Hunter Biden could face trial, newly named US special counsel says

Weiss has been investigating Hunter Biden for over 5 years, and has not brought charges.

A month or so, ago, he and Hunter negotiated on a plea deal; Hunter would plead guilty to two misdemeanors and in exchange, would not be prosecuted for the gun application charge.

The deal fell through when a judge refused the deal, and Hunter withdrew is plea.

So now Weiss says Hunter could face a trial. If the trial is about the two charges Hunter withdrew his guilty plea, I see some grounds for appeal. but, even if he is charged, filing late on taxes, paying them late, and owning a firearm illegally does not get any criminal referrals on Joe Biden.

All I care about is Joe. Hunter is a private citizen. Why he is being investigated for this long, why he is being assigned a special counsel, to me, makes no sense. It would if there were evidence of Joe Biden receiving payments from Hunter's deals, or providing favors for sale (with his son as a conduit) but so far, no evidence has been provided.

So, Garland has assigned a Special Counsel to continue the investigation, or rather, he's given Weiss a promotion to SC, which will give him broader resources to prosecute. Moreover, Joe Biden has allowed hiom to do it, noting that it is the investigation of his own son, knowing that if there is any evidence of wrongdoing by himself, it will come out.

This proves to me that Joe is a man who knows he is innocent, and knows that the trial, will exonerate all suspicions against him, and probably won't result in too serious of a charge against his son. It certainly won't prove corruption, as is being alleged. Conduct that looks bad, is unseemly, by Hunter, perhaps, a FARA violation, late taxes, illegal gun ownership, perhaps. but, none of that proves the allegations of corruption and influence peddling, especially not on Joe Biden.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/hunter-biden-prosecutor-elevated-us-special-counsel-2023-08-11/

Republicans have accused the elder [ Joe ] Biden of profiting from his son's business ventures in Ukraine and China, though they have yet to produce any evidence of wrongdoing.
[...]
Republicans in the House of Representatives are also threatening an impeachment inquiry into unproven claims that President Biden benefited from his 54-year-old son's business ventures.

Weiss, who has been investigating Hunter Biden since 2019, filed misdemeanor criminal tax and gun charges in June, but a federal judge refused to accept a proposed plea deal.

Weiss said in a court filing on Friday that talks between the two sides have since broken down. "The Government now believes that the case will not resolve short of a trial," he wrote.

Republicans claim 'there is mounting evidence against Joe'. No, there isn't, all that is mounting are fabricated allegations. Republicans are clearly trying to milk this for all its worth, just as they did with the incessant 'drip drip drip' technique they used against Hillary, until they succeed in putting doubt into the electorate's mind about Joe, even though there is no proof.

See, Republicans cannot run on the merits of their policies, they have to smear their opponent with lies and more lies, especially they are hoping to deflect attention away from Trump's legal problems, and he is about to receive indictment #4, in Georgia, which no one can pardon him if he is convicted.

 

Because he was doing his best not to but then indeed did bring "charges" in the sweetheart deal that practically got laughed out of court in his attempt to get him and The Big Guy off relatively scot free over multiple possible felonies with blanket immunity for Hunter from any future charges.

And Garland had the gall to insult our collective intelligence by assigning him, against the federal statute, to be the Special Prosecutor, over the case he has been trying to cover up.

 

Yep, this is so obvious as a political deflection that it will eventually backfire big time on them for a long time.

 

The wheels of Justice turn slow but they will still turn.... Tick tock baby, tick tock

 

So what about Hunter facing trial?
The odds of him doing any real time are slim and none, and even if he did a "token" sentence it would be at the most 2 or 3 months (which he could do standing on his head)...
So, big whoop...

 

Still haven’t seen a dem yet who gives a damn about Hunter or what happens to him

 

That's okay with them. Since they can''t get Joe, they will settle for any family member.

 

Why did it take so long to prosecute the gun charge? That was an open and shut case.

 

See, Republicans cannot run on the merits of their policies, they have to smear their opponent with lies and more lies,"


Indeed. Hunter has been investigated so much now , that they might have to "find" things to accuse him of in order to completely ruin him. Savage politics does not begin to cover the mentality of the Republicans since they have been infested with the Trump virus.

This should NOT affect Bidens rerun for POTUS...........particularly if so many are willing to accept a criminal defendant as a candidate. What has happened to this country?? Totally insane and lost its values and bearings.
Hunter is a vulnerable person. History of emotional issues so he makes such an easy target for the savage Republicans.

 

It was negotiated, you give up this. I'll plead Guilty to that, but only if it's a misdemeanor. Apparently wise believe that was the best deal he could get.

