Federal criminal investigation Hunter Biden focuses on his business dealings (Update: DOJ appoints special counsel) (8 Viewers)

[SaintForLife]

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.

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

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.

 

[SaintForLife]

Still more.....

 

[bdb13]

Still more.....

The judge has now banned the attorneys from communicating with the clerk and they have to go directly through her.

 

[MT15]

All of the above is old news and you’re quoting the discredited NY Post. They admit to lying in order to score political points. You need to come up with something else, they will never report anything in an unbiased way. And no, the NYT and WaPo are not the same.

This deal was embarrassing for the US Attorney. His office was sloppy in writing that up. Other than that, it’s just a bunch of squabbling among the lawyers.

SFL: which is it - you seem to be claiming that the US Attorney is in bed with the defense one minute and then saying the defense is fighting with the US Attorney in the next minute.

 

[SaintForLife]

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.

-Between one of Biden's lawyers misrepresenting that she worked for the GOP lawyer Ted Kittila represents the Ways & Means Committee so they could get the ple deal sealed &

-Hiding the immunity deal in the pretrial diversion instead of in the actual plea deal which is unprecedented and possibly not constitutional.

The fix was in....

 

[MT15]

-Between one of Biden's lawyers misrepresenting that she worked for the GOP lawyer Ted Kittila represents the Ways & Means Committee so they could get the ple deal sealed &

-Hiding the immunity deal in the pretrial diversion instead of in the actual plea deal which is unprecedented and possibly not constitutional.

The fix was in....

You are saying things that are allegations and rumors. One of Biden’s lawyers most certainly didn’t misrepresent who she worked for - that’s a serious ethics breach and she would be in deep trouble.

I don’t know of anyone, other than far right conspiracy theorists, who is saying that the immunity deal was purposefully “hidden”. Just more suppositions and jumping to conclusions.

 

[SaintForLife]

All of the above is old news and you’re quoting the discredited NY Post. They admit to lying in order to score political points. You need to come up with something else, they will never report anything in an unbiased way. And no, the NYT and WaPo are not the same.

This deal was embarrassing for the US Attorney. His office was sloppy in writing that up. Other than that, it’s just a bunch of squabbling among the lawyers.

SFL: which is it - you seem to be claiming that the US Attorney is in bed with the defense one minute and then saying the defense is fighting with the US Attorney in the next minute.

The fix was in. They couldn't hide it. They tried to get it sealed by claiming they worked for the GOP. If you don't like what the NY Post said, then read what the judge said and was said in response to her questions. Unprecedented, possibly not constitutional. They got caught trying to give Hunter a sweetheart deal.

It was just a sloppily written deal? With all the facts we know now, your weak talking points aren't even slightly believable.

The NYT and Washing Post are different huh? Do I need to refresh your memory on the Press vs The President article that exposed them both as dishonest and deceitful? The article you tried to discredit with a swing and miss.

The press versus the president, part one

<p>INTRODUCTION: ‘I realized early on I had two jobs’ The end of the long inquiry into whether Donald Trump was colluding with Russia came in July 2019, when Robert Mueller III, the special counsel, took seven, sometimes painful, hours to essentially say no. “Holy shirt, Bob Mueller is not going...

www.cjr.org

 

[bdb13]

-Between one of Biden's lawyers misrepresenting that she worked for the GOP lawyer Ted Kittila represents the Ways & Means Committee so they could get the ple deal sealed &

-Hiding the immunity deal in the pretrial diversion instead of in the actual plea deal which is unprecedented and possibly not constitutional.

The fix was in....

I would say it gives that appearance, yes, especially if it is indeed unprecedented to put the immunity deal inside the pretrial diversion.

If this was on the up and up then there's really no reason everything shouldn't have been straightforward, especially considering the circumstances.. and for some reason it doesn't seem like it was.

 

[bdb13]

You are saying things that are allegations and rumors. One of Biden’s lawyers most certainly didn’t misrepresent who she worked for - that’s a serious ethics breach and she would be in deep trouble.

I don’t know of anyone, other than far right conspiracy theorists, who is saying that the immunity deal was purposefully “hidden”. Just more suppositions and jumping to conclusions.

I'm pretty sure the judge herself accused the Biden attorney of misrepresenting herself.. the attorney denies it.

 

[SaintForLife]

You are saying things that are allegations and rumors. One of Biden’s lawyers most certainly didn’t misrepresent who she worked for - that’s a serious ethics breach and she would be in deep trouble.

