Federal criminal investigation Hunter Biden focuses on his business dealings (Update: DOJ appoints special counsel) (5 Viewers)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 6 (members: 0, guests: 6)
    Status
    Not open for further replies.
    SaintForLife

    SaintForLife

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Oct 5, 2019
    Messages
    7,313
    Reaction score
    3,404
    Location
    Madisonville
    Offline
    Hunter Biden received a $3.5 million wire transfer from Elena Baturina, the richest woman in Russia and the widow of Yury Luzhkov, the former mayor of Moscow, Senate Republicans revealed in their report on the younger Biden’s work in Ukraine.

    Baturina is referenced in the 87-page report, which was released Wednesday, addressing her payment to Biden’s investment firm in early 2014.

    “Baturina became Russia’s only female billionaire when her plastics company, Inteko, received a series of Moscow municipal contracts while her husband was mayor,” it said in providing background on the businesswoman.

    The report described her involvement with Biden as “a financial relationship,” but declined to delve deeper into why the wire transfer was made.

    The probe also found that Baturina sent 11 wires transfers between May and December 2015 to a bank account belonging to BAK USA, a tech startup that filed for bankruptcy in March 2019.

    Nine of those 11 wire transfers were first sent to Rosemont Seneca Partners, the investment firm founded by Biden and Chris Heinz, stepson of former Secretary of State John Kerry, before being transferred to BAK USA.
    nypost.com

    Hunter Biden received $3.5M wire transfer from Russian billionaire: Senate report

    Hunter Biden received a $3.5 million wire transfer from Elena Baturina, the richest woman in Russia and the widow of Yury Luzhkov, the former mayor of Moscow, Senate Republicans revealed in their r…
    nypost.com nypost.com

    We all know their is massive corruption on both sides of the aisle. Here is an alleged allegation against Hunter Biden who was allegedly enriching himself because his Dad was Vice President.
     
    bdb13 said:
    Certainly the prosecution and defense had had prior discussions over whether or not this deal provided Hunter broad immunity from further prosecution.. right? How would that not have been covered?

    Just seems strange.
    Click to expand...
    To me, it seems that Hunter's team are also guilty of conflating this tax case with the broader Ukraine/China allegations. They got it their heads that him pleading out this case would shut down the other investigation and IMO, they got that idea from the prosecution.

    It's likely that once this tax case was closed, Weiss would then move on to address those broader allegations, he has conveyed that by repeatedly saying "this is an ongoing investigation". At the same time, he was selling the idea that his offered deal will close the case of Biden's tax liability, all while knowing that the broader allegations are still being investigated.

    Weiss had a chance to have his cake and eat it too! He could have secured a guilty plea from Biden on tax violations which Biden had already resolved, now Weiss has to prove both his tax violations and the broader issues.
     
    DJ1BigTymer said:
    To me, it seems that Hunter's team are also guilty of conflating this tax case with the broader Ukraine/China allegations. They got it their heads that him pleading out this case would shut down the other investigation and IMO, they got that idea from the prosecution.

    It's likely that once this tax case was closed, Weiss would then move on to address those broader allegations, he has conveyed that by repeatedly saying "this is an ongoing investigation". At the same time, he was selling the idea that his offered deal will close the case of Biden's tax liability, all while knowing that the broader allegations are still being investigated.

    Weiss had a chance to have his cake and eat it too! He could have secured a guilty plea from Biden on tax violations which Biden had already resolved, now Weiss has to prove both his tax violations and the broader issues.
    Click to expand...
    As I understand it, if there is no immunity from future prosecution there really isn’t anything in this plea deal that benefits Hunter. After all, he is pleading guilty to two tax crimes that are almost never prosecuted if the taxes and penalties are paid, and his were. And the gun case is never prosecuted either unless as an accompaniment to other gun charges. So in the absence of other gun charges and in light of the fact that all taxes and penalties were paid, it’s odd that he is being charged at all.
     
    DJ1BigTymer said:
    To me, it seems that Hunter's team are also guilty of conflating this tax case with the broader Ukraine/China allegations. They got it their heads that him pleading out this case would shut down the other investigation and IMO, they got that idea from the prosecution.

    It's likely that once this tax case was closed, Weiss would then move on to address those broader allegations, he has conveyed that by repeatedly saying "this is an ongoing investigation". At the same time, he was selling the idea that his offered deal will close the case of Biden's tax liability, all while knowing that the broader allegations are still being investigated.

