Hunter Biden Plea Deal

[GaryK]

Hunter Biden is pleading guilty to tax evasion charges and is also being charged for illegal gun pocession.

https://www.npr.org/2023/06/20/10871738 ... QlFGWdHz_0

The younger Biden has agreed to plead guilty to two misdemeanor offenses related to his filing of federal income taxes. Federal authorities also charged him with a felony firearm offense, for which he agreed to enter a pretrial diversion agreement that allows him to avoid prosecution.

According to David Weiss, the Delaware U.S. attorney, Biden did not pay federal income taxes for either 2017 or 2018, despite owing more than $100,000 in taxes each year.

Additionally, in October 2018 Biden possessed a firearm despite knowing he was an unlawful user of and addicted to a controlled substance, Weiss' office said.

I wanted to respond to this in a new thread.

This investigation has been going on for years and has concluded in a plea deal.

What I'm having a hard time understanding is why this relatively minor tax issues and gun related case took years to conclude. Yet in just a bit over one year of investigation, a former president is indicted and is going to stand trial in August.

How can the relatively minor case take years to conclude and the other one be so speedy?

[Szdfan]

Was Hunter just being investigated for taxes and the gun, or was he being investigated for other issues as well?

The investigation into Trump seems rather straight-forward -- Trump refused to turn over classified documents that the National Archives asked to get back. To me that seems rather cut and dry.

If the DOJ was investigating Hunter's overseas business deals, that could be a lot more complicated and take longer.

[GaryK]

Was Hunter just being investigated for taxes and the gun, or was he being investigated for other issues as well?

The investigation into Trump seems rather straight-forward -- Trump refused to turn over classified documents that the National Archives asked to get back. To me that seems rather cut and dry.

If the DOJ was investigating Hunter's overseas business deals, that could be a lot more complicated and take longer.

That makes sense as a possible reason.

I wonder if whether or not Hunter was being investigated for overseas business dealings will be made public?

[Sliceitup]

Hunter Biden is pleading guilty to tax evasion charges and is also being charged for illegal gun pocession.

https://www.npr.org/2023/06/20/10871738 ... QlFGWdHz_0

The younger Biden has agreed to plead guilty to two misdemeanor offenses related to his filing of federal income taxes. Federal authorities also charged him with a felony firearm offense, for which he agreed to enter a pretrial diversion agreement that allows him to avoid prosecution.

According to David Weiss, the Delaware U.S. attorney, Biden did not pay federal income taxes for either 2017 or 2018, despite owing more than $100,000 in taxes each year.

Additionally, in October 2018 Biden possessed a firearm despite knowing he was an unlawful user of and addicted to a controlled substance, Weiss' office said.

I wanted to respond to this in a new thread.

This investigation has been going on for years and has concluded in a plea deal.

What I'm having a hard time understanding is why this relatively minor tax issues and gun related case took years to conclude. Yet in just a bit over one year of investigation, a former president is indicted and is going to stand trial in August.

How can the relatively minor case take years to conclude and the other one be so speedy?

According to the article the investigation lasted 5 years. But if I’m doing my math correctly then he wasn’t charged for anything that actually happened until after the investigation was opened. (Taxes for 2017 wouldn’t be paid until 2018, correct?) Presumably they weren’t able to find anything that was worthy of charging that happened pre-investigation, but spent a lot of time doing the work to see if there was anything there.

[Bootstrap]

Was Hunter just being investigated for taxes and the gun, or was he being investigated for other issues as well?

Obviously, lots of other issues. Including overseas business deals. The time it takes really does depend on the complexity of investigating it.

The investigation into Trump seems rather straight-forward -- Trump refused to turn over classified documents that the National Archives asked to get back. To me that seems rather cut and dry.

If the DOJ was investigating Hunter's overseas business deals, that could be a lot more complicated and take longer.

And we may see other charges in both cases. Or not. Time will tell.

[Bootstrap]

How can the relatively minor case take years to conclude and the other one be so speedy?

More relevant: who was the special prosecutor, and who chose him? Did he face any political interference?

The special prosecutor was chosen by the Trump Administration. Merrick Garland says he gave him full authority. Normally, the special prosecutor is required to make a statement that says he was able to operate without interference and had the resources he needed to do the investigation, or to identify limitations he faced. You can read this in any of the recent investigations done by special prosecutors.

So I think the Trump Administration's special prosecutor was allowed to see what evidence he could develop on Hunter Biden:

Weiss, the top prosecutor in the state, is one of just two U.S. attorneys who stayed on the job at the end of the Trump years, to continue to oversee the Hunter Biden probe. Republicans in Congress had pressed the Justice Department to name a special prosecutor in the case, but federal authorities resisted that idea, arguing that Weiss and his team had been working smoothly and free from political interference.

Attorney General Merrick Garland has told Congress that Weiss had "full authority" to make decisions in the probe.

If Weiss comes out and says there was interference, then we have a story and a real issue. Until that happens, I don't think we do.

