Select Page

Hunter Biden Almost Got the Best Plea Deal EVER … But Judge Says No

Hunter Biden Almost Got the Best Plea Deal EVER … But Judge Says No

Federal District Judge Maryellen Noreika pulled the rug out from under one of the most corrupt plea bargains in American history – a least temporarily.  She postponed final judgment after requesting both sides to provide more arguments.  Though it is only a postponement, it tends to indicate that the plea deal on the tax charges offered by the prosecutors will have to be changed or dropped – and that is bad news for Biden. 

There is also a question of the deal over the gun charges as to whether the Court has the authority to reject it since it is not based on Biden pleading guilty.  In a sense, they are using a unique strategy to not carry forward on the gun charge. 

I shall try to explain.  Read on.

If you watch the left-leaning media, you will have heard one reporter, anchor and panelist after another claim that the plea deals federal prosecutors offered Hunter Biden was just what any average person would have gotten.  In fact, MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell proffered the argument that Hunter was offered a tougher deal than most with similar charges.  (You can always count on O’Donnell to carry the propaganda to the ridiculous extreme.)

None of those analyses are remotely true.  In what must have been shocking to the “Morning Joe” personalities was the detailed explanation legal analyst Danny Cevallos provided to viewers.  He called the deal amazingly good for Biden– virtually unprecedented in a federal court.  He said it was a “gift from heaven.”  Actually, it was a “gift” from overly friendly or biased prosecutors in the Biden stronghold of Delaware … period.  

Not only was it a good deal for Hunter, Cevallos said he could not think of any other example– as in never – in which a federal gun case of this sort was subject to such a plea deal. 

Officially known as “pre-trial diversion,” Cevallos said that it essentially is a not guilty verdict.  This is not like a normal plea deal in which the defendant gets a lesser sentence for a guilty plea.  No.  No.  No.  This means no guilty plea at all on the more serious gun charge.

After two years of good behavior the record would have been expunged as if Biden was never guilty of the gun charge.  Think about that.  Hunter pleads guilty to tax evasion and gets a pre-trial diversion on the gun charge — and will get off scott free.  Not even a criminal record.  To the best of Cevallos’ knowledge, no other person has ever gotten a pre-trial diversion in such a gun case … EVER.

Cevallos said that if the federal courts are going to start handing out pre-trial diversions, he will be the first attorney to raise his hand.  The deal Biden got is not only a good deal, but also unprecedented.

There are two aspects of the case – the tax evasion charges and the gun charges.  The latter is the more serious issue.  

The tax evasion charge was a misdemeanor.  Biden agreed to plead guilty to evading $200,000 in taxes in his 2017 and 2018 filing.  Actually, they billed it as a “late payment.”  Uh huh.    He pays the past taxes and penalties and that is it.  No fines.  No jail time.  (You have to have made a lot of money in those two years to evade $200,000 in taxes over and above what he may have paid.  I mention that because you will recall Biden pleaded in his love child case that he did not have the money to pay a few thousand dollars a month in child support.  But I digress.)

The gun case was a serious felony that would not – and should not — have been subject of a pre-trial diversion.  A guilty verdict could potentially put Biden in the slammer for ten years – although that is very unlikely.  But some jail time for sure.  Essentially, the feds charged Biden with the illegal acquisition and possession of a gun by a drug user.  According to Cevallos, that charge should not have been closed with a sweetheart deal – especially a pre-trial diversion.  

Cevallos pointed out that to press the charge, prosecutors would have to prove that Biden possessed a gun illegally as a habitual drug user.  That could be hard to prove in many cases, but Biden has all the evidence on the public record – from videos to his admissions in his book.  The prosecutors offered the unprecedented sweetheart deal in the face of a virtually slam-dunk case.  There can be only one reason these prosecutors would do that – and we all know the reason.  In fact, the entire prosecutorial decision in Delaware appears to have been influenced by the presence of close Biden friends in the office of the U.S. Attorney.

In pre-trial diversion, Biden would not have had to plead guilty to the gun charges.  He gets a $10,000 court cost fine and if he is a good boy for two years, the charges are dropped and expunged as if they never happened.  Cevallos could not believe that federal prosecutors would offer such an unprecedented sweetheart deal.

Instead of “the deal,” Biden had to plead not guilty in court because the judge refused to accept the deal as presented.  Normally, this would mean a trial.  But that is up to the prosecutors.  They could drop the charges or run the case past the statute-of-limitation in October.  Hunter may yet wiggle of the hook, but not as easily as it was before Judge Noreika essentially called the plea deal for what it was – what Cevallos called a “gift from heaven.”