I don’t know of anyone, other than far right conspiracy theorists, who is saying that the immunity deal was purposefully “hidden”. Just more suppositions and jumping to conclusions.

It's not a rumor. It's a fact. Luckily we have the judge calling it out, but I know no evidence against a Democrat ever matters to you.


Can you explain why they put the immunity agreement in the pretrial diversion document and not in the actual plea agreement? That's never been done before. They way they did that didn't allow the judge to rule on the immunity agreement. How convenient. Also, why didn't they provide the judge with the immunity agreement until right before the trial?

from NYT's Glenn Thrush reporting from the courtroom: "From the start, the judge seemed highly skeptical of the unusual deal — which offered Hunter Biden broad immunity from prosecution in perpetuity, questioning why it had been filed under a provision that gave her no legal authority to reject it. When she asked Leo Wise, a prosecutor, if there was any precedent for the kind of deal being proposed, he replied, 'No, your honor.'”

We have the judge's own words refuting your talking points.

 

[bdb13]

You are saying things that are allegations and rumors. One of Biden’s lawyers most certainly didn’t misrepresent who she worked for - that’s a serious ethics breach and she would be in deep trouble.

I don’t know of anyone, other than far right conspiracy theorists, who is saying that the immunity deal was purposefully “hidden”. Just more suppositions and jumping to conclusions.

“It appears that the caller misrepresented her identity and who she worked for in an attempt to improperly convince the Clerk’s Office to remove the amicus materials from the docket,” Noreika wrote, before ordering Biden’s legal team to explain why Noreika should not issue formal sanctions “for misrepresentations to the Court.”

Bengels, who is listed on Latham’s web site as the firm’s director of litigation services and litigation services counsel, did not respond to an email and phone call seeking comment. But Latham lawyers representing Biden said in a court filing Tuesday night that Bengels never misrepresented herself.

Judge says member of Hunter Biden’s legal team ‘misrepresented her identity’ on eve of plea deal hearing

Biden’s legal team staunchly denied any misconduct, saying the episode was a misunderstanding.

www.politico.com

 

[MT15]

The fix was in. They couldn't hide it. They tried to get it sealed by claiming they worked for the GOP. If you don't like what the NY Post said, then read what the judge said and was said in response to her questions. Unprecedented, possibly not constitutional. They got caught trying to give Hunter a sweetheart deal.

It was just a sloppily written deal? With all the facts we know now, your weak talking points aren't even slightly believable.

The NYT and Washing Post are different huh? Do I need to refresh your memory on the Press vs The President article that exposed them both as dishonest and deceitful? The article you tried to discredit with a swing and miss.

The press versus the president, part one

<p>INTRODUCTION: ‘I realized early on I had two jobs’ The end of the long inquiry into whether Donald Trump was colluding with Russia came in July 2019, when Robert Mueller III, the special counsel, took seven, sometimes painful, hours to essentially say no. “Holy shirt, Bob Mueller is not going...

www.cjr.org

You are willing to assume a whole lot of rumor and speculation is true, I am not. That’s the difference here. You see conspiracies everywhere, I do not. I require proof - not the breathless yellow journalism of the freaking NY Post.

Why would a life-long REPUBLICAN like Weiss try to cover up anything? How is prosecuting Hunter for tax issues that are never prosecuted a “sweetheart” deal? If Joe Biden were trying to cover something up, why leave a Republican US Attorney in place? He could have replaced him, Trump certainly set the precedent for interfering in the DOJ for political reasons, he did it numerous times. And you never complained once about that.

None of it makes any sense - unless you think that what Hunter did was unethical but not illegal, and Joe wanted to let the investigation play out because there wasn’t anything really bad to hide, and he knew it.

Making everything into a huge conspiracy is not a good look.

I'm pretty sure the judge herself accused the Biden attorney of misrepresenting herself.. the attorney denies it.

Yes. There is an accusation from the clerk, and the attorney says it was a misunderstanding on the clerk‘s part. It would be incredibly stupid for an attorney to intentionally misrepresent herself like that. It’s far more likely to be a misunderstanding. These are not Trump lawyers - this is a respected law firm.

 

[bdb13]

Yes. There is an accusation from the clerk, and the attorney says it was a misunderstanding on the clerk‘s part. It would be incredibly stupid for an attorney to intentionally misrepresent herself like that. It’s far more likely to be a misunderstanding. These are not Trump lawyers - this is a respected law firm.

It would be incredibly stupid for sure but the way you responded in the previous post made it sound like you wholly dismissed the possibility and I was just pointing out that the judge herself had seemed to believe it had occurred.

