistle and then if you retaliate against
or you're fired, you're retaliated against and you're fired, and
the law doesn't allow for those proactive protections of whistleblowers.
We have to get a team together as whistleblowers and
we have to fight and prove that we're retaliated against. So, yeah,
we're working with Chairman Smith's office and we're providing some
(15:58):
of our lessons learned from our perspective on strengthening whistleblower laws.
That's really what this book is all about. This is
why we're really kind of taking an additional risk here
as whistleblowers. We want to support future whistleblowers, current whistleblowers.
So all the profits from this book end up going
to the nonprofit that supports whistleblowers. So that's our new
(16:19):
mission is to help whistleblowers come forward and get the
protections that they need to protect themselves.
Speaker 1 (16:25):
Senator Grasse has really had an amazing impact. Hasn't he
really creating a much more practical and less dangerous environment
for whistleblowers than existed twenty or thirty years coming. Here's
a guy who's in his nineties, still goes to farms
every weekend, visits all ninety nine counties in Iowa every year,
(16:47):
is very tough and been very firm. Did you find
working with him sort of an interesting experience?
Speaker 2 (16:53):
He was incredible. He's so read in and he is
so steadfast and his protection of whistle blowers and supporting whistleblowers.
I mean, he just an amazing individual, amazing person, and
I can't say enough good things about him. Joe, what's
your perspective? You look at the back of the book.
Speaker 3 (17:12):
I mean he put his words, he put his mouth
to support our book, and I think Gary said this.
I want to mention this. I think that this is
so important. Gary and I are not going to make
a cent off this book. We're still current federal employees.
So one thing that Gary and I and I think
that this has often overlooked is that we want to
(17:33):
be a support mechanism for future and current whistleblowers. We
want to show people, here is the right path to follow,
Here's what you can do to bring your truth to
the light of day. And that's why I think it's
so important that the proceeds from this book are going
to the nonprofit so that we can have money in there.
And not only that, but the book really details what
(17:56):
we went through the investigation, what was going on our
personal life, and it really is a blueprint for people
to see what a whistleblower is feeling as they're going
through this entire process. While you have this other story
about the Biden family and what they were involved in.
Speaker 1 (18:13):
Seems to me that what you all did would not
have happened without you, without people courageously taking on the
whole system. They were just going to cover it up.
Speaker 3 (18:25):
They did not expect Joe Zigler, Gary Shapley to be
involved in this investigation. It was apparent very early on
that Department of Justice wanted to investigate the case but
really didn't want to charge Hunter Biden. At the end
of the day, that was by their actions, by what
they were saying. You look at the terms that some
(18:45):
of the prosecutors were saying optics. I don't know anywhere
in the Department of Justice manual where it says optics
should play into how you move forward with an investigation
or how you make decisions. And it was very apparent
that the Delaware US Attorney's Office David Weiss, were more
concerned with their reputations how they looked, compared to actually
(19:10):
working a proper investigation.
Speaker 1 (19:12):
Ironically, that kind of blew up on him, didn't it.
Absolutely they ended up looking bad, not good.
Speaker 2 (19:19):
Yeah, well, you know, it was a hard burden to
get there. David Weiss never imagined or Meyrick Garland never
imagined in one hundred years that Joe and I would
have figured out what the legal process was to be
able to put tax information in the public sphere legally
with an active investigation ongoing. It's never been done before,
(19:42):
and they knew that, so their risk was very low.
They just assumed that we do something wrong and then
we could get smeared and fired and discredited and all
the way into the middle of twenty twenty three. They're
trying to make the case disappear. This wouldn't have happened
without Joe and I and and I don't mean to
be pretentious, but it's just the facts.
Speaker 3 (20:04):
What's so terrifying is that when I decided to become
a whistleblower and we were removed from the investigation, that
was my breaking point. I decided to come forward, and
I actually wrote a heartfelt email to the Commissioner of
the IRS at the time, Danny Warfol, basically saying that
this is a huge risky agency. You don't understand what
the repercussions of this are. And it really was something
(20:27):
that I thought that the commissioner would want to read.
That come to find out later that the Deputy commissioner
at the time actually deleted that email from his inbox.
And I had also come to find out that that
email was sent to Department of Justice, to our internal
ig to investigate me for doing something wrong. So here
(20:49):
is this agent trying to do the right thing, and
they're doing exactly what you shouldn't do, retaliating against that whistleblower.
Speaker 1 (20:57):
You will really illustrate the American system at its best,
that courageous people willing to take real risk can take
on the entire system and force it to confront a
problem that it was desperately trying to avoid. And in a sense,
it seems to me that's a tremendous comment on the
(21:19):
ultimate potential for citizens to influence their government and to
take on corruption and to take on the powers of beaming.
Is that too positive and optimistic exploration?
Speaker 2 (21:32):
Not from my perspective. Look, thank you for saying that
this federal government is not perfect, not every employee is perfect,
not every process is perfect, But there are people like
Joe and I out there. We are here for public service.
We are here to make this place better. In the
bureaucracy wants to fight those improvements day in and day out.
(21:54):
But even going through this process, I'll never be the same.
I probably took ten years off my life, if not more,
with the stress that happened. But with all that being said,
I would do it again if I had to. And
I'm optimistic that we can turn this around. Maybe not
make it perfect, but we can make improvements here that
(22:15):
the American people will see and will have more confidence
in the irs and their government, and I hope that
we're beacons for that for the American people.
Speaker 1 (22:40):
When you look at all the cases you two have
handled in your careers, to what accent are these kind
of cases like the Hunter Biden case and anomaly and
to what extent in general does the system work pretty well?
