Judging Freedom - Hunter Biden Plea Deal CRUMBLES

Episode Date: July 26, 2023

Sponsored by: Lear Capital - https://LearJudgeNap.comIt's time to take control of your financial future and consider investing in gold.Consider adding gold to your portfolio with the company I trust – Lear Capital. Over 25 years of experience, thousands of 5-star reviews, and a 24-hour risk-free purchase guarantee. Give Lear a call today at 800- 511-4620 – the information is Free and there is no obligation to purchase. Get your Gold and Silver wealth protection guides, get your questions answered, and there is zero pressure to buy. Or inquire online @ https://LearJudgeNap.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Thank you. Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Wednesday, the 26th of July, 2023. I'm going to explain for you everything you need to know about the Hunter Biden guilty plea and the mess that occurred in the courthouse in Wilmington, Delaware today, from my own perspective as having taken more than 1,000 guilty pleas in my judicial career. But first this. Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Lear Capital. Are you tired of feeling helpless while roller coaster markets and economic uncertainty wreak havoc on your savings? It's time to take control of your financial future and consider investing in gold.

Gold has a long history as a safe haven for investors who want to diversify their wealth against economic uncertainty. Unlike paper investments, gold I do my investing in gold and silver at Lear, and you should do the same. Lear has over 25 years of experience in the business and thousands of five-star reviews and a 24-hour purchase guarantee, risk-free. When I buy gold, I choose Lear. So call my friends at Lear. Use the 800 number below. Tell them the judge sent you. 800-511-4620.

Get your gold and silver wealth protection information. Get your investor information. Get your questions answered with no bonus gold with a qualifying purchase. So call my friends at Lear, 800-511-4620, or do as I do and go on the internet, learjudgenap.com. All right, so Hunter Biden, the son of the president of the United States of America and the notorious object of scorn because of his despicable and disreputable personal behavior, was indicted by a federal grand jury in Wilmington, Delaware, on three charges, two of the willful failure to pay taxes in a timely manner, and one on the possession of a, actually four charges. One, the possession of a weapon by a person addicted to drugs, and another perjury by making an application for a handgun permit and lying on it. So we'll start with the handgun. Apparently,

Hunter Biden has been hopelessly addicted to drugs. I don't know if he's clean now. He claims that he's clean now. And I don't know if he was clean at the time that he applied for the gun permit in Delaware, but he applied for the gun permit in Delaware. And when you apply for a gun permit, they ask you, are you addicted to controlled dangerous substances? He said no. He then published an autobiography in which he described a long period in his life in which he was addicted to controlled dangerous substances. So for that, he was indicted on two counts. One, possession of a weapon by a person who is hopelessly addicted to drugs. His defense is he's no longer addicted. And two, lying on the application. His defense was he forgot because he was no longer addicted at the time, he says, he made the application. So those are the

two gun charges. The tax charges, notwithstanding the terror that the IRS causes in the lives of many people, and notwithstanding the are failure to file income taxes, and then once having filed, failure to pay the taxes that you agreed to pay. These are normally misdemeanors. A misdemeanor is a charge for which you are not indicted by a grand jury because you're only required, the grand jury is only required to indict in the federal system for felonies. A misdemeanor is a charge for which the maximum time in jail is less than a year. A felony, of course, is a charge for which the minimum time in jail is more than a year. So he was indicted by a grand jury as if this were a felony. But if you look at the regulations of the Department of Justice, unless the person cheated on the taxes, unless the person

hid their income from the government, unless the person claimed that they made a lot less than they really made and the government found the truth and caught them red-handed. Normally, this is a misdemeanor. In Biden's case, it's a little ridiculous because the taxes have already been paid. So as soon as he got caught, as soon as the Fed said, hey, you filed your taxes, you owe us a couple of million, where is it? He paid it. I don't know where he got the money from. Maybe he went to his father's wealthy donors and somebody loaned him the money. The IRS doesn't care where you get the money from as long as you don't steal it. So the taxes have been paid. So essentially we're talking about a punishment for a period of time during which he had the money that belonged to the IRS? Did he pay a fine for this on top of the taxes? Yes. Did he pay interest for it on top of the taxes? Yes. Most people are not prosecuted for this. Most people,

once you pay the tax and once you pay the fine for paying the tax late, and once you pay the interest on the tax money that you owed, the IRS is happy to wash their hands of you. But because he is the president's son, and because of the disgusting behavior of his made manifest on this laptop, the saga of the laptop is another story, which we can discuss at another time. But obviously, the IRS is aware of the behavior on the laptop. Because of all of this, they decided to indict him. So he's indicted on the four charges. There are two failure to pay taxes. It's for two years. The perjury charge, that's lying on the application. And then the possession of the gun by a person who's hopelessly addicted. Okay. So his lawyers sit down with the federal prosecutors and say, let's make a deal. Actually, the feds called his lawyers in and said, let's

make a deal. We really don't want to prosecute this case. The feds usually don't prosecute cases. That is, they don't bring them to trial. They get 99, literally 99% of their cases are disposed of by plea bargain. So they only charge cases where they know they have a tremendous amount of evidence. They often overcharge like they did with the people who were involved in January 6th, charging them with sedition when they really only want them to plead a trespassing. But that's the way they operate. So they called Hunter Biden's lawyers in and said, let's make a deal. What kind of a deal can we make? And they came up with a deal whereby, remember, the taxes are already paid.

