Legal Experts Point to Another Fishy Aspect of Hunter Biden’s Proposed Plea Deal

Legal experts said Thursday that the statement of facts included in Hunter Biden’s proposed plea deal favored the defense as, due to the terms of the Department of Justice’s agreement with Biden, it would have immunized him from prosecution for a number of offenses.

The statement of facts section of the plea deal appeared heavily skewed towards the defense, encompassing a wide range of activity that could have shielded Biden from future charges under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), legal experts said. That’s because the diversion agreement allowing Hunter Biden to avoid jail time for a felony gun charge — a separate document from the plea deal for the two misdemeanor tax charges — included a paragraph affirming the United States would not prosecute the president’s son for any crime “encompassed by the attached Statement of Facts” in both the diversion agreement and the plea deal.

Julianne Murray, lawyer for the Heritage Foundation and Delaware GOP chair, told the Daily Caller News Foundation the statement of facts would have favored Hunter Biden by providing him immunity for any crimes it encompasses if the judge had accepted the diversion agreement.

“It’s talking about income from Chinese partners, Ukraine, Romania—there’s a lot of information in there,” she told the DCNF. “I do think the statement of facts was broad and favored the defense.”

Former federal prosecutor and Missouri Attorney General candidate Will Scharf wrote for the Federalist Thursday that the facts were “purposely written to include his foreign influence peddling operations in China, Ukraine, and elsewhere.”

“In an apparent effort to shield Hunter from a new administration, which might try to throw out the pretrial diversion agreement by claiming that Hunter had violated his probation terms, they included a provision — which they admitted was entirely novel, with no precedent — stating that the government could not deem Hunter to have violated the agreement without first proving up violations in front of the judge,” Scharf wrote, referring to the DOJ’s proposed agreement.

During the hearing, Judge Maryellen Noreika questioned DOJ prosecutor Leo Wise about whether there was an ongoing investigation. He affirmed an investigation was ongoing and that the government could bring a charge under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

The statement of facts makes reference to Hunter Biden’s time on the boards of Ukrainian energy company Burisma and “a Chinese private equity fund.” It notes that he made “just under $1 million from a company he formed with the CEO of a Chinese business conglomerate; $666,666 from his domestic business interests; approximately $664,000 from a Chinese infrastructure investment company; $500,000 in director’s fees from a Ukrainian energy company; $70,000 relating to a Romanian business; and $48,000 from the multi-national law firm” in 2017.

“Certainly a significant portion of the Statement of Facts is defense-oriented,” attorney Sol Wisenberg tweeted. “This is not normal.”

Lawyer and former federal prosecutor Bill Shipley said on Twitter that he thinks there is “no way the prosecutors wrote the Statement of Facts.”

“That was written by defense counsel because there is a purpose behind it, and it’s written in a style that I have NEVER seen come from a prosecutor,” he said. “It is not something I would have ever written in a million years.”

The statement of facts points out that Hunter Biden “continued to earn money and exercise control over his personal and corporate finances” even during the 2017-2018 period where his substance abuse worsened and he failed to pay taxes.