This is not only a story about political bias in the prosecutorial ranks, but of a corrupt media that proffered a completely phony, untrue propaganda analysis of the case for political reasons.  This is not the first time we have seen this combination of questionable law enforcement and dishonest reporting – and sadly will not likely be the last.

So, there ‘tis.

About The Author

Larry Horist

So,there‘tis… The opinions, perspectives and analyses of Larry Horist Larry Horist is a businessman, conservative writer and political strategist with an extensive background in economics and public policy. Clients of his consulting firm have included such conservative icons as Steve Forbes and Milton Friedman. He has served as a consultant to the Nixon White House and travelled the country as a spokesman for President Reagan’s economic reforms. He has testified as an expert witness before numerous legislative bodies, including the U. S. Congress. Horist has lectured and taught courses at numerous colleges and universities, including Harvard, Northwestern, DePaul universities, Hope College and his alma mater, Knox College. He has been a guest on hundreds of public affairs talk shows, and hosted his own program, “Chicago In Sight,” on WIND radio. Horist was a one-time candidate for mayor of Chicago and served as Executive Director of the City Club of Chicago, where he led a successful two-year campaign to save the historic Chicago Theatre from the wrecking ball. An award-winning debater, his insightful and sometimes controversial commentaries appear frequently on the editorial pages of newspapers across the nation. He is praised by readers for his style, substance and sense of humor. According to one reader, Horist is the “new Charles Krauthammer.” He is actively semi-retired in Boca Raton, Florida where he devotes his time to writing. So, there ‘tis is Horist’s signature sign off.


  1. Dan tyree

    Send Hunter to prison and let him take it up the ass. And then ask him/her about which pronouns cover bitch

    • Tom

      I think it is “They / Them” but ask Frank Stetson. He is an advocate for this group and is probably our best source of info.

      • frank stetson

        I am not an advocate for this group. I just am not as interested in what people do in the bedroom as Tom who is obsessed with people’s sexual preferences and gender identity as if it’s a major determinant of God’s acceptance and love. Tom equates my desire for equality for all people as advocacy, it is not.

        • Dan tyree

          It’s not Tom who stirs queer feelings Frank. Neither is it God. But hunter will be a punk on day one.

          • Frank stetson

            So far, Hunter is not up for any jail time except in frustrated twisted minds of the ignorant. Keep the faith though brother.

  2. Michael Gilliam


  3. Tom

    Never has there been a more blatant case of a two tiered justice system. I hope Hunter does not get off. But when I read your analysis, it appears to me that Hunter will not get any punishment at all due to statutes of limitation. Thus the judge just opened up the possibility that he walks with never getting any punishment. Sad. I wonder what our friend Frank thinks of this?

    And I guess the other question I have is if Hunter can get this pre-trial diversion deal, why can’t Trump get the same thing for several things like the documents, the election meddling, etc.???

    • frank stetson

      I really don’t think Hunter wanted this “diversion” and the statute charges would be FARA, not this one, and they have another year or more for the ongoing investigation.

      I don’t know what you mean by pre-trial diversion deal, but Trump has tried numerous delays, change of venues, whatever to delay anything he is facing so not sure where you are coming from. His lawyers asked for a court date of “infinity” for the documents case.

    • frank stetson

      “Never has there been a more blatant case of a two tiered justice system”

      What rock did you crawl out from? Have you been watching the Trump cases? Did you notice his pardons? Most of his campaign, many advisors, all went to jail only to be pardoned. Is that the third tier? Did you notice that one?

      Only Bill Clinton, in modern times, pardoned more and that’s not exactly the GOAT for ethics.

      Trump let Bannon go, Stone. Manafort, Flynn, Paraquatdopolis, Kushner, all crooks, all guilty,.

      Never more blatant my sweet billydoots.

  4. Darren

    I wonder how much illegal money Trump made like the Biden’s from him keeping his own documents.
    That’s right, he made NO Money.

  5. frank stetson

    am i blocked?

  6. frank stetson

    What money did Biden make? Show us.
    No one currently knows what Trump was doing but given it’s a boatload of boxes of documents, sure wasn’t a library, sounds like he was scooping up anything that wasn’t nailed down. He certainly was using it as profit as his display of top-secret docs just to prove a point could be considered “profit.” He was using them to get ahead.
    Trump exists on campaign contributions from people like PBP readers. He diverts a minimum of 10% to his legal team. He also finances a lot of “lifestyle,” off contributions where he double-dips by hiring his own companies for services, charges exorbitant prices, and pockets the profit from your donations.

    links blocked

  7. frank stetson

    Either there is a glitch in the system or free speech extremism is being replaced by CENSORSHIP.