Speaker 3 (22:55):
That's a great question. I mean Gary and I as
senior advisors, I mean what we're trying to figure out
is is this a systemic issue or is this an anomaly?
What can we do to create further guardrails, potential policy
that is going to treat every taxpayer the same, that
is going to ensure that the right thing is done
(23:19):
when these investigation, these audits, whatever the IRS may be
doing are done. Like Gary said before, I hope this
is an anomaly. But what I'm very concerned with is
you have a lot of bureaucrats, career government employees who
are sitting in positions who have tremendous power, and when
you have that, obviously they lean one side of the
(23:41):
aisle left or right, and they're having a huge influence
on what is done specifically at Department of Justice. And
what I've been encouraged by is through this administration is
that they're trying to take a a hard stance and
an effort to clean house, to prevent some of these things,
to make our government as a political when you work
(24:04):
with Department of Justice, when you work with the irs
as possible.
Speaker 1 (24:09):
Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but you all
stand for the depth as we approach our two hundred
and fiftieth anniversary as a country. But you sort of
really along with sender Grass. They stand for the notion
that citizens have the right to take on the biggest machine,
the most corrupt politician, the most powerful people, and that
(24:31):
the larger American system in the end will rally to
the citizens if they have enough courage and will in
fact find a way to make things work, which we're seeing.
I think in the Hunter Biden case.
Speaker 2 (24:46):
We are examples of why this country's the greatest country owner.
Right Like our forefathers created a system that was meant
to move and to be flexible and to change and
to take on new opinions and ideas, and it's all
driven by the people, right And I think that one
of the things that gave me strength through this whole
process was that I knew I was doing the right thing.
(25:09):
I knew that I was coming forward for the right reasons,
and I knew that the American people were going to
see the things that the government was trying to hide
in their dark places, right, And I was hoping that
I was the light, or I was bringing some of
the light forward so that the American people can say, look, like,
you know what, maybe I don't agree with those guys,
(25:30):
but they came forward, and if someone else doesn't agree
with something, they can come forward following what Joe and
Gary did and really affect positive change and keep this
country the great country that it is.
Speaker 1 (25:43):
I have to ask one other things which I've never understood,
and that is the whole process. Hunter Biden forgets his laptop,
but this place they got who's repaired it finally gets
started of waiting, and so the laptop gets surfaced in
a way that it's really worthy of being in a movie.
And then the system tries to pretend the laptop doesn't exist.
(26:07):
There's this astonishing effort, including fifty one senior intelligence officers
who deliberately lie about the nature of the laptop. So
if you look at the effort to cover up the
mistake that Hunter made, it's a remarkable story. When did
you all become convinced that the laptop was real and
(26:30):
that it was at the heart of helping us understand
what was going on?
Speaker 3 (26:35):
Well, I mean, as the lead investigator on the case,
it was extremely early on. It was a meeting with
the FBI to where they said, hey, we know about
this laptop. It's at this laptop prepare shop. And then
that's when we obtained the laptop and through my search warrant,
we were able to look at the contents of what
(26:55):
was on that laptop. And there were multiple search warrants
that were done through this investigation. And I think that
that's one thing that is overlooked in this is there
was also a media cover up. There was a media
censorship that they didn't want this. It was discredit, discredit, discredit,
it's misinformation. When this was valid information, they couldn't dispute it,
(27:20):
and the media companies went to great lengths to suppress
the information. Almost like they went to great lengths to
try and suppress the information. I can tell you it
was a struggle for Gary and I when we were
coming through the whistleblower process. We had a ton of
media interest in it, but what was disappointing for me
is it was a limited amount of media interest on
(27:41):
the left side of politics, and we tried to do
a concerted effort to be as middle centrists of the road,
going on different media platforms to get the story out.
Speaker 1 (27:52):
But you felt pretty clearly early on that this was
the real deal.
Speaker 2 (27:57):
We knew laptop was real very early on, especially in
Zeke knew it and he confirmed it very early on.
Obviously you're like, well, how can you and Joe sit
there and see these fifty one intel folks say these
things in the media and put their names on this
letter if the record shows that at that time I
was sending emails to the Delaware US Attorney's office saying
(28:17):
that we had to have discussions about this, and it
prompted a very long meeting about the laptop that I
documented in detail and delivered that to House Ways and
Means Committee, who made that document public. And it clearly
shows that it was Hunter Biden's laptop, that none of
the information on there was manipulated. And these are one
of the things that helped confirm, like other journalists like
(28:38):
Randon Devine who was working the laptop story, that helped
them confirm that it was accurate. The second was is
that because Joe and I came forward, Hunter Biden got
charged with that gun charge in Delaware. And what did
the government, What did the Department of Justice enter into
evidence in that gun trial that laptop? It was absolutely his.
(29:00):
They knew it was his whole time, and they allowed
the media narrative and censorship to occur to try to
cover that up.
Speaker 1 (29:08):
My sense, I mean even in politics for a fairly
length of time. If the truth about the laptop had
come out before the election in twenty I think that
Biden would have lost badly because the laptop had so
many different things in it that were crazy, particularly the
relationship with Ukraine, that were just indefensible.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
There are many items that I believe were run afoul
of the election the rules of thumb as Department Justice
of Meeric Garland call it right. There were search warrants
in June twenty twenty, physical search warrants of Joe Biden's
guesthouse and some other locations that they didn't allow happen.
