WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-MO), House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH), and House Oversight and Accountability Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) sent a letter to Hunter Biden’s attorneys Christopher Clark and Abbe Lowell demanding the leaked documents about their interactions with the Department of Justice (DOJ) regarding Hunter Biden’s unprecedented plea deal.

A little over three weeks after Hunter Biden’s sweetheart plea deal fell apart, the New York Times and Politico published separate articles providing detailed accounts of the failed settlement negotiations between the DOJ and Hunter Biden’s lawyers based on nonpublic information, including previously undisclosed documents and communications.

Excerpts of the letter:

“The Committees on the Judiciary, Ways and Means, and Oversight and Accountability are continuing their oversight of the Department of Justice’s (Department) commitment to impartial justice and its handling of a criminal investigation involving Hunter Biden. On July 26, 2023, Hunter Biden appeared before Judge Maryellen Noreika of the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware for a hearing on the apparently unprecedented plea deal involving Hunter Biden agreed to by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware. However, the plea deal fell apart when prosecutors and defense attorneys could not provide answers to routine questions about the agreement posed by Judge Noreika.

“A little over three weeks later, on August 19, 2023, the New York Times and Politico published separate articles providing detailed accounts of the failed settlement negotiations between the Department and Hunter Biden’s lawyers based on nonpublic information, including previously undisclosed documents and communications. The information contained in these articles reinforces serious concerns regarding whether the Department has handled a case involving President Biden’s son in an impartial manner that is consistent with other prosecutions.

“There are a limited number of people who would have had access to the documents and communications discussed in these articles, and based on the narrative set forth in these pieces, the Committees believe it is highly likely that these materials were provided to these media outlets by or at the direction of the Biden legal defense team, of which you are or were a member. Given that these disclosures have been made to two media outlets and this information has been widely publicized, no basis exists to withhold these documents and communications from the Committees, including on the basis of any purported duty of confidentiality, work product, or other privilege interest.

“Accordingly, so that the Committees can fulfill their oversight obligations, please produce the following information:

1. The 32-page letter from Mr. Clark to U.S. Attorney David Weiss regarding a potential gun charge against Hunter Biden that is referenced in the Politico article;
2. The 100-slide PowerPoint presentation regarding potential tax charges against Hunter Biden that is referenced in the Politico article;
3. All e-mails from Mr. Clark to the head of the Department’s Criminal Division, the head of the Department’s Tax Division, the Office of Legal Counsel, the Office of the Solicitor General, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, Attorney General Merrick Garland, and Associate Deputy Attorney General Bradley Weinsheimer seeking meetings that are referenced in the Politico article;
4. The May 11 e-mail from Associate Deputy Attorney General Bradley Weinsheimer to Mr. Clark that is referenced in the Politico article;
5. The May 18 communication between an attorney for Hunter Biden and two prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware, including but not limited to the first draft of the proposed deal between Biden and the U.S. Attorney’s Office, that is referenced in the Politico article and the New York Times article;
6. The May 18 communication between Lesley Wolf of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware and Hunter Biden’s attorneys that included a list of musthaves for a potential deal that is referenced in the Politico article and the New York Times article;
7. The May 19 communication between Lesley Wolf and Hunter Biden’s attorneys where Ms. Wolf pointed to another deal with the camera company Aegis Electronic Group, Inc. that is referenced in the Politico article;
8. The May 19 communication between one of Hunter Biden’s attorneys and prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware, including another draft pretrial diversion agreement addressing both the gun and tax issues, that is referenced in the Politico article;
9. The June 2 e-mail from Mr. Clark to Lesley Wolf that included sample immunity language that is referenced in the Politico article;
10. The post-June 2 e-mails between Hunter Biden’s attorneys and prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware where the deal was line-edited that are referenced in the Politico article;
11. The June 7 e-mail from Lesley Wolf to Mr. Clark that included the final immunity language that is referenced in the Politico article;
12. The June 19 e-mail from U.S. Attorney Weiss’s top deputy to Mr. Clark regarding a press call that is referenced in the Politico article;
13. The e-mail from Mr. Clark responding to the June 19 e-mail referenced above, including two versions of a statement that Hunter Biden’s attorneys planned to release when the deal became public, that is referenced in the Politico article;
14. The June 19 e-mail from Shannon Hanson of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware to Mr. Clark asking to remove two words from the statement describing the status of the investigation that is referenced in the New York Times article;
15. The pretrial diversion report sent on July 24 from the Chief Probation Officer for the District of Delaware to Hunter Biden’s attorneys and the prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware that is referenced in the Politico article;
16. The July 31 communication from prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware to Hunter Biden’s attorneys regarding suggested changes to the plea agreement and pretrial diversion agreement that is referenced in the Politico article;
17. The August 7 letter from Mr. Clark to prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware rejecting the suggested changes set forth in the July 31 communication that is referenced in the Politico article;
18. All documents and communications not listed above shared by or at the direction of Hunter Biden’s attorneys with the New York Times, Politico, or any other news organization regarding the settlement negotiations in the following cases: United States v. Biden, 1:23-cr-00061 (D. Del. 2023); United States v. Biden, 1:23-mj-00274 (D. Del. 2023);
19. All communications between Clark Smith Villazor LLP, Winston & Strawn LLP, or any member of the Biden legal defense team and the New York Times, Politico, or any other news organization concerning the materials referenced, explicitly or otherwise, in the New York Times article or Politico article; and
20. All other communications between Clark Smith Villazor LLP, Winston & Strawn LLP, or any member of the Biden legal defense team and the Department of Justice, including any U.S. Attorney’s Office.

Please provide this information as soon as possible but not later than 5:00 p.m. on September 20, 2023.”

Read the full letter to Hunter Biden’s attorneys here.