Hunter’s plea deal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is worse - a trump appointed prosecutor who.negotiated in bad faith or a trump appointed judge who.saw through this farce?

She didn't see through the farce. She saw actual rights of Hunter Biden's being infringed by the DOJ and wanted them clarified. THAT was what was unprecedented that was commented on.

You’re really wrong here. She rejected the plea bc the plea was drafted by incompetent (or corrupt?) DOJ lawyers to give immunity to Hunter related to foreign lobbying registration crimes still being investigated. The Judge asked the DOJ lawyer if that was intentional to provide just far reaching immunity and they said it was not. Hunter’s team cried foul and said they expected it to be covered, and so now a narrower (less favorable to Hunter) agreement needs to be drafted. Smart judge!

Thank you.

[Anonymous]

The Hunter Biden plea deal was announced on June 20. It is now July 27 and we have yet to see the actual written plea agreement. This is an outrage in a case of this public magnitude. The plea agreement should have been filed as part of the court record back in June. I can think of only one reason for it still being under wraps. The DOJ is embarrassed by the specific terms of the agreement. Is it a global agreement that resolves all of Hunter's legal problems? That would be a scandal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Hunter Biden plea deal was announced on June 20. It is now July 27 and we have yet to see the actual written plea agreement. This is an outrage in a case of this public magnitude. The plea agreement should have been filed as part of the court record back in June. I can think of only one reason for it still being under wraps. The DOJ is embarrassed by the specific terms of the agreement. Is it a global agreement that resolves all of Hunter's legal problems? That would be a scandal.

Sounds like it was a "presidential pardon" by another name: plea agreement

Enabled Hunter to be "pardoned" without Dad's decree--anyone who thinks Dad was not involved--directly or indirectly--is mistaken.

Just like Dad never "discussed" Hunter's business with him--even though he talked to him every day-or so he says.

Most parents of grown children will ask them how their job is going and what they are doing. Did your parents never ask you?

[Anonymous]

Lotta tinfoil hats here today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Hunter Biden plea deal was announced on June 20. It is now July 27 and we have yet to see the actual written plea agreement. This is an outrage in a case of this public magnitude. The plea agreement should have been filed as part of the court record back in June. I can think of only one reason for it still being under wraps. The DOJ is embarrassed by the specific terms of the agreement. Is it a global agreement that resolves all of Hunter's legal problems? That would be a scandal.

Seeing as all of these legal problems are bs (FARA? Can you guys even hear yourselves?), a global agreement would make sense.

For some reason the public is involved in this nonsense which is the problem in a nutshell.

[Anonymous]

Weiss is not incompetent. One has to wonder why he did this.......

Based on conversations with people who were in the courtroom today, and my experience as a former federal prosecutor, I think I know the full story of what happened with the Hunter Biden plea agreement blow-up this morning.

Bear with me, because this is a little complicated:

Typically, if the Government is offering to a defendant that it will either drop charges or decline to bring new charges in return for the defendant's guilty plea, the plea is structured under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(A). An agreement not to prosecute Hunter for FARA violations or other crimes in return for his pleading guilty to the tax misdemeanors, for example, would usually be a (c)(1)(A) plea. This is open, transparent, subject to judicial approval, etc.

In Hunter's case, according to what folks in the courtroom have told me, Hunter's plea was structured under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(B), which is usually just a plea in return for a joint sentencing recommendation only, and contained no information on its face about other potential charges, and contained no clear agreement by DOJ to forego prosecution of other charges.

Instead, DOJ and Hunter's lawyers effectively hid that part of the agreement in what was publicly described as a pretrial diversion agreement relating to a § 922(g)(3) gun charge against Hunter for being a drug user in possession of a firearm.

That pretrial diversion agreement as written was actually MUCH broader than just the gun charge. If Hunter were to complete probation, the pretrial diversion agreement prevented DOJ from ever bringing charges against Hunter for any crimes relating to the offense conduct discussed in the plea agreement, which was purposely written to include his foreign influence peddling operations in China and elsewhere.

So they put the facts in the plea agreement, but put their non-prosecution agreement in the pretrial diversion agreement, effectively hiding the full scope of what DOJ was offering and Hunter was obtaining through these proceedings. Hunter's upside from this deal was vast immunity from further prosecution if he finished a couple years of probation, and the public wouldn't be any the wiser because none of this was clearly stated on the face of the plea agreement, as would normally be the case.