And then they basically gave us a cease and desist
(29:49):
from all investigative activity and the election meddling memorandum signed
by Merrick Garland clearly states that you can't choose to
or fail to take investiga negative steps for the purpose
of affecting in reality or in appearance, any election. And
they didn't let us continue this investigation six seven months
(30:12):
before the election even occurred. And that's why our day
of action where we actually went out and attempted to
interview Hunter, Biden and others, that occurred on December eighth
of twenty twenty. It was held. It was held, It
was held until after the election, and then they even
held it a couple of weeks after the election because
they said, oh, it's a contested election, so we can't
do it. So then of course FBI tips off Secret
(30:36):
Service and the Biden transition team about these impending interviews
and how that's not obstruction. I have no idea.
Speaker 1 (30:44):
When you put your career on the line in some ways,
your life on the line, when you do what you
believe is absolutely true, and you really make progress, and
then President Biden steps in, doesn't just pardon Hunter but
issues this very strange pardon for everybody who's not even
charged with anything. I mean, as people who've tried to
(31:07):
enforce the law, what was your reaction to.
Speaker 3 (31:10):
That, so havn't worked this investigation since twenty eighteen. I
really didn't have any reaction to it. I mean, that's
the president. He has the ability to do that, and
that's his right in the Office of the Presidency. What
I found very comical was that Gary and I to
government employees, continually changed the narrative from Joe Biden and
(31:34):
the White House. If you look back at I never
had any involvement with my son's businesses to I never
benefited financially from my son's businesses. I never talked to
my son about his businesses. The narrative continued to shift
as Gary and I continue to go through the Whistlelower
process provide additional evidence to House Ways and Means Committee,
(31:56):
so that narrative continued to shift. Same thing with the
partons I will never pardon my son. It's fought out,
no pardoning my son, the preemptive pardon that has never
been done before. And then ultimately they changed that narrative
and now they do it. So what I found was
very comical that we could have by us speaking the truth,
(32:17):
that the Presidency of the United States had to change
their narrative continually throughout the four years of his presidency.
Speaker 1 (32:24):
Of course, that does fit the Emerson vision that one
man in the truth is a majority and that's the
best of the ideal American system.
Speaker 2 (32:33):
Yeah, that's correct, And the pardon didn't have a lot
of effect on us, right, that was up to the president.
It was a power afforded to the president. But we
were successful here. You know, we brought to the American
people to put in front of the American people what
Department Justice was trying to do. They were trying to
give this preferential treatment and to hide the conduct of
a very powerful family from coming forward. And if we
(32:58):
didn't come forward, the American people would know it, we
wouldn't learn the lessons that we learned to try to
create a better processing system. Now, so the pardon didn't
really affect us. I think we were still very successful
and proven correct here, and I think that that's the
basis for all a bunch of positive change.
Speaker 1 (33:14):
Now, what I'm struck with is that you two are
literally classically American. There's this very deep tradition in the
American system that's just about the point that the whole
thing is totally screwed up. Somebody has the courage to
step out, take huge risks and somehow in the end
(33:38):
the truth wins. And I think what's fascinating is that
your book, the Whistleblowers versus the big Guy, two special agents,
the Biden crime family, and a corrupt eurocracy. This is
in a way a perfect book for our two hundred
and fiftieth birthday, because it is the deepest American tradition
that one person in the truth is the majority, and
(34:01):
that if you have the courage to stick to it,
that in the end the system will drift towards the
truth and away from the lies. And you two personify that,
and you've paid a real price for it. And e
every American citizen hoose the two of you a debt
of gratitude for the commitment and the courage Theyve Champ.
Speaker 2 (34:22):
Thank you so much. I really appreciate that.
Speaker 3 (34:24):
Yeah, thank you so much.
Speaker 1 (34:29):
Thank you to my guest Gary Shapley and Joseph Siegler.
News World is produced by Gingish Threet sixty and iHeartMedia.
Our executive producer is Guarzie Sloan. Our researcher is Rachel Peterson.
The artwork for the show was created by Steve Penley
Special thanks to the team at Gingers Sweet sixty. If
you've been enjoying news World, I hope you'll go to
(34:51):
Apple Podcasts and both rate us with five stars and
give us a review so others can learn what it's
all about. Join me on sub sect at English three
sixty dot net. I'm new Genglish. This is Neutrop
On this episode of News World, Gary Shapley and Joseph
Ziegler made headlines when they testified before Congress, revealing political interference,
bureaucratic stonewalling, and outright obstruction in the Hunter Biden cominow
case despite overwhelming evidence. They watched as the system bent
(00:25):
to protect the powerful, with the IRS, FBI, and DOJ
failing to act as independent institutions. Their investigation ultimately led
to Hunter Biden's federal conviction, but in a stunning last
minute move, President Joe Biden pardoned his son then when
even further issuing blanket pardons to other family members before
(00:48):
leaving office. But this isn't just about Hunter Biden. It's
about two public servants who risked everything to expose corruption,
facing Rotelli isolation and intense public scrutiny. Chaplin and Ziegler
take us inside the high space battle between truth and
(01:09):
power here to discuss their new book, The Whistleblowers Versus
the Big Guy. I'm really pleased to welcome my guests
Gary Shapley and Joseph Sniegler here, and Joe welcome and
(01:32):
thank you for joining me in the News World.
Speaker 2 (01:34):
Thank you, sir. Great to be here. Great to meet you.
Speaker 3 (01:36):
Yeah, thank you so much for having us.
Speaker 1 (01:38):
Let's start Joe with you. Can you start by telling
us a little bit about your own background, how you
get started at the IRS, and how you first became
connected to what became the Hunter Biden case. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (01:50):
Absolutely so. I grew up in a small town in
northeast Ohio. I'm an Ohio native. While I was there,
worked at Ernst and Young prior to coming to the government.