Not going to see this in the New York Post and in other publications that hate the son because they hate the father. I'm looking at this from a judicial perspective, not from the perspective of a conservative Republican that wants old Joe out of office, not from the perspective of a monk that thinks Hunter should be tormented because of his horrible personal behavior, but from the perspective of a judge who's looking at a plea bargain. The plea bargain called for no jail time. That's not a big deal. Most people don't go to jail for paying their taxes late. They go to jail when they have evaded taxes by cheating on the taxes and lying to the IRS. That is jailable.

But rarely does a person go to jail for paying their taxes late. And I've never heard of a person going to jail for paying their taxes late, but where the taxes were already paid by the time the case got into court. But the plea deal that he arranged, that his lawyers arranged for him, called for probation, no jail time because the taxes have been paid. And then there is this issue of the gun. So the government was willing to allow him to enter into what's called pretrial intervention. This is a probationary program whereby if you don't drink and don't take drugs and don't break the law and promise not to do it again, the charges against you are dismissed. Under the federal system and under every state system, everyone gets one free bite of the apple. You actually can get two, a free bite of the apple under the federal system and a free bite of the apple under the state system. What do I mean by a free bite of the apple?

I mean a freebie. I mean, okay, you did this, but nobody was really harmed by it. All right, you lied on the application, but maybe you weren't addicted to drugs by the time you made the application. Okay, you once were addicted to drugs and you now have it, but you're technically a violation, but you didn't harm anybody with the gun. So here's what we're going to do. If you stay clean for six months, we'll dismiss these two counts involving the gun. Those type of programs occur every day in every courthouse, state and federal, in the United States of America for a couple reasons. One, believe it or not, sometimes the government does have a heart.

And two, believe it or not, the government just doesn't have the resources to prosecute every case that comes before it, and it likes these pretrial interventions. So Hunter Biden walked into court this morning expecting to plead guilty to two counts, misdemeanor counts, no jail time, of not paying his taxes on time, and expecting to enter into the pretrial intervention program. No booze, no alcohol whatsoever, even a glass of wine at dinner. Urine testing unannounced that can knock on your door and say, here, fill the cup. No drugs whatsoever. Stay clean. Don't break the law. At the end of six months, the charges against you involving the gun will be dismissed. The court said, now before I get to the court said, there are two kinds of judges that accept guilty pleas. There are those who say, okay, my job is

to resolve disputes between the government and the defendant. Now the government and the defendant are in my courtroom and they both want the same thing. There is no dispute. The government says we agree to the plea deal. The defendant says we agree to the plea deal. Most judges would say, okay, plea deal is accepted because the judicial job is not to make law. It's not to make public policy. It's not to say who's good and who's bad. It's to resolve disputes. And if there is no dispute, the case is over. That's the way most judges would look at it. When I was on the bench, I did not do that. When I was on the bench, I took the position, I am not a potted plant. And if I think that the penalty is too harsh, or the penalty is too light, or the agreement is to a crime that the defendant really didn't commit, it's just a made up crime in order to get rid of the case.

I'm not going to accept it. Today, the judge in the case was of that latter mentality to which your humble correspondent belonged when he was on the bench. And she basically said a couple things. One, what does the gun have to do with the tax cases? It really should be two separate cases, and I'm uncomfortable resolving both. And two, here's the kicker. Are there any other charges about to come down the pike against Hunter Biden? Now, when she said that, the defense said no. And the state said, the government said, maybe. And then the defense said, well, what do you mean maybe?

The purpose of this guilty plea is to resolve all of the cases against Hunter Biden in one place before one judge at one time. So then she says, oh, you guys got to talk more because if the government has more cases, you need to know about it. Maybe you don't want him to plead to these cases. Maybe you want a universal settlement, defense counsel. This is a universal settlement. The government told us that by entering these pleas today and entering this pretrial intervention program today, the government is finished with Hunter Biden, the government. No, we never told you that. And there are some other things we're investigating and we may bring other charges against him. That's what caused the judge to say,

okay, I am not rejecting the guilty plea forever. I'm just rejecting it today. I think you guys and gals should get together and sit down and resolve this. Now, the judge did not say what I'm about to say. There was a principle of law called the entire controversy doctrine. And it basically says, if you're going to sue somebody and you have five causes of action

against them, you can't sue them for one and resolve it and then sue them for the other four. You got to bring all five at once. If you're going to prosecute somebody and you got five causes of action, you can't prosecute them for three and hold two back. You got to prosecute them for all five at once. You got to lay your cards on the table. We're not playing games here. So if the government has more potential charges against Hunter Biden under the Constitution, he's entitled to know what those charges are.

