Staff Reports
In a recent court document, Hunter Biden’s lawyers argued that a section of a previous plea agreement with federal prosecutors should still apply, even though it was not approved by a judge. They claim that the agreement, which involved a diversion program for a gun possession charge, is “valid and binding.” However, prosecutors have not yet expressed their position on the matter.
Hunter Biden's Attorneys Seize on Special Counsel Appointment to File 'Suspect' Motionhttps://t.co/tXauJTHDqe
— 🇺🇸🇺🇸Josh Dunlap🇺🇲🇺🇲 ULTRA-MAGA (@JDunlap1974) August 15, 2023
The plea deal itself had a unique structure, with Hunter Biden admitting to two misdemeanor tax offenses and the felony charge related to his gun purchase being processed separately. If he met certain conditions for two years, including staying sober, the gun charge would be dropped.
https://rumble.com/v37umgb-hunter-bidens-attorneys-seize-on-special-counsel-appointment-to-file-suspec.html
Diversion programs are typically used for non-violent defendants with substance abuse issues and do not require a judge’s approval. However, in this case, the key elements of the agreement were part of the diversion, not the guilty plea, leading to its failure in a July hearing.
Now, there are indications that Hunter Biden may face additional charges, potentially coinciding with President Biden’s reelection efforts. Federal prosecutors have mentioned unsuccessful discussions with Biden’s legal team regarding tax-related charges. They are also planning to present their case in California and Washington, D.C., where Hunter Biden has lived.
Attorney General Merrick Garland recently appointed a special counsel, Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss, to expand the investigation beyond Delaware. This move allows Weiss to bring charges in other jurisdictions.
The breakdown of the plea agreement happened when the federal judge overseeing the case raised concerns about whether it provided immunity from future charges for Hunter Biden. While his lawyers claimed it did, prosecutors disagreed.
Hunter Biden’s lawyers have stated that their understanding of the agreement is based on written terms and the prosecutors’ communications during negotiations. The lawyers argue that the immunity granted by the agreement is still in effect.
Hunter Biden’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, appeared on Face the Nation to discuss the “broad immunity” of the diversion agreement, which he believes is still valid. He emphasized that there are two separate agreements: the plea deal and the diversion agreement. Lowell claimed that the diversion agreement, which has already been filed in court, is binding and independent of the plea deal.
Additionally, there is a new legal motion to vacate the court’s briefing order, leading some legal observers to speculate that Special Counsel David Weiss may be trying to move the case to a different venue with a more favorable judge.
From a conservative perspective, this case raises concerns about possible preferential treatment for Hunter Biden, as the plea agreement and diversion program appear to deviate from typical legal procedures. It is important for the investigation to proceed in a fair and unbiased manner, without any undue influence due to Hunter Biden’s familial connections.
