Was the Hunter Biden Plea Deal Meant to Protect Joe Biden?
Last week, a plea deal struck between the United States Department of Justice and Hunter Biden was put on hold after a federal judge said she required more information about whether the deal extends to any prosecution related to his business dealings – which are now under investigation by House lawmakers.
As a result, last Wednesday, Biden – the troubled son of President Joe Biden– entered a “not guilty” plea to two misdemeanor tax charges. He had originally agreed to plead guilty to those charges and to enter a diversion program in lieu of pleading guilty to a felony gun possession count. Judge Maryellen Noreika deferred the decision on the plea deal, stating “You are telling me to rubber stamp the agreement.” Both parties were told they would have 14 days to brief her while her ruling on the matter could now be delayed for weeks.
The younger Biden, who had appeared in court in a blue suit, was reported to have been visibly frustrated by the decision to defer the agreement. However, some watching the case have suggested that it could be President Biden who may have been even more frustrated – in part because he is as much worried about his son, as what this could mean for him as well.
Was the Plea Deal Meant to Protect Joe Biden?
Writing for The New York Post on Thursday, David Harsanyi even suggested that Hunter Biden’s plea deal may have been to protect the president.
“The government didn’t release the text of the plea agreement — it usually does — but a leaked copy shows that the wide-ranging, intentionally vague promise of immunity for crimes committed from 2014 to 2019 was curiously buried on paragraph 15 of the Pre-Trial Diversion Agreement,” Harsanyi wrote, who added that every aspect of the current investigation in the younger Biden’s foreign business dealings, “would, sooner or later, lead to Joe (Biden).”
Harsanyi added, “How could the FBI properly scrutinize Hunter’s tax evasion and influence peddling without talking to the president? Hunter’s laptop was teeming with texts and emails in which the son referenced his dad’s role in securing payments and taking a cut. In one email, a Burisma exec thanks Hunter for setting up a meeting with his dad. These are private correspondences that Hunter and others never thought would be made public. Why would anyone lie in them?”
The New York Post’s Editorial Board offered a similar argument that the plea deal was meant to protect the sitting president, by offering blanket immunity from essentially everything Hunter Biden was involved in for nearly the past decade.
“(It had) everything to do with protecting his dad,” the editorial board suggested. “Think about it: The reason the judge called the deal ‘nonstandard’ — and why (Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Leo) Wise couldn’t provide any precedent — is that no normal defendant ever gets such a sweetheart deal.”
But Do Americans Actually Care?
The bigger issue than “what Biden knew and when did he know it” or even how involved the president was is whether the American people actually care. Just half of Americans seem to even believe the son of the president received special treatment, and most Democratic voters have expressed that it wouldn’t change who they voted for.
According to a Reuters/Ipsos poll from last month found that 60% of Americans believe Biden was being a good father by supporting his son as he navigates legal troubles. However, the poll also found that half of respondents believe Hunter Biden has been receiving favorable treatment from the Justice Department because he’s the president’s son.
Even if that is the case, 58% said his plea deal still wouldn’t have any impact on the likelihood of their voting for his father in the 2024 presidential election.
In other words, it may all lead to President Biden, but a lot of Americans simply don’t care.
Author Experience and Expertise
A Senior Editor for 19FortyFive, Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer. He has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers, and websites with over 3,200 published pieces over a twenty-year career in journalism. He regularly writes about military hardware, firearms history, cybersecurity, politics, and international affairs. Peter is also a Contributing Writer for Forbes and Clearance Jobs. You can follow him on Twitter: @PeterSuciu.
From 19FortyFive
The Second American Civil War Has Begun
