(CN) — The federal prosecutor investigating Hunter Biden pushed back on claims that a pretrial agreement negotiated between the U.S. government and lawyers for the president’s son should continue despite the dissolution of a plea deal last week — arguing Tuesday that such a program never went into effect in the first place.
Counsel for the younger Biden, who faces two federal tax evasion charges and a felony firearms charge, told the U.S. Court for the District of Delaware over the weekend that the government should still honor part of their client’s plea deal, which imploded on Friday.
Now, however, prosecutors have accused Biden’s lawyers of using “cobbled together snippets” of court proceedings to misrepresent their position. David Weiss, U.S. attorney for the District of Delaware, told the court in a Tuesday filing that a diversion program negotiated as part of Biden’s gun charge never actually went into effect.
Until last week, Biden appeared set to agree to two separate but related pretrial agreements. Under the first, he would have pleaded guilty to the two tax charges — which stem from more than $100,000 in unpaid taxes between 2017 and 2018 — and prosecutors would have recommended a sentence of probation rather than a maximum penalty of 24 months in prison. The second deal, related to an illegal handgun purchase in 2018, would require Biden to enter the diversion program, allowing him to evade a felony charge carrying a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison.
Biden’s lawyers argued that the government had acknowledged the diversion program as in effect, quoting statements made by the prosecution that the pretrial agreement was a “bilateral agreement between the parties.”
That position “misstates the record,” Weiss retorted Tuesday. “The government never said the proposed diversion agreement was in effect because it is not. In fact, the government said the opposite.”
Citing the transcript from a July 26 hearing, Weiss pointed to a statement from prosecutors that acknowledged such a diversion program would only go into effect if signed by Margaret Bray, the chief probation officer for the District of Delaware. The court declined at the time to approve either the diversion agreement or Biden’s separate plea deal related to the tax charges, Weiss argued.
“To reiterate, the now-withdrawn diversion agreement, by its own terms, is not in effect,” the prosecutor wrote.
Weiss also blasted Biden’s lawyers — who wrote in their Sunday filing that the government reneged on their client’s plea deal — for their framing of events surrounding the end of negotiations. He explained that, following the July hearing, counsel for the younger Biden proposed changes to the pretrial agreement that the government “did not believe … were in the best interests of the United States.” After counterproposals were rejected, the government backed out of negotiations, Weiss wrote.
Prosecutors have asked the court to dismiss the tax case against the younger Biden, reasoning that without a plea deal the charges will likely lead to a trial. According to court documents, U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika had yet to respond as of Tuesday afternoon.
Meanwhile, the Biden camp is also readying for the possibility of a trial. Defense attorney Christopher Clark moved to withdraw from proceedings in a filing early Tuesday, writing that he could not represent his client since he could be called as a witness in a future trial to discuss plea deal negotiations.
As Biden’s plea agreement fell apart last week, the Justice Department announced that it would expand its inquiry into the president’s son by appointing Weiss as special counsel. The designation expands the U.S. attorney’s jurisdiction and gives him license to look into the younger Biden’s overseas business dealings.
On Capitol Hill, House Republicans are conducting their own separate investigation into Hunter Biden, who they argue leveraged his father’s position as vice president between 2008 and 2016 to close business deals and secure a spot on the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma. So far, however, lawmakers have yet to provide any direct evidence that now-President Biden was involved in his son’s exploits.
Democrats and the White House have both accused the GOP of attempting to smear President Biden and his family.
Follow @BenjaminSWeiss
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