There may be other charges later. But is right-wing media really outraged that the special prosecutor that the Trump Administrator chose was not able to find evidence for their claims about Hunter Biden and charge him with more serious crimes? And that is somehow unfair to Donald Trump?

[Josh]

Multiple whistleblowers already came forward and testified before Congress they were subject to interference from top officials in the IRS.

[Bootstrap]

Multiple whistleblowers already came forward and testified before Congress they were subject to interference from top officials in the IRS.

I'm imagining that David Weiss, the special prosecutor that the Trump Administration appointed to this case, looked into these claims. If he hadn't, and they are true, it's quite possible that there will be further charges.

David Weiss said that its investigation of Biden is ongoing. Both Hunter Biden and Donald Trump may face further charges.

[Josh]

Multiple whistleblowers already came forward and testified before Congress they were subject to interference from top officials in the IRS.

I'm imagining that David Weiss, the special prosecutor that the Trump Administration appointed to this case, looked into these claims.

I'm glad your imagination can imagine that, but we have no evidence this is the case. The whistleblowers' testimony before Congress is public record.

If he hadn't, and they are true, it's quite possible that there will be further charges.

You have a very high degree of confidence in Congress, special investigators, and the unaccountable, unelected parts of the executive branch. Some of us do not share that confidence. I think it is quite possible there won't be further charges even if very serious evidence is found.

David Weiss said that its investigation of Biden is ongoing. Both Hunter Biden and Donald Trump may face further charges.

Boot, ultimately, if I blatantly broke federal weapons laws, I would either end up in prison or would end up shot dead, or my family shot dead, much as happened to Randy Weaver at Ruby Ridge. That is how people who are not politically well connected get treated when they break (or are suspected of breaking) federal firearm laws.

Likewise, if I had filed false tax returns and owed well north of $100,000 to the IRS, I would not be getting a light slap on the wrist. I would be facing felony charges and prison time plus seizure of any and all of my goods.

But then again, I've never been hired as a consultant for a Ukrainian gas company to the tune of $50,000 a month. I am surprised you don't circumstances like that just a tad suspicious and worthy of investigation on their own right. Whilst you seem very concerned about Trump possibly having some classified documents - aren't you a bit more worried about the current sitting President having a son (and taking payments from that son) who is deeply involved in Eastern European corruption, in a place that is now a warzone?

[Bootstrap]

You have a very high degree of confidence in Congress, special investigators, and the unaccountable, unelected parts of the executive branch. Some of us do not share that confidence. I think it is quite possible there won't be further charges even if very serious evidence is found.

The DOJ and FBI have lots of accountability to Congress, the Executive branch, and the Judicial branch, and that's how it should be. No human process will ever be perfect, but the constitution is wise to make the various parts of government accountable to each other. Again, accountability is important when we find serious problems like the FISA warrants for Carter Page, but let's not burn it down and replace it with torches and pitchforks.

Who should we trust instead? What are their accountability mechanisms? How do you propose we avoid political witch hunts? I don't really see a serious proposal to create a better, more accountable process, I see politicians bragging that they can take the other side down. Sometimes insisting that the DOJ and FBI should do their will, protecting their friends, punishing their enemies. And that's the very definition of a political witch hunt. That's McCarthyism.

Here are some of the key accountability mechanisms for the DOJ and FBI:

• Internal Inspections and Audits: The DOJ and FBI have internal inspection and audit offices that conduct reviews and evaluations to assess compliance with policies, procedures, and regulations. These internal entities monitor the agencies' activities and identify areas for improvement or potential misconduct.
• Office of the Inspector General (OIG): The DOJ has an independent OIG, which conducts independent audits, investigations, and inspections to detect and deter waste, fraud, abuse, and misconduct within the department. The OIG also provides oversight of FBI operations and investigates allegations of misconduct or impropriety involving FBI personnel.
• Congressional Oversight: The DOJ and FBI are subject to oversight by the United States Congress. Congressional committees, such as the Senate Judiciary Committee and the House Judiciary Committee, hold hearings, request documents, and exercise subpoena powers to examine the agencies' activities, policies, and performance. Members of Congress can raise concerns, request investigations, and propose reforms based on their oversight responsibilities.
• Judicial Oversight: The actions of the DOJ and FBI can be subject to judicial review. Courts can evaluate the legality and constitutionality of their actions, including search warrants, surveillance programs, and other investigative techniques. If misconduct is identified, courts can suppress evidence, dismiss cases, or take other appropriate actions.
• Civil Liberties and Privacy Protections: The DOJ and FBI are required to respect civil liberties and privacy rights while carrying out their duties. Laws such as the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the Privacy Act of 1974, and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) provide legal safeguards for individuals' rights, and violations of these rights can be challenged in court.
• Whistleblower Protections: Both agencies have established mechanisms to protect whistleblowers who report misconduct, waste, or abuse. Whistleblowers can make protected disclosures without fear of retaliation and are afforded certain legal protections.
• External Review Boards and Commissions: In some instances, independent review boards or commissions may be established to investigate specific incidents or issues involving the DOJ or FBI. These external entities can provide impartial assessments and recommendations for improvement.