OPINION | Views expressed in this article reflect the author's opinion.
Photo illustration of Joe Biden via Imagine Art

As Hunter Biden faces serious criminal charges, his lawyer Chris Clark came up with an interesting defense strategy: Put Joe Biden on the stand.

In a letter obtained by Politico, Clark vowed that the sitting president would “unquestionably would be a fact witness for the defense in any criminal trial.”

Suddenly, Americans are beginning to learn why the Department of Justice is giving Hunter a “sweetheart” plea deal that avoids any prison time. (Poll: Do You Trust the Biden Family? VOTE)

Hunter faces a felony gun charge that carries a maximum 10-year prison sentence. He illegally purchased a gun as a drug user and lied on a federal form.

When other Americans commit the same crime, even as first time offenders, they are dragged through the mud. Howevever, the rules don’t apply to the president’s son. In the words of Joe Biden when he was caught on a hot mic in 2022: “No one f**** with a Biden.”

In defense of Hunter, Clark said the DOJ will want to avoid the “spectacle of a sitting President testifying at a criminal trial.”

Clark argued the criminal trial has the “potential” to result in a “Constitutional crisis” as he vowed to put Joe on the stand.

More than 300 pages of emails and documents exchanged between Hunter Biden’s legal team and prosecutors show how they arrived to the plea ddeal.

Federal prosecutors recently moved to voluntarily dismiss criminal charges against President Joe Biden’s son Hunter in Delaware without prejudice. Hunter’s special plea guilty deal fell apart in court after Judge Maryellen Noreika discovered Hunter is still under investigation and may face other charges.

The dismissal of charges against Hunter in Delaware is viewed by many people as a “dirty trick.” By refiling charges against Hunter in a different jurisdiction, either in the Central District of California or in Washington, D.C., prosecutors will more likely receive a Biden-appointed U.S. attorney as well as a sympathetic judge overseeing the case.

Republican Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas said, “Biden’s DOJ wants to dismiss the charges against Hunter, supposedly to refile them elsewhere, no doubt before some liberal judge who will rubber-stamp a sweetheart deal.” (Trending: Look How Many Times Democrats Denied Election Results Without Indictments)

“Remember, when Biden’s DOJ and Hunter’s lawyers meet, they’re not negotiating. They’re conspiring,” Cotton said.

— Advertisement —

For example, U.S. attorney E. Martin Estrada in Central District of California is a donor to Biden and Kamala Harris’s campaigns. He reportedly refused to file charges against Hunter Biden in 2022.

In the meantime, U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed U.S. Attorney David Weiss as special counsel in the Hunter Biden investigation. Judge Maryellen Noreika recently refused to accept Hunter Biden’s plea deal in federal court after discovering that the investigation is still ongoing.

Appearing on Fox News, legal analyst Andrew McCarthy argues the appointment is a “sham” and argued that an attorney must be appointed who is external to the DOJ and federal government.

Fox News legal analyst and former defense attorney, Gregg Jarrett, agreed that Garland is defying federal regulations. “So, the fix is in,” he said. “Weiss will continue the obstruction & Biden protection.”

“This is a shamm,” McCarthy said. “There is no special counsel investigation. There is no Biden investigation. What makes a special counsel special is that you’re a lawyer who’s brought in from outside the United States government,” McCarthy continued. Contrary to that foundational idea, he pointed out that Weiss, despite his new title, is still very much a part of the Biden administration, being “a top official in the Biden Justice Department.” (Poll: Do You Stand With Trump? VOTE)

“This is the Biden Justice Department’s vehicle for maintaining control of an investigation that they are not pursuing,” he continued. “They’ve had the case for five years. They’ve never indicted it. They’re strategically allowing the statute of limitations to run to the point that the 2014 and 2015 conduct, which covers most of the $21 million that the congressional investigation report showed this week, that’s already time-barred.”