The criminal case against President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden is heading to a trial after plea negotiations fell through, prosecutors said on Aug. 11.
“The Government now believes that the case will not resolve short of a trial,” U.S. Attorney David Weiss, appointed under President Donald Trump, said in a filing.
An attorney for Mr. Biden did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
According to prosecutors, lawyers for the president’s son were asked for his position on the request on Aug. 9, with a deadline of Aug. 11. The defendant requested more time to provide his position. The government declined, and has still not provided it, Mr. Weiss said.
The deal also included a pretrial diversion agreement for a gun charge.
It was revealed during the hearing that Mr. Biden was poised to receive extensive immunity under the deal. Attorneys for the government and Mr. Biden could not cite precedent for the agreement under questioning from U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika.
In the new filing, Mr. Weiss asked Judge Noreika, another appointee of President Trump, to dismiss the case.
The dismissal would be without prejudice, enabling the charges to be brought in another district.
“Venue for these offenses does not lie in Delaware,” Mr. Weiss said. “Rather, venue for these offenses and any other related tax offenses lies either in the Central District of California or in the District of Columbia. The information was filed in this District because the parties had previously agreed that the Defendant would waive any challenge to venue and plead guilty in this District. However, during the July 26, 2023, hearing that the Court set on this matter, the Defendant pled not guilty. Since that time, the parties have engaged in further plea negotiations but are at an impasse.”
That’s when prosecutors said the case is heading to a trial.
“And that trial cannot take place in this District because, as explained, venue does not lie here,” they said.
If the request is granted, prosecutors said they may bring the same charges as before or different ones.
Separately, prosecutors asked the judge to vacate her order that the parties brief her on aspects of the plea agreement she called “atypical.”
“The Court’s briefing order is premised on the idea that the parties intend to continue towards a guilty plea,” they wrote, adding later that “that is no longer the case.”
Ms. Noreika ordered Mr. Biden to respond to the motion to vacate no later than noon on Aug. 14.
Appointed Special Counsel
Also on Friday, Attorney General Merrick Garland, appointed by President Joe Biden, appointed Mr. Weiss as special counsel.The appointment was necessary to provide Mr. Weiss with resources to continue the probe into Mr. Biden, according to Mr. Garland.
Mr. Weiss requested the appointment, Mr. Garland said as he read prepared remarks without Mr. Weiss present.
“This appointment confirms my commitment to provide Mr. Weiss all the resources he requests,” Mr. Garland said. “It also reaffirms that Mr. Weiss has the authority he needs to conduct a thorough investigation and to continue to take the steps he deems appropriate independently, based only on the facts and the law.”
Whistleblowers say that during a meeting, Mr. Weiss disclosed that he had tried to bring charges against Mr. Biden in California and Washington but that prosecutors there rejected the efforts.
Gary Shapley, an IRS agent who investigated Mr. Biden, and one of the whistleblowers, wrote in an email that Mr. Weiss said during the 2022 meeting that he was not the ultimate authority on charging decisions. Mr. Weiss also allegedly said he asked to be appointed a special counsel but the Department of Justice denied the request.
Darrell Waldon, Mr. Shapley’s supervisor, said he would be referring the matter to the Department of Treasury’s inspector general. “You covered it all,” Mr. Waldon wrote.
Mr. Garland told Congress in April that Weiss was in charge of the investigation into Mr. Biden and that “there will not be interference of any political or improper kind.”
The Department of Justice and Mr. Weiss have since maintained that he has the authority to bring any charges he sees as appropriate.
If Mr. Garland lied to Congress about the matter, that would be potential grounds for impeachment, Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, told The Epoch Times.
Some Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives have floated impeaching Mr. Garland but have not yet initiated a formal inquiry.
