HUNTER BIDEN's Plea Deal with DOJ Rejected by Judge - She Suspects More Crimes Will Be Revealed.

Wednesday, July 26, 2023

President Joe Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland were hoping to rush this through before additional crimes could be uncovered. But the Judge could see right through their "hurry up!" motivation...

Hunter Biden's plea deal appeared to fall apart during his first court appearance Wednesday morning, amid questions about federal prosecutors' plans for the ongoing investigation.

The president's son was expected to plead guilty to two misdemeanor tax counts of willful failure to pay federal income tax, as part of plea deal to avoid jail time on a felony gun charge.

But Judge Maryellen Noreika pressed federal prosecutors on the investigation and questioned whether there was the possibility for future charges.

Source: www.foxnews.com...

This was the "Sweetheart" plea deal...

Hunter Biden will plead guilty to two misdemeanor tax violations, and one gun felony, in what Republicans are blasting as a "sweetheart" plea deal following a five-year investigation.

Fox News has confirmed that the president's son will plead guilty to two counts of willful failure to pay federal income tax and one count of possession of a firearm by a person who is an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance.

From June 20th: www.foxnews.com...

(Naive) Legal Experts were perplexed this morning over how the DOJ could give Hunter Biden such a good deal, even though DOJ investigations into Biden family mysterious cash infusions, are still ongoing.

-CareWeMust

Not much info yet.

a reply to: carewemust

I don't know about the other stuff, but the felony gun charge casts a real bad picture. In non-clown-world, Bidens supporters that support more gun control, would be watching with Argus Eyes about how Biden handles it, despite being his son.

If he was a man of honor and integrity about the stuff he preaches, he would throw his son under the bus. On the other hand, it's his son and parents protect their kids.

One is upholding the country, law and future laws, one is upholding the family. No matter what he does, if the gun charge get's publicity, Biden has a integrity problem..

originally posted by: musicismagic
Not much info yet.

GOP Attorneys and Congress were asking HOW could Hunter Biden make a deal with the DOJ to stay out of prison, when the DOJ is still conducting an investigation of his finances?

DUH!

We know how...Right Joe and Merrick?

a reply to: TDDAgain

Hunter told the court last year that his Father keeps 5 guns in the house. No need hold a little "white lie" against him for a mixup.

Live Updates

The Hunter Biden plea proceedings have restarted and the president’s son has agreed to a limited agreement that covers 2014 to 2019 and only includes conduct related to tax offenses, drug use and gun possession.

President Joe Biden's son will still plead guilty to the tax misdemeanors for 2017 and 2018, but the agreement will also cover his tax-related conduct for the three years.

edit on 26-7-2023 by frogs453 because: Fixed link

Good Developments...

Judge Maryellen Noreika pressed federal prosecutors on the investigation and questioned whether there was the possibility for future charges.

The judge asked prosecutors if Hunter Biden was currently under active investigation. Prosecutors said he was, but would not answer specifically what the president's son is under investigation for.

Prosecutors on Wednesday said Hunter Biden pleading guilty to the two misdemeanor tax offenses would not immunize him from future charges.

The judge asked whether a potential violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act was under consideration, but prosecutors were tight-lipped on the matter.

The judge put the court in recess and asked that federal prosecutors and Biden's legal team discuss the plea deal, telling the court that they did not appear to be in agreement on the terms.

Source: www.foxnews.com...

this whole thing just got super weird. He had a plea deal, but is still under investigation?

How does that work? I realize at the moment, it doesn't, since he didn't get his super nice deal, apparently door number 2 was chosen for him, and he gets to go to trial. (which could be epic)

a reply to: network dude

Trying to "push something through."


Didn't work out i suppose

Nobody has even mentioned that a Hunter lawyer tried to pull a fast one on the court, called the clerk pretending to be from the other side, and wanted to seal the amicus brief about the whistleblowers testimony.

The judge didn't like this little stunt one bit. From my understanding the lawyer could wind up disbarred.

Why would someone do such a thing for poor little old Hunter?

This decision was also (more than likely) influenced by the following little tid bit:

Hunter's legal team also had someone call the court impersonating a staff member of a congressman, requesting that documentation that had been filed be stricken from the court.

Generally speaking as a paralegal and almost a decade in the legal field....... This is what we expertly refer to as a "Big No-No".

Sources:

Source 1

Source 2

U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika, who is set to decide whether to approve Biden's plea deal on tax and gun charges on Wednesday, said that a member of his legal team "misrepresented … who she worked for" to get evidence removed from the docket. Noreika threatened to place sanctions on the lawyers.....

..... The judge said the staffer called to have the item removed, claiming to work for the Republican representative.

"It appears that the caller misrepresented her identity and who she worked for in an attempt to improperly convince the Clerk’s Office to remove the amicus materials from the docket," the judge said.

OOPSIE POOPSIE

a reply to: CoyoteAngels

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You made your post as I was typing out mine and hunting down some sources.

I got notice from law360 and had to hunt something down that wasn't hidden behind a paywall.

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
Nobody has even mentioned that a Hunter lawyer tried to pull a fast one on the court, called the clerk pretending to be from the other side, and wanted to seal the amicus brief about the whistleblowers testimony.

The judge didn't like this little stunt one bit. From my understanding the lawyer could wind up disbarred.

Why would someone do such a thing for poor little old Hunter?

Yeah...here's the quote from the defense...who's buying it?

The defense, though, denied the allegations and called the incident "an unfortunate and unintentional miscommunication."

originally posted by: dothedew
This decision was also (more than likely) influenced by the following little tid bit:

Hunter's legal team also had someone call the court impersonating a staff member of a congressman, requesting that documentation that had been filed be stricken from the court.

Generally speaking as a paralegal and almost a decade in the legal field....... This is what we expertly refer to as a "Big No-No".

Sources:

Source 1

Source 2

OOPSIE POOPSIE

I was thinking that this would be pretty big, like felony / disbarment big.
But I also expect it to be shut down quickly in whatever way Garland may be able to do so.
We could always pursue the crime the way the dems do for Trump. Get a local conservative DA or sheriff to push it through. But we never have the guts to do it. They do it 24/7 and keep looking for new ways to fake it again and again.

a reply to: stevieray
I also expect the judge to get the big threat including kids and grandkids. Or the 3 million in a Jamaican bank. Billionaire Democrat operative has that in their couch cushions.
Either way, she’ll show up one morning saying the country needs to move on and sign that sweet deal right now.

a reply to: stevieray

Oh if it were an attorney doing that, that would definitely warrant an unpaid vacation and sanctions. In a perfect world. Perjuring yourself however, never really carries any sort of penalty. (Especially in my state)

Generally speaking though, the legal system is so corrupt that nothing will be done. I'd be hesitant to even believe that sanctions will be ordered.

a reply to: peter_kandra

Of course it was a big misunderstanding! Nobody would expect them to admit to fooling around.

originally posted by: dothedew
a reply to: stevieray

Oh if it were an attorney doing that, that would definitely warrant an unpaid vacation and sanctions. In a perfect world. Perjuring yourself however, never really carries any sort of penalty. (Especially in my state)

Generally speaking though, the legal system is so corrupt that nothing will be done. I'd be hesitant to even believe that sanctions will be ordered.

I think it was a lady attorney. Of course she immediately announced it was “their misunderstanding”. Which sounds like just the right excuse, unless it’s recorded and is painfully obvious.

a reply to: carewemust

It's not about having guns but being for gun control (Biden), it's about having a family case where a gun felony happened and being for gun control.

Maybe I misunderstood you, not sure.

Yes. They are busted. Miscommunication my....