And the government is required to lay them out so that when a guilty plea is entered, it's a universal guilty plea. It ends all the prosecutions against him. I don't know what defense counsel knew when they walked into the courtroom this morning. The government says defense counsel knew there were more charges coming. Defense counsel says, no, we didn't. You specifically told us this is it. The judge doesn't know. But the judge, in my opinion, did absolutely the right thing. First of all, she's not a potted plant in the same mold that your humble correspondent was. And secondly, the entire controversy doctrine, which militates a level of fairness to the defendant, says, you're the government. You got more charges against him?

Tell him what they are. He can't plead guilty to half of them and then have you come after him for the other half. He's entitled to know all the charges against him. So I don't think this is going to be resolved today. He, Hunter Biden, quite properly entered not guilty pleas to the four charges, the two tax charges and the two gun charges, and then went home. And now his lawyers will sit down with the government and say, okay, what are the other charges? Let's just lay them out on the table and resolve them all at one time before one judge with one guilty plea. Or we'll try all these charges at once. But before we can enter a guilty plea, we need to know what the charges are, what the evidence is, what the government intends to do with the evidence. So that's basically what happened today. Two other events happened today.

The United States Congress did something that has never happened before, in my experience, in criminal cases. It attempted to enter the criminal case as a friend of the court. And the United States Congress basically says in the House of Representatives, we have other evidence against him, Judge, and we want to bring that evidence to you. Now, if I were the judge, I would fine the House of Representatives for filing a frivolous piece of litigation. I'm going to use the language of the streets. The court doesn't give a damn what the Congress thinks about a criminal prosecution. If a member of Congress, in the course of his or her official duties comes upon criminal evidence about a person

who is already a criminal defendant in a criminal case, bring it to the prosecutors. You don't bring it to the judge. The prosecutors will decide whether or not they want to prosecute. There's a clause in the Constitution called the Bill of Attainder Clause. What's a Bill of Attainder? Well, bills of attainder are prohibited, thanks's a Bill of Attainder? Well, Bills of Attainder are prohibited, thanks be to God, under our Constitution. The British Parliament used to engage in Bills of Attainder. As far as I know, they may still do so. A Bill of Attainder is a legislative determination of guilt. So the Congress would vote as a matter of law, Hunter Biden is guilty, and the Congress would decide what his punishment is. Because the British

Parliament often did that to British politicians, and they tried to do it to American colonials, when Madison wrote the Constitution, he made sure that bills of attainder were prohibited. Came ever so close to a bill of attainder, whereby the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, which hates Joe Biden and hates Hunter Biden, and I understand that hatred. I'm not saying I agree with it, but I understand it, wanted to enter a criminal case as if they were the prosecutors. Guess what, guys? The Congress doesn't prosecute. The U.S. attorneys do. If you have dirt or if you have criminal evidence on Hunter Biden or on the father or on anybody, bring it to the appropriate prosecutors.

The judge today didn't quite treat the Congress as harshly as I've just suggested to you. I would treat them. But she disregarded the Congress, the House of Representatives application to become involved in the case. Second thing that happened today was bizarre. And I have heard of this before. A young lawyer on the defense team called the judge's chambers to ask if the judge was going to favorably receive the application of the House Ways and Means Committee chair, what I've just been talking about, the House of Representatives, to enter the case. And whatever this young lawyer said to the judge's clerk, the judge's clerk thought he, the clerk, was talking to a lawyer for the government rather than a lawyer for the defendant.

That may have been an innocent confusion in the phone call and the rush to get this done with all the national press there in the courtroom and right outside the courthouse, or it may have been an intentional and material misrepresentation by this young lawyer for the defense. I sort of doubt the latter because that could result in her loss of her license to practice law. But whatever it was, the judge, and I don't blame her, I'd be upset about this as well, was upset that her clerk did not know who the clerk was talking to. It's a voice on the phone. Am I talking to defense counsel who wants to know if they have to answer the brief filed by the House of Representatives, or am I talking to the government lawyers who really don't want the Congress involved either?

So the court said, let's resolve that issue as well. That's it. That's everything that happened in the courtroom today. You're going to read different versions of this tomorrow. If you go to a website or a newspaper that hates old Joe, you're going to read a different version. But I have given it to you, the straight and narrow, as I perceive it from among all the experience I've had, which, as I said, is more than a thousand guilty pleas in my career. More as we get it. Tomorrow, Matt Van Dyke. I can't tell you where he's coming from, but it's not the United States of America at 9 o'clock in the morning.

Jack Devine, who knows where he's coming from, at 2 o'clock in the afternoon. And at 2 o'clock on Friday afternoon, the one and only Scott Ritter. Morris, we get it, whether it's Hunter Biden or whether it's Ukraine. Judge Napolitano, I hope you liked this. If you did, like, subscribe, tell a friend. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Thanks for watching!