From Jonathan Turley.
JT is on target.
Special Counsel David Weiss appears to have finally made the
long-awaited case exposing years of concealment and political corruption. No,
it is not the case against Hunter Biden. The allegations of tax fraud in
California are obvious and unavoidable. Weiss just made the case against the
Justice Department and himself in protecting Hunter Biden from the most damaging
charges of being an unregistered foreign agent. In a new filing, Weiss released
evidence on Hunter seeking money to advance the interests of a Romanian on
United States policy.
I have previously
testified on the Foreign Agents Registration Act and have previously written
about the disturbing disconnect in the treatment of the President’s son as
opposed to figures like Paul Manafort.
The charge was always one of the greatest fears of the White
House. If Hunter Biden was a foreign agent, it would magnify the influence
peddling scandal and further link his conduct to work of his father as vice
president and later president.
What was previously known about millions received from
China, Russia, and other countries made such a charge obvious. In the past, the
Justice Department has used the charge early and often in high-profile cases to
pressure defendants and force cooperation or plea agreements.
The reason is the definition:
A “foreign agent” is defined as “(1) any person who acts
as an agent, representative, employee, or servant, or any person who acts in
any other capacity at the order, request, or under the direction or control, of
a foreign principal or of a person any of whose activities are directly or
indirectly supervised, directed, controlled, financed, or subsidized in whole
or in major part by a foreign principal, and who directly or through any other
person— (i) engages within the United States in political activities for or in
the interests of such foreign principal; (ii) acts within the United States as
a public relations counsel, publicity agent, information-service employee or
political consultant for or in the interests of such foreign principal; (iii)
within the United States solicits, collects, disburses, or dispenses
contributions, loans, money, or other things of value for or in the interest of
such foreign principal; or (iv) within the United States represents the
interests of such foreign principal before any agency or official of the
Government of the United States; and (2) any person who agrees, consents,
assumes or purports to act as, or who is or holds himself out to be, whether or
not pursuant to contractual relationship, an agent of a foreign principal as
defined in clause (1) of this subsection.”
For years, I have expressed alarm at the special treatment
afforded to Hunter Biden on the charges. Many of us have also criticized
Weiss for allowing the most serious tax charges to expire despite being able to
extend the statute of limitations. He has yet to offer a compelling reason why
prosecutors would ever allow viable felony charges to expire when they could
have extended that period.
Now, Biden is seeking to avoid conviction under the tax
charges in California. He is repeating the claims that failed in his
recent gun violation. He is claiming that he was an addict and not
responsible for his criminal conduct, even though he was flying around the
world collecting millions from foreign sources.
To rebut that claim, Weiss’ team said they plan to introduce
evidence showing his sophisticated scheme to tap foreign sources interested in
influencing the government and federal policy.
In the filing below, Weiss opposes the Biden team effort to
exclude the evidence of his working for the Romanians. Senior assistant
special counsel Derek Hines writes in the
filing that “[t]he evidence of what the defendant agreed to do and
did do for [the businessman] demonstrates the defendant’s state of mind and
intent during the relevant tax years charged in the indictment. It is also
evidence that the defendant’s actions do not reflect someone with a diminished
capacity, given that he agreed to attempt to influence U.S. public policy and
receive millions of dollars pursuant to an oral agreement.”
That sounds a lot like seeking the work of a foreign agent.
Here is the language from FARA:
“The first category of evidence the defendant seeks to
exclude is any “reference to allegations that Mr. Biden (1) acted on behalf of
a foreign principal to influence U.S. policy and public opinion . . .” Motion
at 3 (emphasis added). The government does not intend to reference allegations
at trial. Rather, the government will introduce the evidence described above,
including that the defendant and Business Associate 1 received compensation
from a foreign principal who was attempting to influence U.S. policy and public
opinion and cause the United States to investigate the Romanian investigation
of G.P in Romania.” (emphasis added)
The other foreign dealings reportedly involved Hunter
reaching out to government officials while his father was vice president. That
includes the controversy over Joe Biden’s sudden decision to issue an ultimatum
to the Ukrainian government.
In a 2018 interview at the Council on Foreign Relations,
Biden bragged that he unilaterally withheld a billion dollars in US aid from
the Ukrainians to force them to fire prosecutor
general Viktor Shokin.
The Ukrainians balked, but Biden gave them an ultimatum: “I
looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not
fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.”
However, a State Department memo is shedding disturbing
light on that account and shredding aspects of Biden’s justification for the
action. It directly contradicts Biden’s insistence that he took this
extraordinary stand because there was little hope for the anti-corruption
efforts in Ukraine if Shokin remained prosecutor.
The Oct. 1, 2015, memo summarizes the recommendation of the
Interagency Policy Committee that was handling the anti-corruption efforts in
Ukraine: “Ukraine has made sufficient progress on its reform agenda to justify
a third guarantee.” One senior official even complimented Shokin on his
progress in fighting corruption. So Biden was told to deliver on the federal
aid but elected to unilaterally demand Shokin be fired.
In testimony from
Devon Archer, a business associate of Hunter Biden, we learned that
Burisma executives made the removal of Shokin a top priority and raised it with
Hunter. He described how the need to neutralize Shokin was raised with Hunter
and how “a call to Washington” was made in response. While Archer also said
that “the narrative spun to me was that Shokin was under control,” he and
others also heard concerns over Shokin and the risks of the investigation.
Other transactions directly requested intervention on
matters being addressed by the Obama-Biden Administration.
So, now, the Justice Department is citing some of these
dealings to show a conscious and premeditated effort to shake down foreigners
to influence U.S. policy.
They have made more than the case against Hunter Biden. They
have made a conclusive and overwhelming case against themselves in slow walking
and minimizing charges against the President’s son.
No comments:
Post a Comment