Judge Noreika smelled a rat. She understood that the lawyers were trying to paint her into a corner and hide the ball. Instead, she backed DOJ and Hunter's lawyers into a corner by pulling all the details out into the open and then indicating that she wasn't going to approve a deal as broad as what she had discovered.

DOJ, attempting to save face and save its case, then stated on the record that the investigation into Hunter was ongoing and that Hunter remained susceptible to prosecution under FARA. Hunter's lawyers exploded. They clearly believed that FARA was covered under the deal, because as written, the pretrial diversion agreement language was broad enough to cover it. They blew up the deal, Hunter pled not guilty, and that's the current state of play.

And so here we are. Hunter's lawyers and DOJ are going to go off and try to pull together a new set of agreements, likely narrower, to satisfy Judge Noreika. Fortunately, I doubt if FARA or any charges related to Hunter's foreign influence peddling will be included, which leaves open the possibility of further investigations leading to further prosecutions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Hunter Biden plea deal was announced on June 20. It is now July 27 and we have yet to see the actual written plea agreement. This is an outrage in a case of this public magnitude. The plea agreement should have been filed as part of the court record back in June. I can think of only one reason for it still being under wraps. The DOJ is embarrassed by the specific terms of the agreement. Is it a global agreement that resolves all of Hunter's legal problems? That would be a scandal.

Sounds like it was a "presidential pardon" by another name: plea agreement

Enabled Hunter to be "pardoned" without Dad's decree--anyone who thinks Dad was not involved--directly or indirectly--is mistaken.

Just like Dad never "discussed" Hunter's business with him--even though he talked to him every day-or so he says.

Most parents of grown children will ask them how their job is going and what they are doing. Did your parents never ask you?

I know it's baffling to you, but people with clearance don't discuss issues of national security, such as negations with a foreign country, with their kids.

Maybe it's hard to understand these things when you don't live in the DMV and don't know anyone with clearance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Hunter Biden plea deal was announced on June 20. It is now July 27 and we have yet to see the actual written plea agreement. This is an outrage in a case of this public magnitude. The plea agreement should have been filed as part of the court record back in June. I can think of only one reason for it still being under wraps. The DOJ is embarrassed by the specific terms of the agreement. Is it a global agreement that resolves all of Hunter's legal problems? That would be a scandal.

Seeing as all of these legal problems are bs (FARA? Can you guys even hear yourselves?), a global agreement would make sense.

For some reason the public is involved in this nonsense which is the problem in a nutshell.

Surely you jest.
The "public" is not involved. The judge rejected it because she knew it was a horrible plea agreement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Hunter Biden plea deal was announced on June 20. It is now July 27 and we have yet to see the actual written plea agreement. This is an outrage in a case of this public magnitude. The plea agreement should have been filed as part of the court record back in June. I can think of only one reason for it still being under wraps. The DOJ is embarrassed by the specific terms of the agreement. Is it a global agreement that resolves all of Hunter's legal problems? That would be a scandal.

Sounds like it was a "presidential pardon" by another name: plea agreement

Enabled Hunter to be "pardoned" without Dad's decree--anyone who thinks Dad was not involved--directly or indirectly--is mistaken.

Just like Dad never "discussed" Hunter's business with him--even though he talked to him every day-or so he says.

Most parents of grown children will ask them how their job is going and what they are doing. Did your parents never ask you?

I know it's baffling to you, but people with clearance don't discuss issues of national security, such as negations with a foreign country, with their kids.

Maybe it's hard to understand these things when you don't live in the DMV and don't know anyone with clearance.

That is not what the evidence is showing.
And, tell us... if Joe was busy dealing with corruption in Ukraine, why would he let his son serve on the board of an energy company that was part of that corruption? And, don't tell us he didn't know because it has been reported that people in the Obama administration were troubled over it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Hunter Biden plea deal was announced on June 20. It is now July 27 and we have yet to see the actual written plea agreement. This is an outrage in a case of this public magnitude. The plea agreement should have been filed as part of the court record back in June. I can think of only one reason for it still being under wraps. The DOJ is embarrassed by the specific terms of the agreement. Is it a global agreement that resolves all of Hunter's legal problems? That would be a scandal.

Seeing as all of these legal problems are bs (FARA? Can you guys even hear yourselves?), a global agreement would make sense.

For some reason the public is involved in this nonsense which is the problem in a nutshell.