I wonder if those sort of calls are recorded? Would clear things right up.

 

[MT15]

It would be incredibly stupid for sure but the way you responded in the previous post made it sound like you wholly dismissed the possibility and I was just pointing out that the judge herself had seemed to believe it had occurred.

I wonder if those sort of calls are recorded? Would clear things right up.

No, I knew her clerk made the accusation, and I suppose it makes sense for the judge to take the side of her own clerk.

Honestly, I will probably bow out of this whole conversation. It’s incredibly stupid to begin with to devote all this time to this when we have actual unprecedented stuff going on with Trump. It’s just playing into SFL’s goal to divert all the attention away from the complete scumbag that is Trump. And if he and his follows on Twitter have to make up crazy conspiracies to do so, they don’t care. I just saw this graph on Twitter and it really says it all:

 

[bdb13]

No, I knew her clerk made the accusation, and I suppose it makes sense for the judge to take the side of her own clerk.

Honestly, I will probably bow out of this whole conversation. It’s incredibly stupid to begin with to devote all this time to this when we have actual unprecedented stuff going on with Trump. It’s just playing into SFL’s goal to divert all the attention away from the complete scumbag that is Trump. And if he and his follows on Twitter have to make up crazy conspiracies to do so, they don’t care. I just saw this graph on Twitter and it really says it all:

NOTHING diverts my hate of Trump lol, trust me.

I find this stuff interesting and we'll see how it plays out.

 

[Lapaz]

You are willing to assume a whole lot of rumor and speculation is true, I am not. That’s the difference here. You see conspiracies everywhere, I do not. I require proof - not the breathless yellow journalism of the freaking NY Post.

Why would a life-long REPUBLICAN like Weiss try to cover up anything? How is prosecuting Hunter for tax issues that are never prosecuted a “sweetheart” deal? If Joe Biden were trying to cover something up, why leave a Republican US Attorney in place? He could have replaced him, Trump certainly set the precedent for interfering in the DOJ for political reasons, he did it numerous times. And you never complained once about that.

None of it makes any sense - unless you think that what Hunter did was unethical but not illegal, and Joe wanted to let the investigation play out because there wasn’t anything really bad to hide, and he knew it.

Making everything into a huge conspiracy is not a good look.

Yes. There is an accusation from the clerk, and the attorney says it was a misunderstanding on the clerk‘s part. It would be incredibly stupid for an attorney to intentionally misrepresent herself like that. It’s far more likely to be a misunderstanding. These are not Trump lawyers - this is a respected law firm.

It’s crazy how Republicans are going after Hunter, yet ignore the Trump family’s far more obvious corruption. While Hunter has done plenty of shady things, his actions never impacted US policy, unlike the Trumps, which are far more shady. Republicans so badly want revenge that they’ll attack Joe for being related to someone shady. They need to associate Joe with corruption to mitigate the vast corruption of their leader. Many will be fooled, but I think enough will see that Joe is relatively clean. The worst thing they’ll find is that Joe may have lied to the media. If that is a crime, most Republicans have committed crimes, and many Democrats as well for that matter.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

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.

https://www.axios.com/2023/07/27/rejected-plea-deal-leaves-hunter-biden-team-fuming

The Diversion Agreement has absolutely nothing to do with the tax charges, it is the byproduct of his proposed guilty plea of the gun charge. That it!!!!!

Edit: Additionally, the Judge saved Biden's arse here because Weiss has REPEATEDLY said this is an ongoing investigation and Biden's guilty plea didn't change that. He would have plead guilty to those 2 counts and then would have been blindsided by any future indictment coming from Weiss' investigation.

 

[SaintForLife]

The Diversion Agreement has absolutely nothing to do with the tax charges, it is the byproduct of his proposed guilty plea of the gun charge. That it!!!!!

But the immunity agreement should have been in the Plea deal instead of the pre-trial Diversion. It's never been done like that. Why do you think it happened that way? Why did they fail to give a judge a copy of the immunity deal until right before they started the hearing? Why did the Biden lawyer claim she worked for the GOP so they could get it sealed? So they could hide the sweetheart deal Hunter got.

 

[bdb13]

The Diversion Agreement has absolutely nothing to do with the tax charges, it is the byproduct of his proposed guilty plea of the gun charge. That it!!!!!

The judge definitely pushed back on the way it was structured and the prosecutor admitted it was unprecedented.. I don't understand why they wouldn't have just done it in a straightforward way, as was much needed in this case.