The DOJ is Hunter Biden’s Defense Team
When no one can tell Hunter’s lawyers and prosecutors apart.
[Editor’s note: Make sure to read Daniel Greenfield’s masterpiece contributions in Jamie Glazov’s new book: Barack Obama’s True Legacy: How He Transformed America.]
How do you tell Hunter Biden’s lawyers apart from his prosecutors?
That was the confusing question that Judge Maryellen Noreika had to grapple with while unpacking a plea deal in which prosecutors buried an agreement that gave Hunter immunity from prosecution that had been written to avoid judicial scrutiny. Why would prosecutors write a plea deal for Hunter that one of them admitted to Judge Noreika had no precedent?
The rejected plea deal was unprecedented because prosecutors and defense attorneys were unprecedentedly working for the same team. But that’s what happens when the Justice Department pretends to be investigating the president’s son with his dad’s reelection on the line.
The Hunter Biden plea deal was part of a package in which the DOJ and the FBI stonewalled Congress and are trying to send Devon Archer, Hunter’s closest pal, to prison ahead of his congressional testimony in which he was scheduled to accuse Joe Biden of taking part in conversations with Hunter’s business partners while serving as vice president.
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer called this “obstruction of justice” and denounced “the lengths to which the Biden legal team has gone to try to intimidate our witnesses, to coordinate with the DOJ and certainly to coordinate with the Democrats on the House Oversight Committee to encourage people not to cooperate with our investigation.”
United States v. Biden is a farce because they’re one and the same. The United States of America is currently run by Biden’s dad. The relationship isn’t antagonistic. Beyond ideological allegiances, a whole echelon of Justice Department personnel have bet their careers on the ascension of Democrat political candidates who then appoint transition team members whose pals are their former bosses. When a Hillary or a Joe Biden enters the White House, they all move up a few steps closer to a lucrative position they can use as a springboard to partner in a prestigious D.C. law firm, score a top security consulting position or run for public office.
If Biden loses in 2024, a bunch of DOJ people will have to hold off on that lake house, the extended trip to Europe and the move to a D.C. bedroom community. That’s why the Hunter Biden investigation was never anything more than performative. Everyone wanted to be seen going through the motion, but no one wanted to risk actually winning. Performative bureaucracy is a pantomime in which everyone appears to have done their job but nothing has gotten done. This routine infuriates ordinary citizens who watch it happen when they spend two years waiting for a construction permit, an appointment at the DMV or the outcome of a federal investigation.
The IRS whistleblowers were sidelined because they almost ruined the show by trying to do things even after they were told repeatedly that their job was to run out the clock. The FBI, which was moving full speed ahead in going after Trump or non-violent pro-life protesters, ran out the clock on the Hunter Biden investigation. Armed with evidence of a host of crimes that would have sent any ordinary person away long enough to become a grandfather, the combined defense team and prosecution teamed up to write up an extensive blank check for Hunter.
Judge Noreika’s objection, much like Durham’s, is procedural, but the problem isn’t just that the DOJ violated proper protocol in going after Trump or that it violated the correct procedures in cover up for Hunter Biden, it’s that the Department of Justice has become a political entity.
The procedural violations are symptoms of systemic political corruption.
Critics suspect that figures like Devon Archer or Gal Luft are targeted because they have damaging information about Hunter Biden. And Hunter Biden is protected because he’s the president’s son and anything he says has the potential to bring down his father and his party.
Hunter Biden has become too big to fall because his father, a formerly small-time hack, now carries a party and an ideology on his shaking shoulders. Anyone who threatens Hunter also threatens the ideological project of the leftists who placed their bets on Biden for a second term. And beyond them lies a vast career bureaucracy that also depends on Hunter staying free.
Parties and regimes often crack up over such petty corruption, but what’s cracking up here is the DOJ. The Justice Department has become a corrupt institution in which it alternately ignores and pursues charges of mishandling classified documents based on the party of the presidential candidate, in which it subjects everything from obstruction of justice and FARA violations to gun charges and prostitution to the same political test. While enemies of the party can be tried for anything, members of their party and their kin can commit any crime in the world and walk away.
Hunter Biden is personally insignificant, yet he has become a powerful symbol of a corrupt system. What began with the DOJ acting to protect Hillary Clinton and her aides has now escalated to covering for the entire Biden family. How far is that going to go? Is the DOJ going to become a family law firm for Joe Biden’s brother or for every Biden family member receiving money from the complex web of shell companies surrounding the family’s foreign enterprises?
How many bananas are there in the Biden banana republic? How many plantations? How many acres? If Hunter Biden had run over someone while going 170 mph through a residential neighborhood in Arlington, as he photographed himself doing, would the local cops have busted him or carefully bagged up his crack pipe for the FBI to take away as material evidence in some unrelated case that never sees the light of day? What if he had hit someone important?
Questions like these would have once seemed absurd but are now highly relevant. In a corrupt justice system all we can do is explore the limits of the corruption. How much Hunter could get away with is a stress test of how much corruption his father and the whole clan can do. The Lewinsky case was insignificant but it was a test of whether the rules applied. (They did not.) It’s hard to think of a case where the rules, large or small, have since applied to Clinton associates, accomplices, successors and members of his party.