Decided to make the move into federal service. Moved over
the IRS in twenty ten. Worked a variety of cases,
from pharmaceutical drug diversion cases to captive insurance investigations. Worked
(02:13):
a plethora of things, and then I was fortunate enough
to join what is called the International Tax and Financial
Crimes Group. It's a specialty group of agents, some of
the best around the nation that work high wealth individuals
who are potentially offshoring their assets to evade their income taxes.
When it became a part of that group, was looking
(02:35):
into another investigation. It was a social media company, foreign
social media company and reviewing bank reports. In that case,
Hunter Biden was allegedly paying some Russian prostitutes that were
also a part of that social media company. So his
name came up in the bank reports. Normal course of
(02:57):
what I do in my normal job was like, this
is unusual. In the bank report, it cited that his
ex wife and their divorce and their divorce proceedings claimed
that her husband had tax issues got a diamond, very
rare diamond that was high value. It really led into
more kind of evidence. Started looking at the tax filings
(03:21):
and he had unfiled tax returns for multiple years. So
I'm like, this looks like a pretty good case. So
I elevated it up through the process and that's where
the story unfolds.
Speaker 1 (03:32):
Gary, the same question for you, mean, what led you
from AmeriCorps and the Inspectors Generals off of that NSA
to IRS criminal investigations.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
Yeah, I mean it's really a call of service. We
live in the greatest country on earth, and I always
wanted to do the best for this country and provide
my services this country, and federal law enforcement seemed to
fit where my educational background was and where I found
some interest in while I was in the AmeriCorps doing
volunteer work and of violence tier income tax assistance site.
Oddly enough, so I came over to IRS Criminal Investigation
(04:05):
in two thousand and nine. From NSA very quickly got
into the Swiss Bank program in about twenty thirteen. I
worked at a Department of Justice Tax division for over five years,
working in cases like Credit Swiss, you know, the resolved
for two point six billion, and then another Credit Swiss
for five hundred and eleven million recently, and HSBCPBRS and UBS.
(04:28):
So my path took me into the international route. Especially
Ziegler had already initiated this investigation when I was a
manager elsewhere, and then became the manager of the International
Tax and Financial Crimes Group, and then I became Joe
supervisor and the supervisor of the Hunter Biden investigation. That's
my path.
Speaker 1 (04:47):
There's a hunter Byen investigation begat into unfold. Did that
surprise you, guys? Was that different when you're spending all
your time tracking down people who are breaking the law anyway?
So was this in any way different? Just one more
guy breaking the law?
Speaker 3 (05:02):
I actually didn't even know who Hunter Biden was. I
saw the last name, I didn't know if it was
a nephew, I didn't know if it was a brother.
So name really didn't mean anything to me. It was
facts of the case, evidence that was in front of me.
It really didn't at any point early on in the
investigation it really the name Hunter Biden. I mean it
(05:24):
was former vice president. Really, when I started digging into
the facts, reading the news articles, reading all the information,
it really started to become a parent that all the
different things that Hunter was involved in, from Ukraine to
Romania to China. I mean, what it also said to me,
or what it also showed to me, is a lot
(05:45):
of the money that he was making just didn't make
any sense.
Speaker 1 (05:49):
If I understand it in just straightforward practical ways, here's
the guy who's not filing his income text. That's not
a complicated idea.
Speaker 3 (05:59):
Not filing his income taxes. And then you also had
for one of the early on years twenty fourteen, there
was a significant amount of money he was earning a
million dollars a year from Barisma, and that income was
a reporter on a sack return. So now that elevates
into a felony crime, a potential tax evasion.
Speaker 1 (06:16):
What do you think goes on in somebody's mind that
they have a million dollars coming in and they don't
report it. You know, if you're a real crook, if
you're the MAF, if you're a drug cartel. But I mean,
here's the guy who, at least at one level was
ostensibly normal, and yet he thinks he can take a
(06:37):
million bucks and not have to tell anybody about it.
Speaker 3 (06:41):
That's what goes into our investigations. Is an aspect of
evading your income taxes is wilfulness. What was their mensrael,
what was their mindset when they decided not to report
this income? And that's what elevates something from being a
civil issue to being criminal and into our hands. And
that's part of what we have to look at. And
(07:03):
I mean, like when you look at what's in someone's mind,
you look at the evidence, you look at did they
take acts to further hide their money from the IRS
so that they don't have to pay income taxes on it.
We had put forward evidence that showed that Hunter Biden
had done that.
Speaker 1 (07:20):
Do you think people and that just kind of think
like they're invisible.
Speaker 2 (07:24):
I think it's likely that it was purposeful to not
report that Ukraine income, right, because they knew that the
engagement of his father in Ukraine, and they knew what
that looked like, right, And It's similar to why the
Department of Justice let the statue limitations toll on the
tax charges for twenty fourteen and fifteen, which those were
the years that Ukraine Beresma income had come in. So
(07:46):
they were trying to hide all the aspects of information
coming from Ukraine because they knew underlying what was happening there.
And look like, we have to treat all these taxpayers
the same at the end of the day, and the
wilfulness and the knowledge that he was evading his income
taxes was clear by him pleading guilty to all the
charges that Joe Ziegeler recommended in the report in California.