 

The tax evasion/avoidance and the gun charges are cookbook cases. The only thing that could increase his troubles are if he signed anything that gave him income on access to his dad. That could constitute fraud, but their would have to be a signed document. That aside, can't imagine too many people wanting to do business with a drug addict.

 

The left always wants to make this about Hunter instead of the worst and highly corrupt president in the white bouse who used his son as a money mule to sell foreign influence and quid pro-quo.

It's bad that many on the right allow them to play that game.

 

Problem is you can’t prove any of that. I think he probably used his perceived access to his dad to make money. Doesn’t prove a quid pro quo. You’d need him saying pay me and my dad will do X, then prove joe knew and actually did it.

 

Which is true, but not as it should be. That is, at some point, anyone who is a true advocate for justice, has to ask if Hunter Biden is being treated in a way that is unduly harsh, and inconsistent with the way that anyone else, under the same circumstances, would in all probability be treated.

 

I was thinking very much the same. We've been hearing about the two tier system with regards to Trump. Reps think he's being hunted and treated very unfairly compared to other politicians. Now, they are treating a private citizen as though he were satan, simply because they want to get at his dad.

 

It's precisely why Joe made impromptu calls to his son (20 of them) at business meetings at the exact time to firm up the deals. His call sanctified the deals. It's not about anything said.....it was all prearranged. That is how it is done. Pretty sneaky huh?

 

So, Trump should be considered innocent, until proven guilty, no matter how damning, the copious evidence; meanwhile, Biden is defacto guilty of things, just because of the conjecture you formulate, from a few data points-- which could be easily & innocently explained, by more likely circumstances, than your flimsy conspiracy theories.

LOL, at that inconsistency.

 

The easiest way to distract attention from Hunter Biden is to reelect Donald Trump. The country will be so enthralled with joy that no one will care what Hunter has done. Metra fect, his daddy will be the biggest joke in US history and Biden supporters will be hiding beneath the carpet out of eyesight of the festivities and wondering how they could have misread the American will so badly.
MAGA!

 

My understanding is that the "felony" gun charge is not only rarely charged, and that it has a dubious Constitutional foundation. Where are all the 2nd Amendment fanatics, chiming in on this story?


https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ju...ges-hunter-biden-are-rarely-brought-rcna90191

<Snip>

Legal experts say the charges against Hunter Biden are rarely brought.
The federal statute making it unlawful for a drug addict to possess a gun faces court challenges. The misdemeanor tax charges also rarely result in jail time.
<End Snip>

And the unpaid taxes have, of course, been reimbursed. Yet how many years of investigation, over these relatively minor offenses? And the irony, is that people on the Right take this to be proof, not of prosecutorial overkill, in the hope of getting lucky, finding something meatier, that ties back to Joe Biden-- the same mentality we saw with John Durham and, before that, with Ken Starr-- but rather that there must be something more, than the small potatoes, of these charges.

 

There's more to circumstantial evidence than the common. If you were at the party where Miss Pennywhistle was murdered but you tell the police you weren't there it doesn't make you guilty of murder but it does raise a whole lot of suspicion that you might be the one who did it.

 

Ah, looking forward to an Orange Stain conviction I see…?

 

Ahh, I see. And this makes Biden look worse, between the two, because Trump has never been caught telling a lie?

That still doesn't address the idea of my post, that the standard which one uses, whether it is, or it isn't, "innocent until proven guilty in a court of law," should at least be consistent, for all alleged criminals. If your point was that, in some cases, evidence is just far stronger, than in others, which then warrants an overriding of this rule-- it is against Trump (the actually indicted person), where the case is rock solid; and against the uncharged, President Biden, where speculation is the glue, the rope, and the duct tape, holding together the conspiratorial image, in some peoples' minds.

 

Did I say that? I'm sure I didn't.

The American standard of law in practice is so far beyond consistent that the two of us would be ****** to believe otherwise.

Don't look at me. I'm not the one who's put it into effect. I'm just an observer telling it like it is.

Ho-ho! That you dare say such a thing!

 

The Privileged Class and their minions do not want a trial because Hunter would be force to testify about his businesses and the services he provided. The Privileged Class knows this will drag Joe into the mix. It's clear they are doing everything they can to prevent a trial. No matter how the Privileged Class and their minions spin Weiss's "appointment" as special counsel it's clear they fear a trial. Delaying tactics are Weiss's claim to fame.

 

Lolwut?
Huh?
"forced to testify"? Lmao!
Hunter could take the 5th...
In what fantasy world (totally lacking in knowledge of The Constituton) would Hunter be "forced to testify"?
Is it possible that post wasn't very well thought out?