SHOWDOWN: Special Counsel Dave Weiss Hits Back at Hunter Biden, Accuses Him of Lying to the Court

Special Counsel Dave Weiss accused Hunter Biden of lying to the Court in a reply to his motion to dismiss his charges in California.

The Justice Department in December filed new criminal charges against Hunter Biden.

Hunter Biden was hit with a 9-count indictment filed in the Central District of California: Tax evasion, failure to file/pay taxes, and false/fraudulent tax return.

The new indictment was handed down by Special Counsel David Weiss after a sweetheart plea deal on tax charges fell apart over the summer.

David Weiss’s investigation into Hunter Biden is ongoing. The case was assigned to the United States District Court for the Central District of California Judge Mark Scarsi, a Trump appointee.

The indictment detailed a “four-year scheme” to avoid the $1.4+ million tax obligations he owed between 2016 and 2019 and to file false returns.

“Between 2016 and October 15, 2020, the Defendant individually received more than $7 million in total gross income. This included in excess of $1.5 million in 2016, $2.3 million in 2017, $2.1 million in 2018, $1 million in 2019 and approximately $188,000 from January through October 15, 2020. In addition, from January through October 15, 2020, the Defendant received approximately $1.2 million in financial support to fund his extravagant lifestyle,” according to the indictment reviewed by The Gateway Pundit.

The indictment details Hunter Biden’s lavish lifestyle, drug use, and addiction to prostitutes.

“Between 2016 and October 15, 2020, the Defendant spent this money on drugs, escorts and girlfriends, luxury hotels and rental properties, exotic cars, clothing, and other items of a personal nature, in short, everything but his taxes,” the indictment read.

Hunter Biden argued in a series of court filings that Dave Weiss’s prosecutors charged him to appease Republicans. Of course, Hunter provided no proof whatsoever to back up his absurd claims.

Weiss’s prosecutors hit back at Hunter and said he concocted conspiracy theories.

“The defendant concocts a conspiracy theory that the prosecution has ‘upped the ante’ to appease politicians who have absolutely nothing to do with the prosecution and are not even members of the current Executive Branch,” Weiss’s prosecutors wrote.

Constitutional law expert Jonathan Turley said Weiss’s court filing annihilates Hunter Biden’s public claims about the case.

“Weiss’s filing bulldozes through arguments of selective prosecution and political influence in the case. He specifically notes that Biden repeatedly makes statements without any proof or support in his filings,” Jonathan Turley wrote.

Via Jonathan Turley:

“The government proposed changes to the agreements that addressed only the issues identified during the hearing. Exh. 3. The defendant rejected these counterproposals on August 7, 2023. Id. Instead, the defendant began insisting that the proposed Diversion Agreement had bound both parties, even though it had not been approved by the Chief U.S. Probation Officer, a condition precedent to formation that would have brought it into effect. Moreover, by taking this position, he chose to shut down any further negotiations that could address the issues raised at the hearing.”

Weiss straight up accused Hunter of lying to the Court (via Jonathan Turly):

“In his motion, in multiple places, the defendant falsely states that DOJ ‘inexplicably demanded Mr. Biden plead guilty to felonies with jail time.’ He cites nothing in support of his false claims, which is a consistent theme across his motions. The government attaches as Exhibit 3 a redacted letter from the defendant’s counsel which confirms the defendant understood that the government had proposed changes to only those paragraphs that were at issue during the hearing, not paragraphs regarding the charges the defendant must plead to or any “jail time” the defendant must serve. As shown in Exhibit 3, the government proposed changes to Paragraphs 14, 15 and 17 of the Diversion Agreement, and Paragraph 5(b) of the Plea Agreement. The government proposed no changes to Paragraph 1 of the Plea Agreement, which required the defendant to plead guilty to two misdemeanors. Nor did the government propose any changes to Paragraph 6 of the Plea Agreement, in which the United States had agreed to recommend a sentence of probation. The defendant rejected these counterproposals and refused further negotiations…His newly invented claim in his motion that the government “inexplicably demanded Mr. Biden plead guilty to felonies with jail time” is patently false, unsupported by evidence, and belied by his own letter and representations in his filings in the Delaware case.”

Photo of author
Cristina began writing for The Gateway Pundit in 2016 and she is now the Associate Editor.

You can email Cristina Laila here, and read more of Cristina Laila's articles here.


Thanks for sharing!