Hunter’s plea deal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hunter is scum but this has nothing to do with Joe and shouldn't even a discussion. That said, I do like sweet irony that the person who sponsored the notorious Crime Bill has a certified, crackhead, low-life degenerate criminal son. Karma never fails.

If I'm being pragmatic and honest here, which is clearly impossible for the partisans on either side, the real problematic question that some are asking and others studiously avoiding is to what extent did the DOJ and IRS abuse and even potentially break laws to protect Hunter Biden or to arrange affairs to get him off as quickly as possible to prevent future investigations. Keep in mind that this recent collapse of the plea agreement was because the judge realized the agreement involved full immunity from future investigations. We can certainly ask questions about why it involved such an agreement. We've also had perfectly reliable (aka not Republican stooge) testimony from two IRS agents with impeccable backgrounds saying the IRS investigation of Hunter Biden was repeatedly blocked and stymied by "above".

You can harp on and on about lack of evidence connecting Joe Biden to Hunter Biden's shady business dealings, but that's increasingly besides the point as time goes on. If the WH directed the DOJ and IRS to protect Hunter Biden, that is definitely corruption. And breaking the law.

And, of course, we can't entirely ignore, no matter how much you want to try, that it's shady when your children and grandchildren are getting paid by foreign companies or figures and the money is being channelled through a bunch of shell companies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that the court transcript is out, its clear that this was a fraud upon the court by Biden's attorneys. Thank god this judge saw through it.

As I read it, Paragraph 15 is referring to diversion on the gun charge and is constrained to just the listed charges, and is NOT some kind of supposed immunity from all other crimes and future crimes known or unknown forever in perpetuity as has been bizarrely claimed.

Yes, it was immunity for the facts listed in the plea agreement. However, they included the immunity in the diversion agreement and not the plea agreement, and tried to sell the judge on 'judges don't usually care about the diversion agreement, and probation has agreed to that.'

The judge went through the details and the lawyers for both sides put on a show of being in disagreement to let DOJ save face.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hunter is scum but this has nothing to do with Joe and shouldn't even a discussion. That said, I do like sweet irony that the person who sponsored the notorious Crime Bill has a certified, crackhead, low-life degenerate criminal son. Karma never fails.

If I'm being pragmatic and honest here, which is clearly impossible for the partisans on either side, the real problematic question that some are asking and others studiously avoiding is to what extent did the DOJ and IRS abuse and even potentially break laws to protect Hunter Biden or to arrange affairs to get him off as quickly as possible to prevent future investigations. Keep in mind that this recent collapse of the plea agreement was because the judge realized the agreement involved full immunity from future investigations. We can certainly ask questions about why it involved such an agreement. We've also had perfectly reliable (aka not Republican stooge) testimony from two IRS agents with impeccable backgrounds saying the IRS investigation of Hunter Biden was repeatedly blocked and stymied by "above".

You can harp on and on about lack of evidence connecting Joe Biden to Hunter Biden's shady business dealings, but that's increasingly besides the point as time goes on. If the WH directed the DOJ and IRS to protect Hunter Biden, that is definitely corruption. And breaking the law.

And, of course, we can't entirely ignore, no matter how much you want to try, that it's shady when your children and grandchildren are getting paid by foreign companies or figures and the money is being channelled through a bunch of shell companies.

No, that wasn't pragmatic and honest. Or if it is, you're hopelessly ignorant and incurious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hunter is scum but this has nothing to do with Joe and shouldn't even a discussion. That said, I do like sweet irony that the person who sponsored the notorious Crime Bill has a certified, crackhead, low-life degenerate criminal son. Karma never fails.

If I'm being pragmatic and honest here, which is clearly impossible for the partisans on either side, the real problematic question that some are asking and others studiously avoiding is to what extent did the DOJ and IRS abuse and even potentially break laws to protect Hunter Biden or to arrange affairs to get him off as quickly as possible to prevent future investigations. Keep in mind that this recent collapse of the plea agreement was because the judge realized the agreement involved full immunity from future investigations. We can certainly ask questions about why it involved such an agreement. We've also had perfectly reliable (aka not Republican stooge) testimony from two IRS agents with impeccable backgrounds saying the IRS investigation of Hunter Biden was repeatedly blocked and stymied by "above".

You can harp on and on about lack of evidence connecting Joe Biden to Hunter Biden's shady business dealings, but that's increasingly besides the point as time goes on. If the WH directed the DOJ and IRS to protect Hunter Biden, that is definitely corruption. And breaking the law.

