WEBVTT - What's Next for Hunter Biden & SCOTUS Decisions Ahead 0:00:03.200 --> 0:00:08.000 This is Bloomberg Law with June Brusso from Bloomberg Radio. 0:00:10.400 --> 0:00:13.320 Hunter Biden is now the first child of a sitting 0:00:13.400 --> 0:00:17.720 president to be convicted of a crime. Special Counsel David Weiss, 0:00:18.040 --> 0:00:21.159 who brought the federal case against the president's son for 0:00:21.400 --> 0:00:25.079 lying on a form to get a gun, defended his prosecution, 0:00:25.880 --> 0:00:28.920 saying the case was not about prosecuting addiction. 0:00:29.640 --> 0:00:33.560 This case was about the illegal choice's defendant made while 0:00:33.560 --> 0:00:36.400 in the throes of addiction, his choice to lie on 0:00:36.440 --> 0:00:39.400 a government form when he bought a gun, and the 0:00:39.520 --> 0:00:41.640 choice to then possess that gun. 0:00:42.200 --> 0:00:45.199 But several of the jurors who found Biden guilty of 0:00:45.320 --> 0:00:49.000 all three felony charges said they thought the case should 0:00:49.080 --> 0:00:50.560 never have been brought to trial. 0:00:50.960 --> 0:00:53.680 A waste of text fer scholars. I think they should 0:00:53.680 --> 0:00:55.040 have victus. 0:00:54.960 --> 0:00:58.720 Find joining me is former Manhattan prosecutor Duncan Levin of 0:00:58.840 --> 0:01:02.279 leven In Associates. Doug and the Special Council said the 0:01:02.320 --> 0:01:06.080 prosecution was about the rule of law, but it's not 0:01:06.200 --> 0:01:10.440 a law that many people in similar circumstances are prosecuted for. 0:01:11.400 --> 0:01:14.760 It's very hard to escape the politics of this case. 0:01:15.000 --> 0:01:16.679 The case that shouldn't have gone to trial. In the 0:01:16.680 --> 0:01:19.840 first place, this was supposed to be resolved on a 0:01:19.959 --> 0:01:25.240 pleaded two misdemeanor tax charges. He's facing unrelated tax charges 0:01:25.480 --> 0:01:28.480 that are coming up for trial in September in California, 0:01:28.760 --> 0:01:32.679 basically related to a million four in foreign business income, 0:01:32.720 --> 0:01:35.560 and he's facing three felony counts there and six other 0:01:35.600 --> 0:01:38.960 misdemeanor counts, and they're, you know, pretty serious charges, their 0:01:39.080 --> 0:01:42.039 evasion of an assessment and filing false returns and not 0:01:42.120 --> 0:01:44.800 paying his taxes. And so this was all supposed to 0:01:44.840 --> 0:01:47.520 be wrapped up with a plea deal that was going 0:01:47.600 --> 0:01:52.160 to resolve in absolutely no jail time. And the gun 0:01:52.240 --> 0:01:54.480 charges which just went to trial and that he was 0:01:54.520 --> 0:01:57.400 just convicted on, was supposed to be resolved with pre 0:01:57.440 --> 0:02:01.640 trial diversions, so no real penalty other than having no 0:02:01.760 --> 0:02:04.280 firearms and staying drug free for two years. When that 0:02:04.440 --> 0:02:07.080 plea deal fell apart, it went to trial. And this 0:02:07.120 --> 0:02:10.200 is a trial that really shouldn't have been. It fell apart, 0:02:10.639 --> 0:02:13.640 I think in some part because of politics, maybe in 0:02:13.720 --> 0:02:16.440 large part because the politics. The judge, who is a 0:02:16.440 --> 0:02:20.919 Trump appointee, Judge Norieika, basically felt the choosing put in 0:02:20.960 --> 0:02:23.520 a position where she was going to have to decide 0:02:23.520 --> 0:02:26.799 whether hunter Biden was in compliance with the diversion agreement, 0:02:26.919 --> 0:02:31.040 because the parties didn't really want DOJ to be the 0:02:31.520 --> 0:02:35.440 party in charge of whether to revoke his compliance or not, 0:02:35.919 --> 0:02:38.720 given the fact that Donald Trump couldn't win the presidency, 0:02:38.880 --> 0:02:43.040 and hunter Biden did not want Justice Department under a 