In a request to dismiss Hunter Biden’s criminal charges in California, his lawyers reportedly misrepresented the facts – and a federal court threatened to punish them for their actions.
On July 24, U.S. District Judge Mark Scarsi ordered Hunter Biden’s legal team to explain why their client should not face consequences for the fraudulent claims they made in their request. The lawyers for Biden lied to Scarsi, who said that the president’s son was not charged until after he was designated special counsel by U.S. Attorney David Weiss.
According to the judge, it’s a lie, and they know it.
Biden is set to face trial in California in a couple of months over allegations of tax evasion. This week, his attorneys asked the court to dismiss the charges against him.
Biden lawyers sought to use precedent for a swift victory, referencing the decision by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon in the classified documents case against former President Trump in Florida, finding that special counsel Jack Smith’s appointment was unlawful.
Judge Aileen Cannon showed that the Smith’s appointment violated Congress’ Constitutional authority to choose officials.
Biden’s legal team argued that the judge should have dismissed his accusations, citing the fact that Weiss had enough time as a U.S. attorney to file whatever charges he thought were justified, but that he waited to do so until he was appointed Special Counsel.
Judge Scarsi said in his order that the first allegations against Biden were presented during Weiss’s tenure as U.S. Attorney and prior to his appointment as Special Counsel. Hunter Biden was supposed to enter a guilty plea, but when last year’s plea arrangement fell through, Weiss prosecuted him and began trial preparation.
The present motion contains materially false representations. According to Scarsi, there is a significant difference between the present proceeding and the nonbinding district court judgment that Hunter Biden relies on for his request. Weiss’s decision to press charges against Hunter Biden in his role as U.S. Attorney provides that distinction.
The judge further explained that the court does not abide by lawyers who are not forthright, and Hunter Biden’s request fails to address this difference. Instead, the lawyers skirt the problem by distorting the proceedings’ chronology.
According to Scarsi, Biden’s law team has a full week to reply to the directive. Sanctions will be imposed if the answer is not prompt and sufficient.
