Hunter Biden wants his felony gun charges dismissed, claiming his plea deal grants him immunity.
Hunter Biden seeks dismissal of three felony gun charges brought against him by Special Counsel David Weiss. The president’s son previously pleaded not guilty to the charges on Tuesday.
Last month, Weiss slapped Hunter with three felonies related to his unlawful purchase of a firearm in 2018. The counts specifically allege that Hunter lied on the background check form required to purchase the gun and possessed the firearm “while he was addicted to and using illicit substances.”
It’s important to note that Weiss intentionally delayed an inquiry into Hunter’s alleged criminal activities because he believed it would hinder then-candidate Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential aspirations.
In their Thursday court filing, Abbe Lowell and Richard Jones Jr., Hunter’s attorneys, stated that they “will seek to dismiss” the felony gun charges against their client “pursuant to the immunity provisions” of a diversion agreement agreed to by both parties earlier this summer. Lowell and Jones argue that this agreement grants Hunter immunity from such charges. This agreement was made alongside a separate set of indictments filed against Hunter by Weiss in June, which included two misdemeanor tax charges and a felony charge for possessing a firearm while being an unlawful drug user and addict.
As reported by The Federalist’s Jordan Boyd, this ”carefully orchestrated” sweetheart deal concocted by the DOJ and Hunter’s legal team meant that Hunter would only face probation, not jail time, for the two misdemeanor tax charges he planned to plead guilty to. Meanwhile, the federal government planned to drop the original felony gun charge as long as Hunter promised to abandon his drug-plagued lifestyle for 24 months and never own a gun again.
However, when presented with the pretrial diversion agreement in court, Federal Judge Maryellen Noreika sensed something amiss. Instead of approving the agreement, Noreika discovered that it would grant Hunter immunity from future charges beyond those listed in the indictment. Consequently, the plea agreement fell apart.
If convicted on all three felony gun charges, Hunter could potentially face up to 25 years in prison, according to the New York Post.
Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood
How does Hunter Biden’s diversion agreement impact his accountability for the alleged crimes and what is the argument from his attorneys?
Prison time, for his alleged crimes. This is a stark contrast to the harsh penalties that individuals in similar situations often face.
The decision to seek dismissal of the felony gun charges comes after months of legal battles and controversy surrounding Hunter Biden’s alleged criminal activities. It has been widely reported that Special Counsel David Weiss intentionally delayed the investigation into Hunter’s actions in order to protect then-candidate Joe Biden’s chances of winning the 2020 presidential election. This raises concerns about the impartiality and integrity of the justice system.
According to Hunter’s attorneys, Abbe Lowell and Richard Jones Jr., their client is entitled to immunity from the gun charges under a diversion agreement agreed to by both parties earlier this summer. They argue that this agreement should be respected and that Hunter should not be held accountable for these alleged crimes. It remains to be seen how the court will rule on this matter.
This case has garnered significant attention and controversy due to the high-profile nature of the individuals involved. It raises important questions about the fairness and transparency of the justice system, as well as the potential influence of political considerations on legal proceedings.
Critics argue that Hunter Biden is receiving preferential treatment due to his family connections and the political impact his case could have. They argue that if an ordinary citizen had been in a similar situation, they would have faced much harsher consequences. This highlights concerns about inequality and the potential for a two-tiered justice system.
It is essential for the courts to carefully consider the facts and evidence in this case and make a fair and just decision based on the law. The public’s trust in the justice system depends on the perception that everyone is held accountable for their actions, regardless of their social status or political connections.
This case serves as a reminder of the importance of maintaining the integrity and impartiality of the justice system. It is crucial that investigations and legal proceedings are conducted without political interference or bias. The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for public trust in the justice system and the perception of fairness and equality under the law.
As this case continues to unfold, it is crucial for the public to closely follow the developments and scrutinize the decisions made by the court. The principles of justice and equality must prevail, and any perception of preferential treatment or political influence must be addressed. Only by holding all individuals accountable to the same standards can we ensure a fair and just society.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