0:02:43.080 --> 0:02:45.560 President Trump in his next term if he won to 0:02:45.600 --> 0:02:48.160 be in charge of deciding whether he was compliant with 0:02:48.240 --> 0:02:52.000 the pre trial diversions. And so they tried to put 0:02:52.040 --> 0:02:53.840 this on the judge and said, well, you should be 0:02:53.840 --> 0:02:56.160 the one to decide, and Jude Norieka said, well, I'm 0:02:56.160 --> 0:02:58.480 not going to decide that. So that's why the plea 0:02:58.560 --> 0:03:01.160 deal fell apart. But the plea also fell apart in 0:03:01.280 --> 0:03:05.400 large measure because of politics. The congressional Republicans were saying 0:03:05.400 --> 0:03:08.240 it was a sweetheart deal and calling for the judge 0:03:08.240 --> 0:03:10.880 to deny it. And I think that it may have 0:03:10.919 --> 0:03:13.840 been window dressing that it fell apart because Judge Norrieka 0:03:13.880 --> 0:03:16.760 didn't want to be in charge of deciding whether hunter 0:03:16.800 --> 0:03:19.120 Biden was in compliance. It may have really fallen apart 0:03:19.120 --> 0:03:21.720 because of political pressure. But I think this was a 0:03:21.760 --> 0:03:23.880 comment that was heard by a lot of the jurors 0:03:23.960 --> 0:03:27.160 who were interviewed after the trial, they said that they 0:03:27.160 --> 0:03:29.840 felt that the case was strong, that the evidence was compelling, 0:03:29.960 --> 0:03:32.760 but they felt that this was the case that was 0:03:32.840 --> 0:03:35.280 really unnecessary for the government to bring. 0:03:35.640 --> 0:03:35.680 That. 0:03:35.800 --> 0:03:38.800 All being said, I think that if you're going to 0:03:38.800 --> 0:03:41.960 put in a case like this, the witnesses that they 0:03:42.000 --> 0:03:44.960 called were necessary witnesses. They were, at the core of it, 0:03:45.040 --> 0:03:48.840 trying to prove that he was a user where addicted 0:03:48.920 --> 0:03:51.360 to controlled substance at the time that he filled out 0:03:51.800 --> 0:03:55.280 this form to buy the gun, and they had to 0:03:55.320 --> 0:03:58.080 call witnesses who were going to testify to that. 0:03:58.720 --> 0:04:02.160 And what about bringing through are you felony charges all 0:04:02.160 --> 0:04:05.280 connected with lying on the gun form in a case 0:04:05.320 --> 0:04:07.600 where there was no crime committed with a gun. 0:04:08.120 --> 0:04:11.920 The politics of this case are unmistakable because the charges 0:04:12.000 --> 0:04:16.679 themselves are ones that are rarely, if ever brought. Lying 0:04:16.720 --> 0:04:19.760 to a gun dealer is brought, probably fewer than three 0:04:19.839 --> 0:04:22.599 hundred times a year, and that's out of twenty five 0:04:22.680 --> 0:04:26.320 to thirty million background checks that are conducted around the 0:04:26.400 --> 0:04:29.800 nation every single year. The false claims on a federal 0:04:29.839 --> 0:04:33.200 firearms application is a form called the ETF four four 0:04:33.320 --> 0:04:36.200 seven three. I have never heard of a case being 0:04:36.240 --> 0:04:39.360 brought as a standalone case for lying on a federal 0:04:39.400 --> 0:04:43.800 firearms application never standalone. It's usually brought in connection with 0:04:44.560 --> 0:04:48.560 another more serious crime, maybe somebody illegally using a gun 0:04:49.040 --> 0:04:51.840 or a felon in possession. This is a gun that 0:04:51.960 --> 0:04:55.760 was never used, it was never loaded, and Hunter Biden 0:04:55.800 --> 0:04:58.680 possessed it for eleven days, just to put it in perspective, 0:04:58.880 --> 0:05:02.160 and he possessed it from October twelfth to October twenty third, 0:05:02.200 --> 0:05:05.560 twenty eighteen. It was possessed for an incredibly short period 0:05:05.640 --> 0:05:08.120 of time. And the other sort of I think mitigating 0:05:08.160 --> 0:05:11.880 factor