Staff Reports
The House Judiciary, Oversight and Accountability, and Ways and Means Committees are not taking a break this August. They are diving right into another investigation, this time focusing on the questionable plea deal that Hunter Biden was about to get from the Department of Justice (DOJ) on federal tax and gun charges. The deal, however, hit a roadblock when Delaware District Court Judge Maryellen Noreika raised concerns about its unusual structure. It seems like either the DOJ and Hunter’s attorneys didn’t communicate properly about the scope of the immunity being offered, or they were trying to pull a fast one on the judge. Maybe it was both?
Not wasting any time, the committee chairmen – Jim Jordan, James Comer, and Jason Smith – sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, launching an inquiry into the deal. The letter lays out their concerns about the nature of the deal and questions the DOJ’s decision to approve such an unusual agreement. In the letter, they also request various information and documents from the DOJ by August 14th.
And lastly, this.https://t.co/fCdWPogVmS
— Susie Moore ⚾️🌻🐶 (@SmoosieQ) August 1, 2023
One major issue raised by Judge Noreika is with paragraph 14 of the pretrial diversion agreement. This provision states that unless the judge finds a breach of the agreement, no criminal charges can be pursued against Hunter Biden for the gun charge or any other federal charge covered under the agreement. This raises concerns about the judge’s role in the agreement and the constitutionality of such a provision.
Additionally, the committee chairmen are concerned about paragraph 15 of the agreement, which grants immunity not only for the gun-related conduct but also for unrelated conduct covered by the plea agreement. This raises questions about the agreement’s broadness and whether it is common for such agreements to include immunity for unrelated crimes.
Overall, these provisions and their implications have raised serious concerns among the committees. They believe that the DOJ handled this matter in a troubling way, and they want answers. They have requested information regarding similar agreements and investigations, as well as an explanation of why the plea agreement was originally approved if other investigations were ongoing.
It remains to be seen whether the DOJ will comply with the committee’s requests by the August 14th deadline. However, given the history of government bureaucracy, it’s unlikely that we’ll get the information we need anytime soon. RedState will keep you updated on this investigation, but don’t hold your breath for swift action from the DOJ.
