Hunter's Lawyer's Respond
Essentially: "She didn't do it!"
Okay gang, so to follow up on the story we broke this afternoon: Hunter’s lawyers dropped their response — with about three minutes to spare. I’m appending it below.
I don’t know what to make of this. While it may look like a classic, “he said-she said”… I have NEVER seen a court clerk put on the record a letter saying: “One side’s lawyer lied to me, to remove evidence” (the clerk filed such a letter, on the record).
At the least: If the judge decides to accept Hunter’s plea deal tomorrow, without further investigation, and in light of all these shenanigans…. Well, our criminal justice system is really lost to us.
Recall: There are plenty of other issues in play here. We have yet to see the full contours of Hunter’s deal. If it is expansive enough, even if the Republicans get the House, Senate, and White House, Hunter could be double-jeopardied out of any further prosecution (which is why I just happened to be watching the court docket as all this started appearing… I was looking for the text of the plea deal).
And the fact that neither Merrick Garland nor David Weiss would not consider Congress’s evidence during the Delaware case pretty much tells you all you need to know about that investigation.
Final Note: Upon consideration, I don’t love that the judge sealed the evidence Congress filed with the court. That is NOT grand jury material, as Hunter’s lawyers contend. That was gathered by Congress, pursuant to their investigatory powers.
The Ways and Means Committee had NO IDEA what went on in the Delaware grand jury. Those proceedings are secret. And Hunter’s lawyers know that.
P.S: Please join your humble narrrator to kick-off the Maria Bartiromo show tomorrow a.m. on the Fox Business channel. The Ops Desk had this story before anyone else, and we’ll be covering this boondoggle and the entire Hunter Biden plea deal in-depth.
It promises to be… interesting….