    Can not post links, even ones disguised via * marks.

    On one post, comments censored for TOO MANY WORDS, apparently you can have TOO MUCH free speech.

  8. Mike f

    Larry missed the real takeaway with this judge’s decision (am I surprised?). As to whether the plea deal was normal or not-it’s he said/she said, neither Larry or I know what is normal. But there is a huge issue that wasn’t touched on-conservatives have been saying since the deal was announced that Hunter only received this deal because Joe had his thumb on the scale. That would appear to be BS as most of us that have observed the Biden administration knew it was. As for the gun issue-that would seem to suggest that we need to have more in-depth gun background checks-but democrats have known that for years..

    • Dan tyree

      The background check worked. Hunter got caught. There’s supposed to be mandatory jail time for lying when filling out the paperwork for a new gun. And don’t nobody try to tell me that democrats don’t believe in gun possession. They are reluctant to severely punish people who use guns illegally. No cash bail for violent crimes in New York and other major cities. Weakened police departments. Defunding police. And that’s to name a few. Yes, I believe in background checks. But don’t cry and sling snot because hunter got caught

      • Mike f

        Dan, How much did you have to drink before writing your response? If the background check had worked, he wouldn’t have been able to purchase a gun-that’s the idea anyway. A background check doesn’t serve much of a purpose if the buyer receives a gun and sometime later someone determines that person is ineligible to make that purchase. Conservatives…

        • Dan tyree

          No system is without flaws. It ain’t hunters fault. He just did what lawless democrats do. He lied and got caught and now trying to use the 2nd amendment to get the charges dropped. But that’s ok. Bid bubba is waiting for him in prison. He will get turned out on day one

      • frank stetson

        Still waiting to see all that money the Darren knows about as evidence of the Joe Biden crime family. Still go nothing but crickets Darren…..

        On this post Darren, I think you need to do a “ready, aim, fire” on this instead of “fire, ready, aim.”

        The background check did not work, it did not catch Hunter Biden; Hunter Biden wrote a book that caught him. BUSTED
        The background check asks “dude, you doing drugs,” to which millions of drug users say “No,” and that’s the end of it. Remember, reefer is still an illegal drug by the Fed. This is about as stupid as it gets. The max time is 10 years, hardly anyone gets that, and many get a deal like Hunter’s, especially if clean record, only had the gun for 11 days, and you’re the President’s son. No matter what you do, it will always be better to be the President’s son. But it’s a stupid, unenforceable, question that, for the most part, people only get caught for other illegal actions that include drugs and thus, the cat is out of the bag. In Hunter’s case, he bagged himself. But really —- you want jail time for 11 days of ownership, no public use?

        I am pretty sure this crime does not call for your mandated “mandatory jail time.” BUSTED

        I am pretty sure many Democrats, including Hunter and Joe Biden believe in “gun possession.” We just believe in common sense gun laws too. You can do both. The “punishment” in this case was decided by a Trump appointed US Attorney for Delaware. He’s your guy, he’s your side.

        Do you even know what cash bail elimination means? BUSTED.

        The NY bail elimination act was passed for the entire State, not just NYC. It was for most misdemeanors and a few NONVIOLENT felonies. Basically we were locking up a bunch of poor people for misdemeanors while the rich are free, free, free, at last which, I guess folk like Darren thinks is NOT a two-tiered justice system. The rate of return to court is high, the number of jail days cut big time, newbies don’t face that environment until adjudicated, everyone is treated equally – independent of wealth, and there seems to be very little downside.

        The law hit in January of 2020 and was severely rolled back in June of 2020. It is 2023, what year is Darren researching? One major problem was that NY’s law was a mandate with zero judicial discretion for folks suspected of becoming violent. That was a bad aspect IMO, yet the concept is good, if done correctly. Currently, New Jersey and Alaska have pretty much ended cash bail. No exactly the Democratic tsunami Darren is afraid of. Illinois, Kentucky, Oregon and Wisconsin abolish commercial bail bondsmen, require deposits to courts. Nebraska and Maine, Illinois, Kentucky, Oregon and Wisconsin prohibit surety bail bonds.

        And in 2021, Illinois abolished cash bail. Bail reform to achieve greater equality in our judicial system while maintaining public safety is an action that all sides of the political spectrum are looking at and making changes. In many States, a “bail menu” is being used to standardize bails for crimes and not profiling who is more dangerous, even Texas has a menu.
        The thought that bail is suspended for violent felonies is FUD spread by pundits to make a buck, and politicians trying to scare the vote out of you. And Darren.