    Weiss had a chance to have his cake and eat it too! He could have secured a guilty plea from Biden on tax violations which Biden had already resolved, now Weiss has to prove both his tax violations and the broader issues.
    Click to expand...
    I guess my question would be, if the judge had not pushed back and the agreement goes through and Hunter completes everything out in his diversion program without issue.. would Weiss even have been able to go after Hunter on the other stuff given the plain language of the agreement? Because I think I would side with Hunter's lawyers and their interpretation of it.
     
    bdb13 said:
    I guess my question would be, if the judge had not pushed back and the agreement goes through and Hunter completes everything out in his diversion program without issue.. would Weiss even have been able to go after Hunter on the other stuff given the plain language of the agreement? Because I think I would side with Hunter's lawyers and their interpretation of it.
    Click to expand...
    Well, that assumes there’s other stuff to go after. It’s been what 5-6 years now? I think Hunter needs to be immunized from further prosecution from a R president. If almost any R wins the WH, let alone Trump, they have all shown a willingness to use the DOJ to punish political enemies and to pardon allies. It’s exactly what Trump did, with no consequences - yet.
     
    MT15 said:
    As I understand it, if there is no immunity from future prosecution there really isn’t anything in this plea deal that benefits Hunter. After all, he is pleading guilty to two tax crimes that are almost never prosecuted if the taxes and penalties are paid, and his were. And the gun case is never prosecuted either unless as an accompaniment to other gun charges. So in the absence of other gun charges and in light of the fact that all taxes and penalties were paid, it’s odd that he is being charged at all.
    Click to expand...
    Without going down any conspiracy rabbit holes or anything.. it all together just seems sort of odd to me especially in a case here that is under such obvious scrutiny given the fact the current President's son is being prosecuted by the DOJ. Assuming it all is on the up and up they really, really shouldn't have bungled this agreement to a point that the judge was able to quite reasonably poke holes in it.
     
    MT15 said:
    Well, that assumes there’s other stuff to go after. It’s been what 5-6 years now? I think Hunter needs to be immunized from further prosecution from a R president. If almost any R wins the WH, let alone Trump, they have all shown a willingness to use the DOJ to punish political enemies and to pardon allies. It’s exactly what Trump did, with no consequences - yet.
    Click to expand...
    I guess that gets back to what you said in your last post there, if there's nothing else really to go after AND this plea agreement does not shield him from further prosecution.. why is he even agreeing?

    What punishment is he looking at for the tax crimes otherwise?
     
    bdb13 said:
    I guess that gets back to what you said in your last post there, if there's nothing else really to go after AND this plea agreement does not shield him from further prosecution.. why is he even agreeing?

    What punishment is he looking at for the tax crimes otherwise?
    Click to expand...
    Let me rephrase that last part, what further crimes would he be looking at being charged with in regards to his taxes? Like you said, he's already pleading guilty to tax crimes and so one would naturally assume they're not going to go after him again for the same stuff. I wonder if that's a normal thing to put in there as a catch-all just to make it clear that the entire issue is resolved? I don't know.
     
    bdb13 said:
    ...Because I think I would side with Hunter's lawyers and their interpretation of it.
    Click to expand...
    We don't have access to the promises made to Biden from the published plea deal that was in question because "Attachment A" that contained those promises were sealed, so the general public can only speculate what those promises were.
     
    DJ1BigTymer said:
    We don't have access to the promises made to Biden from the published plea deal that was in question because "Attachment A" that contained those promises were sealed, so the general public can only speculate what those promises were.
    Click to expand...
    Is this not "Attachment A" or am I misunderstanding?
    Screenshot_20230728-141943-969.png
    www.politico.com

    Read the proposed Hunter Biden plea agreement

    POLITICO has obtained the documents laying out the proposed plea deal that a federal judge blocked on Wednesday.
    www.politico.com www.politico.com
     
    bdb13 said:
    Let me rephrase that last part, what further crimes would he be looking at being charged with in regards to his taxes? Like you said, he's already pleading guilty to tax crimes and so one would naturally assume they're not going to go after him again for the same stuff. I wonder if that's a normal thing to put in there as a catch-all just to make it clear that the entire issue is resolved? I don't know.
    Click to expand...
    I think he wants to be shielded from 4-8 more years of “investigation” should a Republican win the WH. If it were me I wouldn’t trust a Republican DOJ from doing more and more frivolous investigations. If the R is Trump, I have no doubt they would manufacture evidence in order to put him in jail. I think the current crop of crazies in the House would do that as well.
     