Speaker 1 (08:10):
Do you think that people like that just think that
they're in vulnerable.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
Yeah, I mean at some level they don't believe they're
going to get caught. And you know, it's possible that
with his connections, he thought that it was never going
to come to his front door. And the problem is
that the Department Justice did everything they could to make
that come true.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
That's the second big surprise to me. And where your
books really important, because you guys, I mean, if you
hadn't had the courage to stick to what you were doing,
a lot of us would never have shown up because
they were trying so hard to bury it. Given all
the other big cases you'd handle and the kind of
crimes you've been dealing with, were you surprised by the
(08:52):
degree to which the Justice Department was actively trying to
discourage this case and trying to basically we cover it up.
Speaker 2 (09:02):
I was very surprised, so surprised that it took us
over two years of seeing this preferential treatment and stopping
investigative steps from happening and removing political figure number one
from our documentary quests and search warrants for us to
finally get to the point where we knew the Department
of Justice was trying to hide this investigation. And their
(09:24):
conduct afterwards after I became a whistle blower and was
coming forward, and after especially Ziegeler did as well, shows
what their intent was.
Speaker 1 (09:33):
Right.
Speaker 2 (09:34):
Their intent was to not charge. They were going to
offer a non prosecution agreement to him on May fifteenth,
twenty twenty three. And then that was right when I
was coming forward to testify in front of Congress. So
David Weiss and Delaware said to his ausa, said, we
have to get him to plead guilty. So that's when
the two misdemeanor plea deal came up, and Chriman Jason Smith,
(09:56):
the House Ways and Means Committee put in an amicust
brief that had about a thousand pages that were Joe
Ziegeler in mind's testimony and the evidence that we provided,
so that judge in Delaware throughout that plea deal, I've
never seen that. I'm sure it's happened, but I've never
seen that happen. This is what DJ tried to do
with the case. And then at that point when the
(10:17):
judge threw it out, the Department of Justice was completely stuck.
They knew we were coming forward with the evidence, so
that's when they started doing the right thing, which was
charged him with a gun charge. A jury of his
peers found him guilty, charged him in California. He pleaded
guilty to those violations. So if not for Joe Ziegeler
and I risking absolutely everything, this would have never happened.
(10:40):
They would have never known what Hunter bind did and
President Biden wouldn't have had to lie about pardoning him
and then pardon him.
Speaker 1 (10:49):
I mean, here you are, as individuals up against a
huge machine and up against the enormous amount of political power.
How did you manage yourselves during this pretty much have
been treminiousment of stress.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
Yeah, there was not only that, but we were facing
retaliation at our job, Like there were multiple points to
where we were isolated. A lot of the things that
we were trying to do, we're just not getting approved,
flat out not getting approved. I think that the way
Gary and I handled ourselves in the best way possible.
We had an extremely good group of attorneys at Empower Oversight,
(11:26):
my attorney Dean Zerby.
Speaker 2 (11:28):
Mark Lydel.
Speaker 3 (11:29):
We had a great team around us that I think
helped us work through the process. But from Gary and
I's perspective, we viewed this as a non partisan issue.
This was something that is very middle of the road.
You have a Department of Justice that's protecting one family
from any of this coming to the light of day,
(11:49):
and I think that they did not expect Gary and
I to be so buttoned up. And I mean we
heard from James Comer and various members of Congress that we,
who are the best witnesses whistleblowers that they have ever had,
testified in front of their committees. Everything we said stood up.
Speaker 1 (12:07):
When you are working on a large system large bureau
credit system and you suddenly stand out and you're prepared
to take on the system, and you go out there
in public. It's a real risk and it creates real
tensions in the larger system. What was it like after
you had testified in front of ways and means to
(12:30):
go back into the building and to go back into
working with the people who realized that you were pursuing
the truth in a way that many of them had not.
Speaker 2 (12:42):
It was actually split right. There's the leadership that is
entrenched in the bureaucracy right that they're just going to
stay status quo and they can't think outside the box,
and they're just really just following whatever Department Justice told
them to do. They weren't thinking what was right and wrong.
The undercurrent of age and the working folks that create
(13:04):
the advantage to complete our mission on a daily basis,
they were incredibly supportive, covertly right overtly. No one would
say anything, no one would provide any support. No one
was really there to help us mentally or to help
us down the past. So that was very difficult, a
(13:25):
very very difficult time, just being isolated and people fearing
to come out and support us.
Speaker 1 (13:50):
First of one was a great tribute to your personal credibility,
in your personal sense of honor and duty. Do you
think this is a unique problem that involved the president's
son or do you think there's an underlying pattern of
hiding from law breaking and protecting powerful people who otherwise
(14:12):
would be in deep trouble.
Speaker 2 (14:15):
I'm not tainted on the system. To me, was hopefully
an anomaly, but that's one of the things that the
process and procedures that we're going to follow moving forward
are going to ensure that no one has given preferential treatment.
Everyone goes through the process right and I won't be
bullied into not working a case that should be worked.
(14:37):
And we're just going to do the right things moving forward.
So are there people that do the wrong things that
don't get caught. Yeah, that happens every day. But if
they come across my desk and Joe Ziegler's desk, I
can absolutely guarantee you they'll be treated the same as
any other person that comes in front of our desk.
This engaged in wrongdoing, and we're going to make sure
that the right thing's done.
Speaker 1 (14:56):
Given the lessons we're learning from this, Congress should do
to strengthen the protection of whistleblowers and to strengthen the
ability to surface these things and bring them in public position.
Speaker 2 (15:11):
Senator Grassley has been fantastic. He's the patron saint of
whistleblowers and he's a guy that supports people coming forward
and getting the protections that they need that become whistleblowers
and the protections. You think that there are protections for whistleblowers,
but the actual process and procedures of whistleblowers or that
(15:33):
you blow the whistle and then if you retaliate against
or you're fired, you're retaliated against and you're fired, and
the law doesn't allow for those proactive protections of whistleblowers.