        I am pretty sure he does not know what “defunding police” even means. And I have always said that’s a really bad term they came up with. It’s should be re-engineering the police. There is no rarely any intent to weaken the police in the defunding efforts thus far. However, results are across the board from what I can find, with many efforts either turned back or modified based on results.

        I don’t know anyone crying over Hunter. We may be crying over your antics, but that has little to do with Hunter and all to do about partisan hacking about. If anything he’s cannon fodder for fools like you who take Hunter’s life and conflate it into the entire liberal movement. How Darren got from Hunter to “defund the police” is a mystery only he can understand. I just wish he would do his background research instead of his open-mouth, insert-foot, approach of “fire, ready, aim.” Too many BUSTEDs to be believable.

        • larry Horist

          Frank Stetson …. I tend to ignore your long repetitious and off topic”what about Trump” screeds. But when you are so blatantly wrong, I have to respond. Did you read the commentary? Or is it a reading comprehension issue? Or are you just making up crap .. lying. In a previous comment, you seemed to admit that you did not know what pre-trial diversion was. That is obvious. I thought it was covered pretty well in the commentary. It is not a plea deal to get a guilty plea. It is a way of NOT charging. Under that generous offer from the prosecutors, Hunter will never be charged with the gun offense. It all goes away without him pleading guilty. You keep saying that others get this deal as a matter of routine. According the the lawyers, no one has ever gotten a pre-trial diversion for those charges in the history of the nation. And even if there is some remote case, it is very very rare. Federal courts to not allow it in practice. This is a unique and favorable deal for Hunter. In indiscriminately handing out your personal “BUSTEDs”, you make a full of yourself It is you who is BUSTED.

          • frank stetson

            Larry Horist: In the beginning, many experts were claiming this was not an unusual plea. That’s what I referenced in the past, not sure on this thread; I think that’s what you BUSTED me for, although you’re not known for specificity as a rule, lots of generalizations, little support. You may also have meant “I really don’t think Hunter wanted this “diversion” and the statute charges would be FARA,” where diversion is quoted because I was alluding to the diversion to the plea that the judge tossed in. When it comes to the bottom line, I think each of the elements is not that strange, but you are correct that the combination and mix of the diversion is unusual, perhaps unique, but not sure even if unique that it would set a precedent. As the judge herself noted in the transcript, the manner by which the Trump-appointed prosecutor got there seems unusual and worthy of the judge voting to defer, to have the participants further hammer out all the legal ramifications.

            I am glad when you ignore my posts, ignorance is bliss after all :>) Love the tropes: screeds always popular, reading comprehension, lying, it’s the repetitive Larry hit parade one more time. You hit a lot of commentors with similar tropes. Of course, you rarely specify the actual lie, just a generalization of the totality. Horist’s bold claim: “ you seemed to admit that you did not know what pre-trial diversion was,” keyword is “seemed” meaning not quite sure. IOW, weasel wording. But right, I did not. Now I do. Then Hoirst boldly says: “According the the lawyers, no one has ever gotten a pre-trial diversion for those charges in the history of the nation. And even if there is some remote case, it is very very rare. Federal courts to not allow it in practice.” Beyond the sacrifice of the English language, and the confusion of “no one” versus “rare,” versus “not allow it,” Larry is lazar focused on the fact that, while diversions happen, he can’t find one for these two specific crimes. IOW, it’s a process that is used, upon rare occasions, but in that rarity, it has never been used between these two specific crimes. I don’t know, he has not proven it except by saying “According the the lawyers” which kind of depends — which lawyers, but hey, he’s probably right.

            Where we all get lost in the weeds on this one is the difference between the bottom line and the line items. Larry is delving into the line items and he has a point, it is unusual, perhaps at the individual charge level, unprecedented for these two crimes to be linked in a plea.

            But to get absolved with a plea: Alford Pleas basically do that all the time by allowing the defendant not to plead guilty, but accept the plea due to the fact the evidence might convict. There is no guilty verdict in an Alford Plea, but the court still views as a conviction, so Hunter’s deal is better. About 5% of Federal cases, and 17% of State cases are Alfords according to the experts.

            Once in a blue moon, pleas will drop charges. But is does happen. More often than “rare.”

            Many States use diversions to drop charges to probation, rehabilitation, restitution, etc. while expunging the record upon completion of prescribed tasks. This is pretty much normal stuff.

            IOW, I think I am correct to say these things happen; Larry is pointing out that they have never been used with these specific crimes in the manner offered, and he is correct too. I am the forest; Larry is the trees. I am Spartacus.