Surely you jest.
The "public" is not involved. The judge rejected it because she knew it was a horrible plea agreement.

There's really no response to this. We seem to disagree fundamentally on whether any of this, including these "charges": and this plea agreement should have happened at all.

Can we agree on why? Because of his last name, and for no other reason? Good thing poor Beau is not subject to any of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Hunter Biden plea deal was announced on June 20. It is now July 27 and we have yet to see the actual written plea agreement. This is an outrage in a case of this public magnitude. The plea agreement should have been filed as part of the court record back in June. I can think of only one reason for it still being under wraps. The DOJ is embarrassed by the specific terms of the agreement. Is it a global agreement that resolves all of Hunter's legal problems? That would be a scandal.

Seeing as all of these legal problems are bs (FARA? Can you guys even hear yourselves?), a global agreement would make sense.

For some reason the public is involved in this nonsense which is the problem in a nutshell.

Surely you jest.
The "public" is not involved. The judge rejected it because she knew it was a horrible plea agreement.

There's really no response to this. We seem to disagree fundamentally on whether any of this, including these "charges": and this plea agreement should have happened at all.

Can we agree on why? Because of his last name, and for no other reason? Good thing poor Beau is not subject to any of this.

The fact that this prosecutor allowed the statute of limitations to prevent him from prosecuting Hunter's tax crimes from 2014/15 tells me politics is at play.
He owes hundred of thousands in taxes from those years, but the IRS will never collect on that.
And, the IRS has hard evidence that he willfully lied on his taxes numerous times - claiming deductions that are FOS.
He was given a sweetheart plea deal because of who he is. Fortunately, the judge wasn't having it.

I don't want to hear Joe tell us anymore about "paying our fair share" when he doesn't hold his son to the same standard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Hunter Biden plea deal was announced on June 20. It is now July 27 and we have yet to see the actual written plea agreement. This is an outrage in a case of this public magnitude. The plea agreement should have been filed as part of the court record back in June. I can think of only one reason for it still being under wraps. The DOJ is embarrassed by the specific terms of the agreement. Is it a global agreement that resolves all of Hunter's legal problems? That would be a scandal.

Sounds like it was a "presidential pardon" by another name: plea agreement

Enabled Hunter to be "pardoned" without Dad's decree--anyone who thinks Dad was not involved--directly or indirectly--is mistaken.

Just like Dad never "discussed" Hunter's business with him--even though he talked to him every day-or so he says.

Most parents of grown children will ask them how their job is going and what they are doing. Did your parents never ask you?

I know it's baffling to you, but people with clearance don't discuss issues of national security, such as negations with a foreign country, with their kids.

Maybe it's hard to understand these things when you don't live in the DMV and don't know anyone with clearance.

That is not what the evidence is showing.
And, tell us... if Joe was busy dealing with corruption in Ukraine, why would he let his son serve on the board of an energy company that was part of that corruption? And, don't tell us he didn't know because it has been reported that people in the Obama administration were troubled over it.

+1

“Ukraine is so corrupt, it’s awful! But my drug addicted son is a perfect fit to sit on the board of an energy company.”

It’s truly a mess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is worse - a trump appointed prosecutor who.negotiated in bad faith or a trump appointed judge who.saw through this farce?

She didn't see through the farce. She saw actual rights of Hunter Biden's being infringed by the DOJ and wanted them clarified. THAT was what was unprecedented that was commented on.

You’re really wrong here. She rejected the plea bc the plea was drafted by incompetent (or corrupt?) DOJ lawyers to give immunity to Hunter related to foreign lobbying registration crimes still being investigated. The Judge asked the DOJ lawyer if that was intentional to provide just far reaching immunity and they said it was not. Hunter’s team cried foul and said they expected it to be covered, and so now a narrower (less favorable to Hunter) agreement needs to be drafted. Smart judge!

Incompetence tells me this is a mistake and not on purpose. No, this is on purpose, thus corruption.

Being cute with the language isn't flying.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

If a private company or citizen doing business overseas without FARA registration is a major crime then that means thousands and thousands of Americans and American companies are criminals.

If lying about whether you ever did drugs on your 4473 is a major felony then millions of gun owners are major felons.

If filing your taxes a few months late is a major crime requiring you go to prison then millions of Americans need to go to prison.

So... When are we going to prosecute the rest of America for these crimes, and if not, why not?