Posted originally on the CTH on July 27, 2023 | Sundance
UPDATED – To add court transcript for context.
First things first, it’s Politico! When the Dept of Justice or FBI need to frame a narrative particular to their interests they use Politico and the New York Times. Keep this in mind. When Main Justice needs to position themselves, they leak to NYT and Politico. All leaks are purposeful.
Politico has received a copy of what is claimed to be the original Hunter Biden plea agreement between the USAO in Delaware and the Biden defense team. This is the plea agreement that was challenged by U.S. District Court Judge Maryellen Noreika, who was concerned the structure of the deal appeared to be creating immunity from prosecution for crimes that might come out of a now admitted, ongoing investigation of Hunter Biden; those crimes may include FARA violations.
[Politico Article Here]
[Plea Agreement and Attachment #1 Here]
[Diversion Agreement and Attachment “A” HERE]
The core issue centers around what appears to be clear coordination between the USAO, likely with the approvals of Main Justice (Monaco, Garland) and the Biden defense team, to structure the wording and placement of legal mechanisms inside the plea agreement to not only excuse the current criminal infractions, but also protect Hunter Biden from future criminal liability.
Essentially, all previous activities by Hunter Biden would be immune from prosecution, up to the date of his signing of the plea agreement. A blank slate retroactively, with all exposure for criminal conduct removed. The conduct surrounding the immunity is outlined in “Exhibit 1” and the “Attachment A” which was filed under seal.
“Attachment A” as above, was filed under seal. Apparently, leaked to Politico – despite not being part of the public court record. It is obvious to those who deal in such matters, the attachment was likely written by the Biden defense team and not the US Attorney Office in Delaware.
“Exhibit 1”, assembled with the statement of fact, is highlighted below and represents the second set of standards to frame the legal immunity from prosecution. Despite an ongoing investigation, anything that would fall into the parameters of Attachment-A and/or Exhibit-1 would be part of what the DOJ is saying would not be criminally prosecuted.
Biden would be excused from “any federal crimes” that touch on these issues and result from the ongoing investigation. This is what the judge ‘reportedly‘ took exception to.
While the gun crime and the tax violations are the face of the legal immunity (the admission of guilt and plea), avoiding criminal liability for the underlying activity that created the income is the issue that appears to be structured by the plea as an ancillary, albeit purposeful, protection.
UPDATE: The transcript of the court hearing shows the context of the dynamic at play. [TRANSCRIPT LINK] U.S. District Court Judge Maryellen Noreika is questioning USAO David Wise about the nature of this plea agreement, and the construct of how the agreement not to prosecute is buried in paragraph 15 of the diversion agreement.
It will be interesting to see how this goes.
This is a critical moment for the DOJ, particularly Deputy AG Lisa Monaco and Attorney General Merrick Garland, as the transparency of the “dual justice system” is represented within the collusion between the USAO in Delaware and the representatives of the Biden family.
There is an obvious intent by Main Justice to protect the Biden family, a political motive, as well as maintain protection of the corrupt DOJ institution itself behind the shield of an “ongoing investigation.” Questions cannot be answered because an investigation is “ongoing,” you know the game.
Centinel2012 