BY TYLER DURDEN
MONDAY, AUG 21, 2023 – 11:00 AM
Hunter Biden’s lawyers played heavy with the Department of Justice, effectively threatening to force President Joe Biden to testify in any criminal trial against the First Son if a plea agreement wasn’t reached over his multiple alleged crimes.
"President Biden now unquestionably would be a fact witness for the defense in any criminal trial," wrote Hunter Biden attorney Chris Clark in a 32-page letter last fall, Politico reports, calling the news that there was enough evidence to charge Hunter an "illegal" leak.
That letter, along with more than 300 pages of previously unreported emails and documents exchanged between Hunter Biden’s legal team and prosecutors, sheds new light on the fraught negotiations that nearly produced a broad plea deal. That deal would have resolved Biden’s most pressing legal issues — the gun purchase and his failure to pay taxes for several years — and it also could have helped insulate Biden from future prosecution by a Republican-led Justice Department.
The documents show how the deal collapsed — a sudden turnabout that occurred after Republicans bashed it and a judge raised questions about it. The collapse renewed the prospect that Biden will head to trial as his father ramps up his 2024 reelection bid. -Politico
According to Clark, putting Joe Biden on the stand would create political and constitutional chaos by pitting Joe Biden against his own DOJ.
"This of all cases justifies neither the spectacle of a sitting President testifying at a criminal trial nor the potential for a resulting Constitutional crisis," reads the letter, which was shared with Politico along with several other documents.
Backstory
In the spring of 2022, Hunter Biden’s legal team was on the war path – using a PowerPoint presentation that invoked the looming ghost of Trump right from their opening slide. Their point was clear: Trump’s ceaseless haranguing of Hunter makes any charges against the younger Biden appear as yielding to political pressure, thus damaging the integrity of the Justice Department.
Of course, Hunter put himself in the spotlight by taking tens of millions of dollars from Ukraine, China and Russia in exchange for zero identifiable benefit aside from access to his father.
While initial concerns surrounded possible charges of influence peddling or money laundering, the actual case circled around late tax payments from 2014 to 2019. Biden’s lawyers argued that charging Hunter with tax crimes would make the DOJ look like they had capitulated to Trump’s call for an investigation.
Fast-forward to later in 2022, and we discover that Hunter could also face federal gun charges, traced back to 2018 when he was deeply hooked on crack cocaine. As things escalated, Hunter’s attorneys sought meetings with the highest echelons of the DOJ. These were not mere fishing expeditions but highly strategic maneuvers designed to corner the department into a position where it had to make a call: either it would take a reputation hit for being "politically influenced" or face accusations of providing “preferential treatment” to the President’s son.
By spring 2023, it seems the DOJ was looking for an exit strategy, and were open to cutting a deal that would save face for everyone involved – especially the department itself. The proposed agreement doesn’t require a guilty plea from Hunter but has its own laundry list of requirements.
From the fall of 2022 through the spring of 2023, Clark sought meetings with people at the highest levels of the Justice Department — almost entirely without success. In multiple emails, he asked to meet with the head of the Criminal Division, the head of the Tax Division, the Office of Legal Counsel, the Office of the Solicitor General, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco and the attorney general himself. On Feb. 21, 2023, Clark’s team reached out to multiple officials at Main Justice, who passed his request from one person to the next.
The search ended when Clark sent Associate Deputy Attorney General Bradley Weinsheimer an exasperated email, saying he had asked the government over and over to tell him who at headquarters they could appeal to if Weiss decided to charge their client. -Politico
"Please advise whether you would be the appropriate person to hear our client’s appeal, in the event that the U.S. Attorney’s Office decides to charge Mr. Biden," wrote Clark.
Please read more at the below link:
