Prosecutors to seek Hunter Biden indictment by Sept. 29
UC Berkeley law professor John Yoo weighs in on reports special counsel David Weiss is planning to seek an indictment of Hunter Biden by the end of the month on 'Your World.'
Never forget: They think we’re idiots.
That’s the main takeaway from Wednesday’s announcement by faux Special Counsel David Weiss that, by month’s end, he intends to indict Hunter Biden on a felony gun charge – the very same gun charge Weiss tried to make disappear just six weeks ago. By both regulation and performance, Weiss is unqualified to be a special counsel – which, naturally, is why Biden Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed him.
Lest you think Weiss has suddenly grown a prosecutorial spine, think again. He made the indictment announcement because he had no choice. He’d still love to bury the gun charge, the same way he has buried the significant aspects of the probe he’s been trusted with – namely, the Biden family business of cashing in on Joe Biden’s political influence. But he was cornered by Judge Maryellen Noreika.
Judge Noreika, we’ll recall, unraveled the sweetheart plea deal the president’s Justice Department tried to give to the president’s son in late July. This wasn’t done out of spite. Judge Noreika just asked a basic question that any competent judge would ask, namely: What was the scope of immunity from prosecution that the Justice Department was agreeing to confer in exchange for Hunter’s guilty plea. The deal unraveled because Weiss tried to pull a fast one: hiding the immunity term outside the formal plea agreement, obscuring its sweep, and then dissembling when called on it.
HUNTER BIDEN SPECIAL COUNSEL TO SEEK INDICTMENT ON GUN CHARGES
To recap, notwithstanding the millions of dollars in taxes evaded, to say nothing of growing evidence that Hunter and other Bidens (ahem) may have violated several criminal laws in a long-running corruption scheme, Weiss tried to settle Hunter’s case on two misdemeanor tax charges with a promise to recommend against jailtime. Weiss also tried to erase a gun felony – based on Hunter’s October 2018 false statement on a required federal form (denying that he was an illegal drug user) in connection with his purchase of a handgun.
Lest you think Weiss has suddenly grown a prosecutorial spine, think again. He made the indictment announcement because he had no choice.
The misdemeanor tax charges are moot for now. They were dismissed after the plea deal collapsed. But the gun offense is a humiliation for Weiss. It is a straightforward transaction that would have taken a competent prosecutor a week or two to investigate and charge; Weiss, instead, sat on it, so the five-year statute of limitations is about to lapse.
Instead of charging it – as would have happened to any defendant not named Biden – Weiss tried to "divert" it, meaning dismiss it in two years if Hunter could keep his nose clean (literally). But there is evidence that Hunter brandished the gun (or I should say "a" gun, since there appears to be more than one involved), which makes him ineligible for diversion under DOJ guidelines – again, illustrating the special treatment he’s gotten. Moreover, the highly irregular way Weiss structured the sweetheart deal enabled Hunter’s lawyers to claim that the diversion agreement still stands – an argument they’ll probably lose but that shouldn’t even be an issue.
COMER DEMANDS NATIONAL ARCHIVES FORK OVER UNREDACTED EMAILS INVOLVING HUNTER BIDEN, UKRAINE, BURISMA
With Weiss already having tried to make her a puppet at the end of his string, Noreika gave him a September 6 deadline to inform her on the status of the case. That is why he announced he’d probably indict by the end of the month. Weiss had to say something because Noreika held his feet to the fire, and if he’d said anything else than that he might indict, it would have raised the specter of a statute of limitations lapse.
But bear this in mind.
After five years, the Hunter gun case should be the easiest grand jury presentation of a one-paragraph indictment in the annals of American prosecution. Why is Weiss still talking about indicting the case when he could easily have indicted the case? If he had just spent a half-hour in the grand jury and gotten the simple indictment, he wouldn’t have to tell Judge Noreika anything on Wednesday. The felony charge would have spoken for itself. The statute of limitations would no longer be an issue. They could have just set a trial date.
Instead, Weiss is still dithering. He and the Biden Justice Department just hope you’re too dumb to notice.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
Remember how Weiss claimed to IRS whistleblower agent Gary Shapley that he had been blocked from indicting Hunter on tax charges by Biden-appointed U.S. attorneys in the federal districts (in Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles) that had jurisdiction over the case? To be sure, that was sheer nonsense: In the Justice Department, if there is a dispute between U.S. attorneys, the Attorney General decides – i.e., Merrick Garland would have ordered any dissenting U.S. attorney to cooperate with Weiss on bringing charges if the Biden Justice Department had intended to prosecute the president’s son. But let’s stick with the gun for a second.
The gun case is not like the tax charges. Hunter bought the gun in Delaware. He possessed the gun there. It was lost (and later recovered) there. There has never been any doubt that Weiss, the U.S. attorney for the district of Delaware, had jurisdiction over the gun charge.
On this one, Weiss can’t even pretend to have been blocked by Biden-appointed prosecutors. He is the only relevant prosecutor. The gun case has never been brought because Weiss has never brought it. The statute of limitations is at its expiration point because Weiss never indicted.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
And he still hasn’t indicted. Just like he hasn’t indicted any charges against Hunter or anyone else in the Biden corruption investigation.
If David Weiss actually wanted to indict Hunter Biden on the gun, he would have indicted Hunter on the gun … years ago. Today, as ever, he’s just stalling.
Best of Opinion
Get the recap of top opinion commentary and original content throughout the week.
By entering your email and clicking the Subscribe button, you agree to the Fox News Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, and agree to receive content and promotional communications from Fox News. You understand that you can opt-out at any time.