We have to get a team together as whistleblowers and
we have to fight and prove that we're retaliated against. So, yeah,
we're working with Chairman Smith's office and we're providing some
(15:58):
of our lessons learned from our perspective on strengthening whistleblower laws.
That's really what this book is all about. This is
why we're really kind of taking an additional risk here
as whistleblowers. We want to support future whistleblowers, current whistleblowers.
So all the profits from this book end up going
to the nonprofit that supports whistleblowers. So that's our new
(16:19):
mission is to help whistleblowers come forward and get the
protections that they need to protect themselves.
Speaker 1 (16:25):
Senator Grasse has really had an amazing impact. Hasn't he
really creating a much more practical and less dangerous environment
for whistleblowers than existed twenty or thirty years coming. Here's
a guy who's in his nineties, still goes to farms
every weekend, visits all ninety nine counties in Iowa every year,
(16:47):
is very tough and been very firm. Did you find
working with him sort of an interesting experience?
Speaker 2 (16:53):
He was incredible. He's so read in and he is
so steadfast and his protection of whistle blowers and supporting whistleblowers.
I mean, he just an amazing individual, amazing person, and
I can't say enough good things about him. Joe, what's
your perspective? You look at the back of the book.
Speaker 3 (17:12):
I mean he put his words, he put his mouth
to support our book, and I think Gary said this.
I want to mention this. I think that this is
so important. Gary and I are not going to make
a cent off this book. We're still current federal employees.
So one thing that Gary and I and I think
that this has often overlooked is that we want to
(17:33):
be a support mechanism for future and current whistleblowers. We
want to show people, here is the right path to follow,
Here's what you can do to bring your truth to
the light of day. And that's why I think it's
so important that the proceeds from this book are going
to the nonprofit so that we can have money in there.
And not only that, but the book really details what
(17:56):
we went through the investigation, what was going on our
personal life, and it really is a blueprint for people
to see what a whistleblower is feeling as they're going
through this entire process. While you have this other story
about the Biden family and what they were involved in.
Speaker 1 (18:13):
Seems to me that what you all did would not
have happened without you, without people courageously taking on the
whole system. They were just going to cover it up.
Speaker 3 (18:25):
They did not expect Joe Zigler, Gary Shapley to be
involved in this investigation. It was apparent very early on
that Department of Justice wanted to investigate the case but
really didn't want to charge Hunter Biden. At the end
of the day, that was by their actions, by what
they were saying. You look at the terms that some
(18:45):
of the prosecutors were saying optics. I don't know anywhere
in the Department of Justice manual where it says optics
should play into how you move forward with an investigation
or how you make decisions. And it was very apparent
that the Delaware US Attorney's Office David Weiss, were more
concerned with their reputations how they looked, compared to actually
(19:10):
working a proper investigation.
Speaker 1 (19:12):
Ironically, that kind of blew up on him, didn't it.
Absolutely they ended up looking bad, not good.
Speaker 2 (19:19):
Yeah, well, you know, it was a hard burden to
get there. David Weiss never imagined or Meyrick Garland never
imagined in one hundred years that Joe and I would
have figured out what the legal process was to be
able to put tax information in the public sphere legally
with an active investigation ongoing. It's never been done before,
(19:42):
and they knew that, so their risk was very low.
They just assumed that we do something wrong and then
we could get smeared and fired and discredited and all
the way into the middle of twenty twenty three. They're
trying to make the case disappear. This wouldn't have happened
without Joe and I and and I don't mean to
be pretentious, but it's just the facts.
Speaker 3 (20:04):
What's so terrifying is that when I decided to become
a whistleblower and we were removed from the investigation, that
was my breaking point. I decided to come forward, and
I actually wrote a heartfelt email to the Commissioner of
the IRS at the time, Danny Warfol, basically saying that
this is a huge risky agency. You don't understand what
the repercussions of this are. And it really was something
(20:27):
that I thought that the commissioner would want to read.
That come to find out later that the Deputy commissioner
at the time actually deleted that email from his inbox.
And I had also come to find out that that
email was sent to Department of Justice, to our internal
ig to investigate me for doing something wrong. So here
(20:49):
is this agent trying to do the right thing, and
they're doing exactly what you shouldn't do, retaliating against that whistleblower.
Speaker 1 (20:57):
You will really illustrate the American system at its best,
that courageous people willing to take real risk can take
on the entire system and force it to confront a
problem that it was desperately trying to avoid. And in a sense,
it seems to me that's a tremendous comment on the
(21:19):
ultimate potential for citizens to influence their government and to
take on corruption and to take on the powers of beaming.
Is that too positive and optimistic exploration?
Speaker 2 (21:32):
Not from my perspective. Look, thank you for saying that
this federal government is not perfect, not every employee is perfect,
not every process is perfect, But there are people like
Joe and I out there. We are here for public service.
We are here to make this place better. In the
bureaucracy wants to fight those improvements day in and day out.
(21:54):
But even going through this process, I'll never be the same.
I probably took ten years off my life, if not more,
with the stress that happened. But with all that being said,
I would do it again if I had to. And
I'm optimistic that we can turn this around. Maybe not
make it perfect, but we can make improvements here that
(22:15):
the American people will see and will have more confidence
in the irs and their government, and I hope that
we're beacons for that for the American people.
Speaker 1 (22:40):
When you look at all the cases you two have
handled in your careers, to what accent are these kind
of cases like the Hunter Biden case and anomaly and
to what extent in general does the system work pretty well?