    MT15 said:
    I think he wants to be shielded from 4-8 more years of “investigation” should a Republican win the WH. If it were me I wouldn’t trust a Republican DOJ from doing more and more frivolous investigations. If the R is Trump, I have no doubt they would manufacture evidence in order to put him in jail. I think the current crop of crazies in the House would do that as well.
    Click to expand...
    I guess we'll have to see what he ends up agreeing to if he does still plea this out as it sounds like neither the prosecution nor the judge are keen on shielding him like that.
     
    bdb13 said:
    I guess we'll have to see what he ends up agreeing to if he does still plea this out as it sounds like neither the prosecution nor the judge are keen on shielding him like that.
    Click to expand...
    I wouldn't be eager to plea to anything regarding those tax charges because those allegations have been resolved prior to his indictment. The only leverage the government has is If there are other tax charges that he could face besides the ones he has been indicted for already.
     
    bdb13 said:
    I guess we'll have to see what he ends up agreeing to if he does still plea this out as it sounds like neither the prosecution nor the judge are keen on shielding him like that.
    Click to expand...
    Well, the defense and the prosecution have already agreed in principle on an amended agreement. IIRC it specified a time period during which he would be shielded, which covers the time period they just spent 5 years investigating. We shall see what the judge says, I suppose.
     
    DJ1BigTymer said:
    I wouldn't be eager to plea to anything regarding those tax charges because those allegations have been resolved prior to his indictment. The only leverage the government has is If there are other tax charges that he could face besides the ones he has been indicted for already.
    Click to expand...
    What would be the point in using leverage like that though in regards to other tax violations after 5 years of investigation? Why wouldn't everything just be laid out on the table?
     
    MT15 said:
    Okay, so? What we have here is most likely a poorly worded plea deal rather than a grand conspiracy. Do you know how I know that? Because I looked at the entire sequence of events, and applied context. The prosecutors didn’t think the deal offered Hunter that broad immunity, when questioned by the judge. At which point, Hunter’s attorney said when he read it he came to the same conclusion as the judge, at which point the judge instructed them to get a better understanding.

    It is very typical of you to just run with a snippet. And you seem to imply this proves your grand conspiracy but when pressed on it, you will say “I never said that” or “show me where I said that”.

    You do not operate in good faith very often on this board. It is what it is.
    Click to expand...
    Poorly worded plea? Not quite. The Biden DOJ purposely hid the immunity agreement in the pre-trial diversion document buried in paragraph 15 instead of putting it in the Plea Agreement document. They did that so the judge could not accept or reject the immunity portion of the deal. Totally unprecedented. I believe the judge questioned if it was even constitutional

    Thats not it. Not only did they try to hide it in the pre-trial diversion, but they didn't provide the judge a copy until right before the hearing.



    Imagine that:

    Hours after the hearing, Biden's team was still fuming, suggesting that Noreika seemed intent on not letting the plea agreement go forward after deliberately questioning lawyers on both sides about the terms of the deal.
     
    MT15 said:
    Well, the defense and the prosecution have already agreed in principle on an amended agreement. IIRC it specified a time period during which he would be shielded, which covers the time period they just spent 5 years investigating. We shall see what the judge says, I suppose.
    Click to expand...
    Weiss said they still have ongoing investigations into Hunter - which would seem to be related to his dealings in China and/or Ukraine (unless someone can show me that that's probably not what they're referring to) - and so I just find it improbable that this judge will sign off on anything that will act as a shield for him against the other potential offenses which would mostly be unrelated to the tax issues.

    I'd say personally I don't really see anything that's particularly compelling in regards to him needing or deserving to be shielded from investigations which are largely unrelated in nature to the tax crimes. Now if it could be shown that the current investigations are politically driven then yes, that would be compelling.. but I'm not aware there's any indication of that being a problem outside of the rhetoric from the right which is unrelated to what's actually going on in an investigation.
     
    SaintForLife said:
    Poorly worded plea? Not quite. The Biden DOJ purposely hid the immunity agreement in the pre-trial diversion document buried in paragraph 15 instead of putting it in the Plea Agreement document. They did that so the judge could not accept or reject the immunity portion of the deal. Totally unprecedented. I believe the judge questioned if it was even constitutional

    Thats not it. Not only did they try to hide it in the pre-trial diversion, but they didn't provide the judge a copy until right before the hearing.



    Imagine that:

    Hours after the hearing, Biden's team was still fuming, suggesting that Noreika seemed intent on not letting the plea agreement go forward after deliberately questioning lawyers on both sides about the terms of the deal.
    Click to expand...

    I don't know enough about all of this shirt to act like I really know what's normal and what's not. I'll just say that it does seem.. weird/suspect.. especially with the way the judge reacted to it.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.

    Share this page

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom