Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings have been the subject of scrutiny since the contents of his abandoned laptop were made public in 2020.
Among those asking questions is Colorado lawyer Kevin Evans. However, he says that the White House has stopped him from getting answers.
DOJ allegedly sitting on 400 pages worth of relevant material
Evans told the Daily Mail last week that he filed a lawsuit in March after the Department of Justice (DOJ) refused to honor his Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. Passed in 1967, FOIA allows citizens to obtain records from federal agencies.
In his FOIA request, the lawyer sought information regarding “any relationship, communication, gift(s), and/or remuneration in any form’ between the Biden family and China, Russia, or Ukraine.”
Evans said that DOJ attorneys were slow to act before eventually coming forward with roughly 60 pages worth of documents.
Yet he complained that the material simply consisted of “letters from senators and congressmen asking about Hunter, and letters from DOJ back.”
“Then towards the end of last year they said, ‘Well we have these 400 pages of potentially responsive documents, we need to review them,'” Evans explained, adding that this admission was later repeated in court.
The lawyer acknowledged that the DOJ may argue that it can refuse to confirm or deny the existence of documents pertaining to Hunter Biden by citing something called the “Glomar response.”
The term’s origins go back to 1975 when the CIA’s 1975 refused to confirm or deny the existence of documents relating to the USNS Hughes Glomar Explorer, a ship which was built to recover a sunken Soviet submarine.
However, Evans told the Daily Mail that he didn’t “know how the heck they now can take the position that Glomar is applicable.”
“To me, it seems the cat’s out of the bag here after [them] having disclosed the documents exist,” the attorney insisted.
Lawyers says that FOIA “has become a toothless vehicle”
Instead of going that route, Evans suggested that the DOJ “will move for summary judgment on the privacy exemptions under FOIA in an effort to avoid having to produce these documents.”
Evans made clear that he is unimpressed with FOIA’s efficacy for uncovering information, asserting that it “has become a toothless vehicle.”
“Courts do not comply with the spirit of the law, they’re more inclined to bend over backwards to accept the government’s position rather than force disclosure,” the attorney was quoted as saying.