Speaker 3 (22:55):
That's a great question. I mean Gary and I as
senior advisors, I mean what we're trying to figure out
is is this a systemic issue or is this an anomaly?
What can we do to create further guardrails, potential policy
that is going to treat every taxpayer the same, that
is going to ensure that the right thing is done
(23:19):
when these investigation, these audits, whatever the IRS may be
doing are done. Like Gary said before, I hope this
is an anomaly. But what I'm very concerned with is
you have a lot of bureaucrats, career government employees who
are sitting in positions who have tremendous power, and when
you have that, obviously they lean one side of the
(23:41):
aisle left or right, and they're having a huge influence
on what is done specifically at Department of Justice. And
what I've been encouraged by is through this administration is
that they're trying to take a a hard stance and
an effort to clean house, to prevent some of these things,
to make our government as a political when you work
(24:04):
with Department of Justice, when you work with the irs
as possible.
Speaker 1 (24:09):
Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but you all
stand for the depth as we approach our two hundred
and fiftieth anniversary as a country. But you sort of
really along with sender Grass. They stand for the notion
that citizens have the right to take on the biggest machine,
the most corrupt politician, the most powerful people, and that
(24:31):
the larger American system in the end will rally to
the citizens if they have enough courage and will in
fact find a way to make things work, which we're seeing.
I think in the Hunter Biden case.
Speaker 2 (24:46):
We are examples of why this country's the greatest country owner.
Right Like our forefathers created a system that was meant
to move and to be flexible and to change and
to take on new opinions and ideas, and it's all
driven by the people, right And I think that one
of the things that gave me strength through this whole
process was that I knew I was doing the right thing.
(25:09):
I knew that I was coming forward for the right reasons,
and I knew that the American people were going to
see the things that the government was trying to hide
in their dark places, right, And I was hoping that
I was the light, or I was bringing some of
the light forward so that the American people can say, look, like,
you know what, maybe I don't agree with those guys,
(25:30):
but they came forward, and if someone else doesn't agree
with something, they can come forward following what Joe and
Gary did and really affect positive change and keep this
country the great country that it is.
Speaker 1 (25:43):
I have to ask one other things which I've never understood,
and that is the whole process. Hunter Biden forgets his laptop,
but this place they got who's repaired it finally gets
started of waiting, and so the laptop gets surfaced in
a way that it's really worthy of being in a movie.
And then the system tries to pretend the laptop doesn't exist.
(26:07):
There's this astonishing effort, including fifty one senior intelligence officers
who deliberately lie about the nature of the laptop. So
if you look at the effort to cover up the
mistake that Hunter made, it's a remarkable story. When did
you all become convinced that the laptop was real and
(26:30):
that it was at the heart of helping us understand
what was going on?
Speaker 3 (26:35):
Well, I mean, as the lead investigator on the case,
it was extremely early on. It was a meeting with
the FBI to where they said, hey, we know about
this laptop. It's at this laptop prepare shop. And then
that's when we obtained the laptop and through my search warrant,
we were able to look at the contents of what
(26:55):
was on that laptop. And there were multiple search warrants
that were done through this investigation. And I think that
that's one thing that is overlooked in this is there
was also a media cover up. There was a media
censorship that they didn't want this. It was discredit, discredit, discredit,
it's misinformation. When this was valid information, they couldn't dispute it,
(27:20):
and the media companies went to great lengths to suppress
the information. Almost like they went to great lengths to
try and suppress the information. I can tell you it
was a struggle for Gary and I when we were
coming through the whistleblower process. We had a ton of
media interest in it, but what was disappointing for me
is it was a limited amount of media interest on
(27:41):
the left side of politics, and we tried to do
a concerted effort to be as middle centrists of the road,
going on different media platforms to get the story out.
Speaker 1 (27:52):
But you felt pretty clearly early on that this was
the real deal.
Speaker 2 (27:57):
We knew laptop was real very early on, especially in
Zeke knew it and he confirmed it very early on.
Obviously you're like, well, how can you and Joe sit
there and see these fifty one intel folks say these
things in the media and put their names on this
letter if the record shows that at that time I
was sending emails to the Delaware US Attorney's office saying
(28:17):
that we had to have discussions about this, and it
prompted a very long meeting about the laptop that I
documented in detail and delivered that to House Ways and
Means Committee, who made that document public. And it clearly
shows that it was Hunter Biden's laptop, that none of
the information on there was manipulated. And these are one
of the things that helped confirm, like other journalists like
(28:38):
Randon Devine who was working the laptop story, that helped
them confirm that it was accurate. The second was is
that because Joe and I came forward, Hunter Biden got
charged with that gun charge in Delaware. And what did
the government, What did the Department of Justice enter into
evidence in that gun trial that laptop? It was absolutely his.
(29:00):
They knew it was his whole time, and they allowed
the media narrative and censorship to occur to try to
cover that up.
Speaker 1 (29:08):
My sense, I mean even in politics for a fairly
length of time. If the truth about the laptop had
come out before the election in twenty I think that
Biden would have lost badly because the laptop had so
many different things in it that were crazy, particularly the
relationship with Ukraine, that were just indefensible.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
There are many items that I believe were run afoul
of the election the rules of thumb as Department Justice
of Meeric Garland call it right. There were search warrants
in June twenty twenty, physical search warrants of Joe Biden's
guesthouse and some other locations that they didn't allow happen.
