Staff Reports
In the latest courtroom drama surrounding Hunter Biden, special counsel David Weiss has taken the gloves off, calling out the first son for his late-in-the-game antics regarding tax charges. Biden has attempted to get his case tossed, arguing the legitimacy of Weiss’s appointment as special counsel is dubious at best. But Weiss’s team isn’t buying it, labeling Biden’s claims as mere fabrications and suggesting that the judge, Mark Scarsi, should either dismiss these claims or send them straight to the bottom of the wastebasket.
Washington Examiner: Weiss blasts Hunter Biden for attempting to dismiss tax case over special counsel argument https://t.co/N6vpiLRYlR
— Ian Hansen 🇺🇸🇺🇸 (@IanHansenFeed) July 30, 2024
Biden’s legal team had the audacity to revisit arguments they first raised back in February. Their assertion? That nine tax charges against Biden should be dropped because Weiss’s appointment was supposedly unlawful. Judge Scarsi has already given them the cold shoulder once, and Weiss pointed out that Biden’s team is coming in six months late with these novel arguments. It’s almost as if they expect a different result by rehashing bad ideas wrapped in the shiny new package of Justice Clarence Thomas’s recent concurrence on special counsels. The implication here is comical; just because it’s fashionable to challenge special counsels doesn’t mean it automatically applies to Hunter.
Prosecutors wasted no time in puncturing the bubble of Biden’s legal reasoning. They pointed out that the cases that Biden’s defense is referencing—Thomas’s musings and Judge Aileen Cannon’s toss of Trump’s classified documents case—are about as relevant to Biden as a snowstorm in July. In fact, the prosecutors had a field day arguing that Joe’s son is trying to cling to somebody else’s arguments like a child to a teddy bear, despite the fact that lawmakers confirmed Weiss’s position. Weiss was actually in a Senate-validated position when he was appointed, unlike the dubious Jack Smith, who has wandered into several legal grey areas unapproved by Congress.
Weiss’s team didn’t shy away from reminding the court that the authority of the attorney general to appoint special counsels is well established. They cited landmark cases like United States v. Nixon, to demonstrate that the legal framework allows such appointments and that Weiss’s authority was not only valid but also built upon solid judicial precedent. So much for Biden’s attempts to shake the ground beneath Weiss’s feet.
Hunter Biden’s defense seems to be digging a deeper hole for themselves. In their bid to convince the judge, Scarsi revealed multiple inaccuracies in their filings, putting Biden’s attorneys on notice that they’d better come up with legitimate explanations or risk a slap of sanctions. The defense’s claim that Weiss didn’t start prosecuting until his special counsel appointment is laughable when viewed against the backdrop of the actual timeline. They seem to have forgotten that Weiss first slapped charges on Biden back in June 2023 when he was still a U.S. attorney, a detail that could easily have been uncovered with a simple Google search.
As the courtroom showdown approaches, with the hearing on Biden’s special counsel claims set for next week and a trial looming on September 9, one thing is clear: Hunter Biden’s grasp on legal arguments is as shaky as a house of cards in a windstorm. As these pages of political theatre turn, the consequences of deceit and delay may finally catch up with him.