And, of course, we can't entirely ignore, no matter how much you want to try, that it's shady when your children and grandchildren are getting paid by foreign companies or figures and the money is being channelled through a bunch of shell companies.

No, that wasn't pragmatic and honest. Or if it is, you're hopelessly ignorant and incurious.

Yep, just a partisan rant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Liar-In-Chief

Or, he didn’t know the details of his sons business dealings because he had nothing to do with them.

In which case, he shouldn't say his son has done nothing wrong.

[Anonymous]

My understanding is that the judge's concern was a separation of powers issue. Not that she thought it was crazy he was charged with that gun statute.

[Anonymous]

Everything concerning Hunter Biden- we were told was made up. He wasn’t under investigation for failure to file/pay taxes. His dead brother’s wife didn’t throw his illegal gun away in a school zone. The laptop wasn’t his. It was all misinformation to get his dad.

It was forbidden to even post about HB here.

Suddenly- everyone forgets to pay hundreds of thousands in taxes/lies to obtain a gun and no regular American is ever prosecuted for those crimes!

So odd. Big big stuff lurks just below the surface, like an iceberg.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was crap to start with & someone woke up.

What is crap is even charging him to begin with. Most people pay a fine/fee to go with late taxes, not get charged with misdeamenor. And no one gets charged with the gun thing.

This!

The only reason he was charged for the gun thing is because he's Biden's son.

The entire thing is BS. Yes he's an idiot, but it was a bad plea deal. Hunter is getting shafted because of his father.

The GOP is twisting it to say Hunter is getting a good deal, which is the polar opposite of the truth.

But the GOP lie?? Who wooda thot?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Too much harmful evidence surfaced in the weeks since the deal was announced. Prosecution balked at agreeing that the agreement gave Hunter immunity. Hunter changed plea from guilty to not guilty. Even CNN & MSNBC can’t ignore this.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to piece together everything that's surfaced and see that it's quite possible a serious ethical lapse, even corruption, happened behind the scenes to protect Hunter Biden, and by extension, Joe Biden. The family was unquestionably doing weird business shilling with dummy shell companies involved and whatever it was, it doesn't smell good. That latest revelation Hunter B was paid over a million for his "art" by a person who later got a plum appointed position is intriguing, to put it politely.

If the best defense so far is that nothing can be "tied" to Joe Biden despite so many family members involved in these financial transactions, whatever they were, you know you're on shaky grounds.

oh FGS STFU!!

Read a book. Watch TV. Stop posting lies. You need a new hobby.

[Anonymous]

Apparently people think this is a weak case that should not have been charged/charged as severely, and it's only happening because it is the President's son. That is believable, by what is not believable is this happens at the same time the prosecutor is working with the defense lawyers to tank the case. It was posted above just how much they did so, hiding things in the diversion agreement, and not even giving the judge a copy of the key paragraph.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now that the court transcript is out, its clear that this was a fraud upon the court by Biden's attorneys. Thank god this judge saw through it.

How is this a fraud by Biden's attorneys? They are supposed to get a good deal for their client, and they did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that the court transcript is out, its clear that this was a fraud upon the court by Biden's attorneys. Thank god this judge saw through it.

As I read it, Paragraph 15 is referring to diversion on the gun charge and is constrained to just the listed charges, and is NOT some kind of supposed immunity from all other crimes and future crimes known or unknown forever in perpetuity as has been bizarrely claimed.

It is not constrained to the listed charges, which incidentally does not include guns, but to the listed facts. which goes well beyond what was charged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is that the judge's concern was a separation of powers issue. Not that she thought it was crazy he was charged with that gun statute.

Normally prosecutors bring charges if there is a violation of a plea deal. Here they said any violations will be brought to this same judge. That added to her concern about the deal, why is she being put in the middle of a future case by DOJ.

[Anonymous]

The prosecutors also did this under a different law, making it a plea deal that does not have to get signed off by the judge, because it is usually about a recommendation for sentencing when using this provision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that the court transcript is out, its clear that this was a fraud upon the court by Biden's attorneys. Thank god this judge saw through it.

As I read it, Paragraph 15 is referring to diversion on the gun charge and is constrained to just the listed charges, and is NOT some kind of supposed immunity from all other crimes and future crimes known or unknown forever in perpetuity as has been bizarrely claimed.

Yes, it was immunity for the facts listed in the plea agreement. However, they included the immunity in the diversion agreement and not the plea agreement, and tried to sell the judge on 'judges don't usually care about the diversion agreement, and probation has agreed to that.'

The judge went through the details and the lawyers for both sides put on a show of being in disagreement to let DOJ save face.

Absolutely.