Following the start of the legal gun case against the government’s boy, a CNN article read,” Hunter Biden test shows America’s justice system is n’t but skewed after all.” There is a mental tension between the rage over Donald Trump’s faith and applauding the prosecution of Hunter Biden, according to the left-wing store. In reality, the two cases ‘ different management confirms that Americans have a right to defend the indictments brought by Trump.  ,
The role of politically inspired investigators and prosecutors is one thing that distinguishes the legal cases of Donald Trump and Hunter Biden. Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan attorney, and Fulton County DA Fani Willis, both of whom are card-carrying Democrats who became party friends by focusing on Donald Trump. Merrick Garland, the attorney general that Bin Laden had appointed, appointed Jack Smith as special counsel to prosecute Donald Trump. The president only made the decision after complaining about Garland’s “deliberative approach,” while” confid[ing ] to his inner circle that he believed former president Donald J. Trump was a threat to democracy and should be prosecuted.
Michael Dreeben was hired by Special Counsel Smith to assist in Trump’s prosecutors. Prior to now, Deeban had targeted Trump as a member of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s staff. Eventually, Dreeban would join the team of Democrat Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance, Alvin Bragg’s father. Dreeban properly gained admittance to Trump’s fees and related financial records while working for Vance. And according to New York Magazine, Dreeben was part of a , important group of original Mueller prosecutors , Vance brought in to figure out ways to socially prosecute Trump.
Smith was n’t the only one to load his constitutional staff with pro- Trumpers. First from the” Biden-Era N.Y.,” Vance and Bragg hired Biden-connected attorneys to work exclusively on the Trump investigation in Manhattan. Power Center” rules company of Paul, Weiss, and afterwards from the Biden administration’s Department of Justice. At least three occupation prosecutors in the Manhattan DA’s office requested that they be withdrawn from the Trump investigation apparently out of concern for how the investigation was handled.
In comparison, it was profession researchers who worked the Hunter Biden analysis, and political officials and D. C. officials who mucked up their situation. The DOJ and its taxes section gave specific treatment to Hunter Biden and had conflicts of interest throughout that crucial investigation, as IRS Supervisory Special Agent Gary Shapley testified.
While David Weiss was a Trump- appointed U. S. lawyer, he yet answered to Biden’s DOJ and needed cooperation from another Collins- appointed U. S. attorneys to deliver charges in different districts. When they refused, the most serious charges against Hunter lapsed, long barred by the statute of limitations.
The Manhattan DA’s office, in contrast, gave new life to what would have been time-barred infractions of fabricating company data. The Democrat DA was previously indicted for falsifying business records to suppress another murder, which was a misdemeanor with a longer statute of limitations because those infractions had already passed.  ,
What would have otherwise have been a standard offense turned into a felony because the Manhattan DA had created a violence to prevent the statute of limitations and charge Trump. The prosecution had given the government’s boy a slip on a number of criminal charges before a federal judge questioned the validity of the plea deal the government had struck with Hunter Biden. Hunter was given a sweetheart deal that made it possible for him to plead guilty to two misdemeanor income offenses without facing any criminal tax or weapon charges.  ,
But, Judge Maryellen Noreika quizzed the parties regarding the strange plea deal when it was time for Hunter to input his innocent appeal. Had the government commemorate the federal government’s commitment to refrain from prosecuting Hunter Biden for other crimes through a preliminary diversion agreement? National prosecutors acknowledged that they had never witnessed a package created in this way before.
Judge Noreika requested additional information while lawyers were willing to push through the absurdity of a plea bargain for the government’s child. The deal finally fell through, resulting in Weiss’s business obtaining a great- judge indictment on both the gun and tax charges. Those charges, however, were not the result of a get- Biden effort but the consequences of the failure of their let- Biden- off plan.
Even now, with Hunter in the heat of trial, the contrast could n’t be sharper. Judge Noreika keeps the charges in mind while conducting a methodical trial. And while some of the salacious material from the laptop has been presented to the jury and some of the material from the hard drive has been put into evidence, none of the material from the laptop is being presented to the jury.  ,
Trump’s jury, on the other hand, heard Stormy Daniels ‘ irrelevant and graphic testimony of her supposed sexual encounter with the former president. Given that the judge decided to reject Trump, it is n’t surprising that the judge donated to Joe Biden’s presidential campaign and his daughter’s campaign contributions to Democrats ‘ candidates.
For all these differences, there is one similarity between the current trial of Hunter Biden in Wilmington, Delaware, and Trump’s just- ended Manhattan trial: the political predilections of the jury pool. In 2020, Biden won Manhattan by 84.5 percent to Trump’s 14.5 percent, with the breakdown in Wilmington slightly higher at 87 percent for Biden, to Trump’s not- even 12 percent. This similarity, though, may soon provide the final proof of the two- tiered system of justice — by acquitting the president’s son.
Margot Cleveland is an investigative journalist and legal analyst and serves as The Federalist’s senior legal correspondent. Margot’s work has been published at The Wall Street Journal, The American Spectator, the New Criterion, National Review Online, Townhall.com, the Daily Signal, USA Today, and the Detroit Free Press. She is also a regular guest on nationally syndicated radio programs and on Fox News, Fox Business, and Newsmax. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge for nearly 25 years. Former full-time university professor, Cleveland teaches adjunct occasionally. The New Civil Liberties Alliance also has Cleveland as its attorney. You can follow Cleveland on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland to learn more about her most cherished accomplishments, including her husband and son. Cleveland’s views are those expressed here in her personal capacity.