here is that this was a gun that Hunter 0:05:11.960 --> 0:05:16.520 Biden possessed for eleven days and was actually thrown into 0:05:16.640 --> 0:05:20.920 a dumpster by his then girlfriend who was also his 0:05:20.960 --> 0:05:23.640 sister in law, Hailey Bidens. And when he came to 0:05:23.720 --> 0:05:26.320 find out that it was thrown into the dumpster, he 0:05:26.400 --> 0:05:29.680 took steps to alert the authority to it who found it, 0:05:29.760 --> 0:05:33.119 and it was started as a case because they found 0:05:33.120 --> 0:05:35.320 the gun in the dumpster. This was a case that 0:05:35.760 --> 0:05:39.000 really should never have gone to trial and got completely 0:05:39.000 --> 0:05:41.400 derailed because of the politics, to a point where the 0:05:41.440 --> 0:05:45.440 jurors were forced to sit through this extremely emotional testimony 0:05:45.800 --> 0:05:48.039 that really, I think at the end of the day, 0:05:48.240 --> 0:05:53.160 served nobody and resulted in a guilty verdict that you know, 0:05:53.560 --> 0:05:56.640 maybe scored the protcutors some points and maybe had some 0:05:56.680 --> 0:06:01.039 political points, but really was utterly away of everybody's time. 0:06:01.480 --> 0:06:04.480 The three jurors who spoke and said that they had 0:06:04.520 --> 0:06:08.120 no choice but to find him guilty, but they question 0:06:08.279 --> 0:06:10.000 whether the criminal case should. 0:06:09.720 --> 0:06:10.520 Ever have been brought. 0:06:10.560 --> 0:06:13.440 One said the case seem like a waste of taxpayer dollars. 0:06:14.040 --> 0:06:18.039 Aren't those the jurors that the defense was targeting to 0:06:18.200 --> 0:06:22.200 nullify to know, to say this case isn't worth it, 0:06:22.400 --> 0:06:23.800 We're not going to find him guilty. 0:06:24.279 --> 0:06:27.760 The jury obviously took the case very seriously, and it 0:06:27.839 --> 0:06:30.920 sounds like politics really did not play a role in it, 0:06:31.000 --> 0:06:34.560 and they didn't nullify, and the defense is clearly not 0:06:34.720 --> 0:06:38.280 allowed to argue jury nullification to them. Remember, this is 0:06:38.320 --> 0:06:42.480 a defendant who is well known to everybody in Delaware, 0:06:42.520 --> 0:06:47.279 particularly the jurors walked through the lobby of the courthouse 0:06:47.440 --> 0:06:51.400 every day to get to the trial, and the defendant's 0:06:51.480 --> 0:06:54.560 father's photograph is hanging in the lobby. This is somebody 0:06:54.560 --> 0:06:57.400 who is well known. The Biden name is well known. 0:06:57.640 --> 0:06:59.600 The First Lady of the United States is sitting in 0:06:59.600 --> 0:07:02.600 attention at the trial. And they took their job seriously. 0:07:02.600 --> 0:07:05.320 They didn't nullify. They looked at the evidence and they convicted. 0:07:05.400 --> 0:07:08.960 The case itself was strong, and the defense really just 0:07:09.000 --> 0:07:12.200 that at the time he filled out this ATS form 0:07:12.320 --> 0:07:14.480 at the gun dealership, he was not at the moment 0:07:14.520 --> 0:07:17.440 he filled the form out addicted to drugs. But there 0:07:17.480 --> 0:07:20.040 was evidence that you know, right before and right after 0:07:20.280 --> 0:07:23.160 he was, you know, texting with a drug dealer, and 0:07:23.200 --> 0:07:25.520 that he was clearly addicted to drugs. You know, this 0:07:25.640 --> 0:07:29.840 is a case that was a waste of taxpayer dollars. 