            Why did this happen? Two-tiered legal system? President’s son? This is a Trump-appointed U.S. Attorney David Weiss plea deal. A Republican wrote it up, IOW. Why would he let Hunter off the hook? If career building by sucking up to Bidens, I am pretty sure he gets a bigger, better job by convicting Hunter.

            One aspect of this that the judge did not like was judicial approval of the diversion process, an approval process usually handled by DOJ. She saw conflict in this unusual aspect. We can only surmise why a US Attorney might want to avoid DOJ approvals in this case, but that could be political to avoid GOP blowback. Another was the linking of the two crimes, as Horist noted, where one hand washed the other which does not happen for these two crimes.

            But as to the bottom line: “Allies of Hunter Biden have pointed to data suggesting it is rare for the Justice Department to bring a weapons charge against a nonviolent offender absent other patterns of lawbreaking, especially since the Supreme Court upended gun regulations in a landmark case last year. They added that Biden’s back taxes had been paid “in full” more than two years ago.”


            With each passing day, new info emerges including the transcript. Post transcript, here’s a summary from the judge, from the bench: “These agreements are not straightforward and they contain some atypical provisions,” she said. “I am not criticizing you for coming up with those, I think that you have worked hard to come up with creative ways to deal with this. But I am not in a position where I can decide to accept or reject the Plea Agreement, so I need to defer it.”

            Not exactly Larry’s smoking gun but certainly indicating this plea is unusual at best.


            “In indiscriminately handing out your personal “BUSTEDs”, you make a full of yourself It is you who is BUSTED.” I have no idea what Larry is thinking, however each of my BUSTED’s stand. They are all correct, proper, and supported. Mr Horist seems frustrated and lashing out. He never proved that any of my BUSTED’s were incorrect.

  9. Dan tyree

    Violent criminals are being released without bail and being rereleased and doing more violence. And being released without bail again. So we really need our guns. What’s wrong with keeping violent offenders locked up? Is punishment off the table? As for common sense gun laws, nobody is more committed to law abiding and safety than me. Why not enforce the laws that are on the books? We don’t need more gun laws. The greatest majority of them don’t work and make criminals out of honest people. Look up operation exile that was employed in Richmond Virginia during the 1990’s It worked and took violent repeat offenders of the streets. And brought down the homicide rate by over 69%. But Clinton couldn’t be persuaded to push for it nationwide. All he did was what all liberals do and try his damn best to destroy gun ownership in America. But we ain’t having none of it. Thank God for our wonderful SCOTUS. And the way that democrats refuse to enforce other laws is a damned disgrace. So go ahead and spin your bullshit. But we know better

    • Frank stetson

      Got evidence of significant numbers, or any, no cash bail release of violent offenders who commit further violence and get released again?

      This ought to be good.

      • Frank stetson

        Sorry Dan not Darren for this last evidence check. Or any of you full-of-fear conservatives can pipe in.

        • Dan tyree

          No fear. Just facts.

          • frank stetson

            Dan T
            Actually, you have not shown any facts, just conclusions without support. Again, got evidence of significant numbers, or any, no cash bail release of violent offenders who commit further violence and get released again?

  10. Dan tyree

    The evidence is in the victims of repeat offenders being rearrested and released again without bail. And most of them shouldn’t be offered bail. The facts are out there. Just get your nose out of liberal blogs and news and find out for yourself. Many of them were murder cases. Good old public hanging would be appropriate

    • frank stetson

      dan, Actually, you have not shown any facts, just conclusions without support. Again, got evidence of significant numbers, or any, no cash bail release of violent offenders who commit further violence and get released again

      BUSTED for lack of evidence, or any evidence, or an anecdote even

      • Dan tyree

        I’m actually stating facts. It’s true. Bleeding hearts on the left have more empathy for repeat offenders than the victims. And people with serious charges are being released without bail. And everyone buried their heads during the so called summer of Floyd. The Floyd people had better thank whatever, if anything that they pray to that they didn’t mess with me or mine. And I also left them alone. So if you were to ever get your head out of your ass and find out for yourself I will accept your apology. Hello”BUSTED” doesn’t get it. Now it’s your turn. Prove that I’m wrong about the no bail release. And find yourself a hobby. You spend too much time being a political hack. And you ain’t good at it. Or does trolling pay well?

        • Frank stetson

          Nope, you never proved your original statement.

          No matter how much you pile on with other kvetches.

  11. Dan tyree

    You never proved me wrong and never will. The facts are in. And it’s on you to prove me wrong. By the way I read about your NJ lieutenant governor dying. Another democrat down. Good riddance