Connect with us

Elections

Hunter Biden’s Plea Deal Collapses Amid Federal Investigation: Court Drama Unfolds

Published

on

hunter biden

During his first court appearance on Wednesday morning, Hunter Biden’s anticipated plea deal unraveled as he pleaded “not guilty” to two misdemeanor tax counts of willful failure to pay federal income tax. Federal prosecutors confirmed that President Biden’s son remains under federal investigation, adding to the intrigue surrounding the case.

Initially, Hunter Biden was expected to accept the plea deal to avoid a felony gun charge and potential jail time. However, the proceedings took an unexpected turn when the defense attorney, Chris Clark, contested a crucial aspect of the deal. As a result, the agreement broke down, leading to further negotiations between both parties.

The presiding judge, Judge Noreika, expressed concerns about the constitutionality of the diversion deal related to the felony gun charge. She highlighted a key issue: if Hunter breached the deal, the judge would need to make a finding of fact before the government could bring charges. Furthermore, Judge Noreika saw this as going beyond her jurisdiction, suggesting that the entire plea deal might be unconstitutional, which would void any immunity Hunter Biden believed he would receive.

Apologizing to Hunter Biden, Judge Noreika sought additional information before making a decision. The court requested briefings from both sides, but no firm date was set, according to reports from Fox News.

During the hearing, Judge Noreika inquired about Hunter Biden’s sobriety and questioned his business dealings, particularly the money he and potentially his father, President Joe Biden, received from foreign business partners, including Ukrainian natural gas firm Burisma Holdings and Chinese energy firm CEFC.

As Hunter Biden entered his not guilty plea, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre addressed the matter at the daily briefing, reiterating that Hunter Biden’s case was a personal matter and highlighting that it was handled independently by the Justice Department under the leadership of a prosecutor appointed by former President Donald J Trump.

However, the implications of Hunter Biden’s legal entanglement have raised concerns about potential national security threats. With the president’s son still under federal investigation, questions arise about the possible risks this situation poses to America’s image and standing on the global stage.

Amidst the unfolding courtroom drama, a cascade of revelations emerged from IRS whistleblowers, Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, shedding light on alleged misconduct within the Department of Justice during the extensive investigation into Hunter Biden. House Ways & Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith stepped into the fray, submitting an amicus brief imploring the court to give serious weight to this critical testimony before approving the proposed plea deal.

The chairman’s grave concerns about possible political interference struck at the heart of the propriety of the U.S. Attorney’s Office’s investigation, casting a somber shadow over the proceedings, and leaving the nation pondering the potential implications on national security and the integrity of the justice system.

On the eve of this pivotal court appearance, tension reached its peak when the judge issued a stern warning of potential sanctions against Hunter Biden’s legal team. An attorney faced allegations of misrepresentation while attempting to expunge IRS whistleblower testimony from the court docket, a move that stirred controversy and raised eyebrows in the hallowed halls of justice.

The defense, however, swiftly refuted the allegations, attributing the incident to an unfortunate miscommunication, yet leaving the lingering question of trust and transparency hanging in the air.

The courtroom drama, infused with a sense of urgency, has elevated the case to the forefront of public interest. The interplay of legal intricacies and ongoing investigations has bestowed upon it an aura of significance, captivating the nation’s attention.

As the legal proceedings unfurl, America stands as a captivated audience, eagerly watching the drama unfold, anxiously awaiting the verdict that will shape the course of events and, potentially, reverberate through the fabric of the nation’s security and its perception of justice.

Follow Alexander Carter on Twitter @AlexCarterDC for more!

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Elections

There is ‘repeated evidence’ of non-citizens voting

Published

on

vote ny

There is “repeated evidence” of non-citizens voting, Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) said during an appearance on Breitbart News Daily, discussing the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act.

“Let me just say this about the overall state of the election issue,” Roy began, explaining that “we’ve got repeated evidence of those who are here illegally — or, or whether they’re here legally — but non-citizens voting.”

“We’ve got studies demonstrating that. We’ve got evidence that it may have tipped the election for Al Franken and his election back in Minnesota. Objective studies have showed…Virginia tossing out 1,500 registered voters just last year. I can go through a laundry list. We’ve got local jurisdictions — Oakland, San Francisco, our nation’s capital in Washington, DC, and New York City — who are registering voters specifically for their state and local elections, but we know that they don’t work hard to make sure they’re not voting in federal elections,” he said, noting that “federal law prohibits [and] limits the ability of states to be able to check and ensure citizenship, so much so that the state of Arizona has to run two systems — one for their state local elections and one for their federal elections.”

“They’re literally bifurcated because they want to ensure citizenship for their state and local elections, but they’re not allowed to for federal elections. Therefore, we need to fix the problem,” he said.

Breitbart News adds:

Further, Roy said, because of the Motor Voter Act — the National Voter Registration Act — passed in the 1990s, the courts have interpreted federal laws to limit the state’s ability to “determine and collect the information necessary for determining and checking citizenship.”

Essentially, Roy said the U.S. has set up a system that requires federal agencies to push out the forms, encouraging individuals to register to vote. And while they ask one to identify if they are a citizen, and while federal law requires one to be a citizen to vote in federal elections, the congressman said there is nothing there to actually check citizenship.

The SAVE Act would help address these issues and correct what Roy described as the “glitch,” making it so every state would require anyone applying to register to vote to prove their citizenship.

“By doing that, though, it is correcting the glitch. It also goes through and it addresses some of the issues that have been complicated. There are states, for example, like North Dakota, which does not have voter registration at all, okay? So they can just show up to vote and don’t have registration…They have their own rules there about what you have to present in order just to vote. And that’s obviously a less populated state than, say, California or Texas or New York or Florida. But, so, we adapt and try to adjust to help with those kinds of situations. But, overall, the purpose of the bill is exactly as you just described, pretty simple,” Roy said. This is a bipartisan issue with massive support.

Continue Reading

Trending