What began as selective neglect has escalated into affirmative cover-ups. The son of a president doesn’t just expect to get a pass, but for prosecutors to come out and lie to a judge.
At the end of George Orwell’s ‘Animal Farm’ describing the descent into Communism, “the creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.” At Hunter Biden’s plea deal, the judge looked around but was unable to say which of the pigs covering for a presidential crackhead were his lawyers and which were the government prosecutors assigned to bring him to justice.
Daniel Greenfield
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
Reader Interactions
Comments
House Republicans Demand AG Merrick Garland Answer for Hunter’s ‘Not Standard’ Plea Deal
House Republicans demand Attorney General Merrick Garland, President Joe Biden’s top law enforcement officer, provide answers as to why the Justice Department (DOJ) agreed to a plea deal with Hunter Biden that was “not standard” and “different” from what the judge normally sees.
Hunter Biden pled not guilty last Wednesday to gun and tax charges, refusing to accept a new plea deal laid out by prosecutors after negotiations fell apart due to questioning by Judge Maryellen Noreika about the “diversion agreement.”
A diversion agreement is a deal between a defendant and a prosecutor whereby the prosecutor agrees to forego the prosecution of the crime in return for some penalty received by the defendant.
In Hunter Biden’s case, “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,” former Federal Prosecutor Will Scharf stated. “That pretrial diversion agreement as written was actually MUCH broader than just the gun charge,” protecting Hunter Biden from any potential future charges related to an ongoing case, such as failing to register as a foreign agent.
The House Committees on Judiciary, Ways and Means, and Oversight issued a letter to Garland seeking “to better understand the Department’s decision to sign off on such apparently atypical agreements.” The committees summarized the concern:
In short, the Department shifted a broad immunity provision, which benefits Mr. Biden, from the plea agreement to the pretrial diversion agreement apparently to prevent the District Court from being able to scrutinize and reject that immunity provision. And then, the Department has benefitted Mr. Biden by giving up its unilateral ability to bring charges against him if it concludes that he has breached the pretrial diversion agreement. Instead, it has placed upon itself the burden of getting the District Court’s permission to bring charges even though the District Court normally has no role in policing a pretrial diversion agreement in that manner. So, the District Court is apparently removed from the equation when it helps Mr. Biden and inserted into the equation when it helps Mr. Biden.
The Committees are also concerned that, contrary to its representations to the Judiciary Committee, the Department may be claiming that other investigations into Mr. Biden are ongoing to shield the Department from Congressional oversight about this matter. In that regard, it was notable that Mr. Biden’s counsel stated at the hearing that it was his understanding that the immunity provision in the pretrial diversion agreement would preclude the Department from bringing charges against Mr. Biden under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. While the Department did not agree with that position, it is difficult to understand how the parties would not have a meeting of the minds regarding a clause of the agreement as fundamental as the scope of the immunity provision, and it raises questions about what discussions have taken place between the Department and Mr. Biden’s counsel regarding the status of those investigations.
The lawmakers’ questions to Garland included:
- How many times in the last ten years has the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware shaped a diversion agreement like Hunter Biden’s?
- How many times in the last ten years has any unit of the DOJ included, in a diversion agreement, a plea deal to not prosecute crimes unrelated to the charges being diverted?
- Was the diversion agreement Hunter Biden or U.S. Prosecutor David Weiss’s idea?
The lawmakers demanded Garland reply by 5:00 p.m. on August 14, 2023.
Follow Wendell Husebø on Twitter @WendellHusebø. He is the author of Politics of Slave Morality.
Peter Schweizer on Devon Archer’s Testimony: ‘The Noose Is Tightening’
With Devon Archer spilling to the House Oversight Committee about the Biden family’s sketchy foreign business deals, Peter Schweizer says in the latest episode of The Drill Down podcast that Democrats and the White House are running out of plausible defenses.
“This starts to get real hinky for the Bidens, it’s really troublesome for them,” Schweizer says. “The noose is tightening, because I haven’t seen any evidence pop up that counters this narrative” – that Hunter Biden and his business partners were cashing in on Joe’s political influence, and that Joe knew.
Devon Archer was the missing piece, says Schweizer, who has been investigating the Biden scandals since 2017. Archer was Hunter Biden’s main business partner throughout the entire period of 2009-2018 that is under question by the committee, setting up many of the business entities and shell companies that are at issue. His testimony to the committee investigating the Biden family’s business dealings had been sought for months — and delayed four times.
Archer and Hunter Biden met while both were students at Yale and remained friends. Archer was a fundraiser for John Kerry’s 2004 presidential campaign. In 2009, as Hunter’s father became Vice President under President Barack Obama, Devon Archer and Hunter Biden began setting up businesses. Archer set up the Rosemont Seneca companies, which would do deals with China, among others.
