Looks like they couldn’t get the judge to sign off on Hunter’s plea deal. It wasn’t the completely usual nothing-to-see-here nothingburger people were claiming it to be.
Looks like they couldn’t get the judge to sign off on Hunter’s plea deal. It wasn’t the completely usual nothing-to-see-here nothingburger people were claiming it to be.
it is nothing to see because main stream media is not covering much of it, or they’re covering only the broad story that they’re forced to cover. were it a real story they would be all over it! /s
I listened to NPR’s On The Media interview with Michael Sulzberger, New York Times publisher, who swears up down and sideways that his newspaper is not a liberally focused newspaper. Early in the podcast the interviewer said with a bit of exasperation “why don’t you just admit that it’s a liberal publication? that doesn’t discount your reporting is professional, thorough, and factual.”
Sulzberger wouldn’t budge.
I’m waiting for that NYT front page expose of Hunter Biden. I might then subscribe to it. How long will I have to wait?
Since I do not follow details of the Hunter Biden story, and there’s certainly smoke there don’t know about fire, the real story has always been the complacency of media and government officials to refuse to cover the story. Ongoing now for years. I enjoyed watching the New York Post reporter testify in front of Congress and give a beatdown to her journalistic colleagues. Yes, I know that the Post is a rag, but that girl has journalism chops. Just like the college freshman had journalism chops, the kid who brought down Stanford University’s president for his unrelenting investigation into cooked research published by the president. Just like that college sophomore who was key in bringing down Elizabeth Holmes.
The Internet has millions of little voices twittering incredibly stupid stuff, but the Internet also allows truth to rise to the top.
No, it most certainly wasn't. Hiding what appears to be a blanket pardon (or at least a promise not to prosecute any additional violations which may come to light) within the pre-trial diversion section of the agreement seems like a big deal indeed. I suspect the judge's attention to detail will now force the DOJ to explore potential FARA (Foreign Agents Registration Act) violations which is the very last thing the Biden administration and main stream media want to happen. If Hunter is found to be in violation the question of what he had to offer comes to the forefront, and the answer is influence.
To think that would have been pushed under the rug in the absence of one simple question from the judge is remarkable.
I also think that's a perfect example of why you shouldn't vote Republican, the double standards, graft and influence peddling will have to be a little less obvious otherwise.
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
The very smart Marcy Wheeler has an interesting take on what’s going on with the Hunter Biden plea deal. The very short TLDR, both the government and Hunter’s lawyer bungled the whole thing although she also seems to think the government may have been trying to back door Hunter into testifying himself into a FARA crime admission that they don’t otherwise have admissible evidence for because of the whole laptop scam being tainted beyond usefulness.
https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/07/2...-hunter-biden/
i’m not sure I understand what this author is saying (it’s hard to wade through the first few paragraphs of this article because she’s so self congratulatory ) but is her conclusion really that the DOJ can’t do what they need to do because —-Donald J Trump? It’s Trump’s fault?
Really, is this the conclusion?
Partly yes. Because the DOj under Donald trump did stuff the DOJ can’t do. But the bigger conclusion is that the DOJ was trying to fix that by scamming Hunter into confessing crimes that the DOJ wouldn’t otherwise be able to prove due to the ‘irregularities’ that occurred under Barr’s tenure.
Basically her understanding from a strictly legal point of view is that neither the right wing or left wing accepted point of view of why this has played out is accurate.
I think what she was basically saying is that the DOJ was trying to set Hunter Biden up through specific language in the plea agreement and that the defense attorneys were too stupid to notice. It occurs to me that the DOJ might attempt something like that but any competent lawyer, not to mention an entire team of lawyers would see through that at first glance. It doesn't pass the smell test for me.
It seems more likely to me that this was a concerted effort between both sides to put this entire matter to rest while doing the least possible damage to the defendant, and also to provide immunity from future prosecution for related charges without admitting to the potential charges themselves. The judge threw a monkey wrench into the mix by asking pertinent questions which forced the prosecution to backtrack on what they and the defense had previously agreed upon but couldn't publicly admit.
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
There are currently 9 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 9 guests)