And then they basically gave us a cease and desist
(29:49):
from all investigative activity and the election meddling memorandum signed
by Merrick Garland clearly states that you can't choose to
or fail to take investiga negative steps for the purpose
of affecting in reality or in appearance, any election. And
they didn't let us continue this investigation six seven months
(30:12):
before the election even occurred. And that's why our day
of action where we actually went out and attempted to
interview Hunter, Biden and others, that occurred on December eighth
of twenty twenty. It was held. It was held, It
was held until after the election, and then they even
held it a couple of weeks after the election because
they said, oh, it's a contested election, so we can't
do it. So then of course FBI tips off Secret
(30:36):
Service and the Biden transition team about these impending interviews
and how that's not obstruction. I have no idea.
Speaker 1 (30:44):
When you put your career on the line in some ways,
your life on the line, when you do what you
believe is absolutely true, and you really make progress, and
then President Biden steps in, doesn't just pardon Hunter but
issues this very strange pardon for everybody who's not even
charged with anything. I mean, as people who've tried to
(31:07):
enforce the law, what was your reaction to.
Speaker 3 (31:10):
That, so havn't worked this investigation since twenty eighteen. I
really didn't have any reaction to it. I mean, that's
the president. He has the ability to do that, and
that's his right in the Office of the Presidency. What
I found very comical was that Gary and I to
government employees, continually changed the narrative from Joe Biden and
(31:34):
the White House. If you look back at I never
had any involvement with my son's businesses to I never
benefited financially from my son's businesses. I never talked to
my son about his businesses. The narrative continued to shift
as Gary and I continue to go through the Whistlelower
process provide additional evidence to House Ways and Means Committee,
(31:56):
so that narrative continued to shift. Same thing with the
partons I will never pardon my son. It's fought out,
no pardoning my son, the preemptive pardon that has never
been done before. And then ultimately they changed that narrative
and now they do it. So what I found was
very comical that we could have by us speaking the truth,
(32:17):
that the Presidency of the United States had to change
their narrative continually throughout the four years of his presidency.
Speaker 1 (32:24):
Of course, that does fit the Emerson vision that one
man in the truth is a majority and that's the
best of the ideal American system.
Speaker 2 (32:33):
Yeah, that's correct, And the pardon didn't have a lot
of effect on us, right, that was up to the president.
It was a power afforded to the president. But we
were successful here. You know, we brought to the American
people to put in front of the American people what
Department Justice was trying to do. They were trying to
give this preferential treatment and to hide the conduct of
a very powerful family from coming forward. And if we
(32:58):
didn't come forward, the American people would know it, we
wouldn't learn the lessons that we learned to try to
create a better processing system. Now, so the pardon didn't
really affect us. I think we were still very successful
and proven correct here, and I think that that's the
basis for all a bunch of positive change.
Speaker 1 (33:14):
Now, what I'm struck with is that you two are
literally classically American. There's this very deep tradition in the
American system that's just about the point that the whole
thing is totally screwed up. Somebody has the courage to
step out, take huge risks and somehow in the end
(33:38):
the truth wins. And I think what's fascinating is that
your book, the Whistleblowers versus the big Guy, two special agents,
the Biden crime family, and a corrupt eurocracy. This is
in a way a perfect book for our two hundred
and fiftieth birthday, because it is the deepest American tradition
that one person in the truth is the majority, and
(34:01):
that if you have the courage to stick to it,
that in the end the system will drift towards the
truth and away from the lies. And you two personify that,
and you've paid a real price for it. And e
every American citizen hoose the two of you a debt
of gratitude for the commitment and the courage Theyve Champ.
Speaker 2 (34:22):
Thank you so much. I really appreciate that.
Speaker 3 (34:24):
Yeah, thank you so much.
Speaker 1 (34:29):
Thank you to my guest Gary Shapley and Joseph Siegler.
News World is produced by Gingish Threet sixty and iHeartMedia.
Our executive producer is Guarzie Sloan. Our researcher is Rachel Peterson.
The artwork for the show was created by Steve Penley
Special thanks to the team at Gingers Sweet sixty. If
you've been enjoying news World, I hope you'll go to
(34:51):
Apple Podcasts and both rate us with five stars and
give us a review so others can learn what it's
all about. Join me on sub sect at English three
sixty dot net. I'm new Genglish. This is Neutrop
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Ruthie's Table 4
For more than 30 years The River Cafe in London, has been the home-from-home of artists, architects, designers, actors, collectors, writers, activists, and politicians. Michael Caine, Glenn Close, JJ Abrams, Steve McQueen, Victoria and David Beckham, and Lily Allen, are just some of the people who love to call The River Cafe home. On River Cafe Table 4, Rogers sits down with her customers—who have become friends—to talk about food memories. Table 4 explores how food impacts every aspect of our lives. “Foods is politics, food is cultural, food is how you express love, food is about your heritage, it defines who you and who you want to be,” says Rogers. Each week, Rogers invites her guest to reminisce about family suppers and first dates, what they cook, how they eat when performing, the restaurants they choose, and what food they seek when they need comfort. And to punctuate each episode of Table 4, guests such as Ralph Fiennes, Emily Blunt, and Alfonso Cuarón, read their favourite recipe from one of the best-selling River Cafe cookbooks. Table 4 itself, is situated near The River Cafe’s open kitchen, close to the bright pink wood-fired oven and next to the glossy yellow pass, where Ruthie oversees the restaurant. You are invited to take a seat at this intimate table and join the conversation. For more information, recipes, and ingredients, go to https://shoptherivercafe.co.uk/ Web: https://rivercafe.co.uk/ Instagram: www.instagram.com/therivercafelondon/ Facebook: https://en-gb.facebook.com/therivercafelondon/ For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iheartradio app, apple podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com