When Hunter Biden was given a seat on the board of a Ukrainian energy company called Burisma and owned by a corrupt oligarch, so was Devon Archer. Interestingly, a third partner declined the same invitation. Chris Heinz, the stepson of John Kerry, “strongly warned Mr. Archer that working with Burisma was unacceptable. Mr. Archer stated that he and Hunter Biden intended to pursue the opportunity as individuals, not as part of the firm,” a spokesperson told the Washington Post.
Archer was later convicted in connection with a bond scheme that swindled money from the Oglala Sioux Indian tribe. Burnham Asset Management, the company behind that fraudulent scheme, was chaired by Archer. Hunter Biden was the vice-chair but was not named in any of the charges.
Schweizer notes that this seems yet another example of a two-tiered application of justice when it comes to the Bidens. Schweizer notes that he has spoken to Archer and says, “He feels angry and burned by Hunter and wants to spill the beans.”
“It seems to me that he wants to simply tell the truth. I don’t know Devon Archer, but I’ve talked to him on the phone, probably for ten or 15 minutes. And my view is that he believes he’s innocent. I’ll let the evidence there speak for itself, but he feels angry. He feels like he was burned and he wants to be honest and transparent.”
As Eggers summed up, “It’s another brick in the wall.”
To hear more of the Drill Down podcast – click here.
Hunter: At the Heart of an Investigation
And once again, the "Big Guy" and his bureaus are doing everything to assist him.
Yes, Hunter Biden is making headlines. Again.
First there was all the news that surrounded his laptop – news that the FBI and Department of Justice did everything in their power to bury. And now, as he prepares to plead guilty to lesser charges of failing to pay taxes and a felony gun charge, it appears he’s in a whole new heap of trouble. But don’t worry – as expected, Daddy will likely try to keep him out of it.
The GOP’s continuous investigation into the Biden family have revealed an FBI document, one that has been made available publicly as of late, thanks to Iowa Republican Senator Chuck Grassley.
In a tweet, the document, an FD-1023 form, showed that then-Vice President Biden managed to get involved in some kind of foreign bribery scheme with a Ukrainian business executive – on Hunter’s behalf.
Upon revealing the document, Grassley noted “now the world can see” for themselves the evidence at hand. “While the FBI sought to obfuscate and redact, the American people can now read this document for themselves, without the filter of politicians or bureaucrats.”
The document had first surfaced shortly after the public testimony of two IRS agents involved with the case, who stated they faced heavy opposition from Joe Biden’s government bureaus when it came to getting information.
But what’s more concerning is that the House Oversight Committee had to fight tooth and nail with the FBI in order to gain access to it, with James Comer actually threatening the agency with contempt proceedings if they failed to deliver. That’s right, they had to fight the FBI to release their own document – which is ridiculous.
As you might expect, Biden has already ordered people on his behalf to “fight back,” as it were. In a statement, Jamie Raskin, a Democratic Representative for Maryland, noted that Grassley’s actions were “another transparently desperate attempt by Committee Republicans to revive the aging and debunked Giuliani-framed conspiracy theories and to distract from their continuing failure to produce any actual evidence of wrongdoing by the President.”
Now, correct me if I’m wrong, Representative Raskin, but…the document is the proof. Just because one of your precious bureaus didn’t have the chance to filter it first for “important information” doesn’t mean it’s not sustainable proof. It’s just sustainable proof that your agencies weren’t able to alter.
As if that wasn’t enough, the Department of Justice decided to make a statement on the GOP’s actions as well, particularly those from House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio). Assistant Attorney General Carlos Uriarte noted, “We are deeply concerned by any misrepresentations about our work – whether deliberate or arising from misunderstandings – that could unduly harm public confidence in the evenhanded administration of justice, to which we are dedicated.”
Yet there’s some confusion here, Uriarte. You note that you are “dedicated” to justice, and that you feel these “misrepresentations” are a concern. But how about the misrepresentation of a. the Committee actually having to threaten the FBI in an effort to get the document; and b. having to immediately discredit the document despite the fact that it contains factual information that the Bidens may have been involved in some shady goings-on?
It sounds like someone’s trying to blow smoke here. But the thing is, some people can still see clearly from it.
I’ve discussed the actions of the FBI and the Department of Justice for the longest time, choosing to guard the interest of the Bidens and their administration instead of the very Americans they’re sworn to protect. Not to mention using certain citizens – like Catholics – as pawns for their surveillance game, in the hopes of “catching someone in the act” when they’re just like you or me.
Honestly, I hope the Committee keeps digging. They’re finding crucial evidence against these bureaus, as well as with the Bidens, that will hopefully turn up the truth that we so richly deserve. Because they’re clearly not going to do it themselves. And that’s a problem.
Michael Letts is the Founder, President, and CEO of InVest USA, a national grassroots non-profit organization that is helping hundreds of communities provide thousands of bulletproof vests for their police forces through educational, public relations, sponsorship, and fundraising programs. He also has over 30 years of law enforcement experience under his belt, hence his pro-police stance for his brothers and sisters in blue.
No comments:
Post a Comment