0:07:29.920 --> 0:07:33.040 On the other hand, the government was kind of forced 0:07:33.080 --> 0:07:35.840 into going a trial on it when the plea deal 0:07:35.920 --> 0:07:38.640 fell apart. So everybody's right here. It's the case that 0:07:39.240 --> 0:07:42.320 was strong. The jury did a very thorough job and 0:07:42.360 --> 0:07:47.240 obviously took the evidence very seriously. They didn't nullify because 0:07:47.400 --> 0:07:50.560 the case it self was worthy of a conviction. It's 0:07:50.560 --> 0:07:53.360 a case where, you know, jurors looking at it without 0:07:53.560 --> 0:07:57.400 a political lens and without looking through the lens of nullification, 0:07:57.720 --> 0:08:00.480 would convict because it was a strong case. There are 0:08:00.480 --> 0:08:03.920 a lot of cases that you could question the motives 0:08:03.960 --> 0:08:07.600 behind prosecutors bringing them in the first place. This case, 0:08:07.680 --> 0:08:12.360 I questioned the motives of the special prosecutor bringing the charges, frankly, 0:08:12.400 --> 0:08:15.440 because these charges are never brought as a standalone case 0:08:15.480 --> 0:08:18.720 without something more serious. So I do question whether the 0:08:18.800 --> 0:08:21.760 case was brought because it was Hunter Biden. But at 0:08:21.760 --> 0:08:23.760 the end of the day, it's unlikely to result in 0:08:23.800 --> 0:08:26.440 any jail time, and I think the more serious charges 0:08:26.480 --> 0:08:29.560 that he's facing are in September, with these tax crimes, 0:08:29.560 --> 0:08:33.360 which we're supposed to be disposed of without any jail time, 0:08:33.400 --> 0:08:37.160 and now he actually has some significant exposure to an 0:08:37.200 --> 0:08:40.480 incarceratory sentence in September if he's convicted on those charges. 0:08:40.720 --> 0:08:41.640 Well, I was surprised. 0:08:41.640 --> 0:08:46.920 The special counsel made a statement afterwards, and he said. 0:08:47.080 --> 0:08:48.559 This case wasn't about addiction. 0:08:48.720 --> 0:08:52.040 It was about the illegal choices the defendant made while 0:08:52.040 --> 0:08:55.760 in the quote throes of addiction, which sounds contradictory to me. 0:08:55.920 --> 0:08:59.280 But how unusual that he has another case pending and 0:08:59.320 --> 0:09:02.080 he decided to make a public statement. 0:09:02.600 --> 0:09:06.400 I think it's problematic any time a prosecutor or someone 0:09:06.440 --> 0:09:10.240 in law enforcement speaks out of court, and this was 0:09:10.320 --> 0:09:14.319 one where I think his words were poorly chosen and 0:09:14.640 --> 0:09:16.720 frankly wrong. I mean, this is a case that is 0:09:16.800 --> 0:09:19.680 very sad, and it's a sad case about addiction. You know, 0:09:19.720 --> 0:09:23.240 people who are addicted to all sorts of things, and 0:09:23.640 --> 0:09:27.280 it doesn't mean they shouldn't be held criminally responsible. And 0:09:27.400 --> 0:09:30.040 it's a legally correct verdict. It's not that it's wrong. 0:09:30.360 --> 0:09:33.840 The verdict itself was based on evidence. It's legally correct. 0:09:33.960 --> 0:09:36.720 But this case is a human tragedy and to say 0:09:37.040 --> 0:09:39.440 that it's anything other than that is just flat out wrong. 0:09:39.720 --> 0:09:43.319 Is there anything the defense could have done to change 0:09:43.559 --> 0:09:47.280 the verdict? I mean, should Hunter Biden, despite the problems, 0:09:47.320 --> 0:09:48.280 have taken the stand. 0:09:48.920 --> 0:09:51.840 So Judge j Rieka really, I thought, went out of 0:09:51.880 --> 0:09:55.840 her way to hobble the defense, and I would describe 0:09:55.880 --> 0:09:59.400 part of it to politics, and given the posture of 0:09:59.440 --> 0:10:02.400 the case, fact that she scuttled the plea deal. There 0:10:02.400 --> 0:10:04.920 were two instances where the defense tried to get very 0:10:05.200 --> 0:10:08.160 evidence into the trial. One of which is that this 0:10:08.320 --> 0:10:11.400 ATS four four seven three form was altered. It was 0:10:11.440 --> 0:10:14.760 altered by the gun dealer at some point after the fact, 0:10:14.760 --> 0:10:17.760 and that is because it is a requirement when the 0:10:17.840 --> 0:10:20.720 gun dealer has this form filled out that they get 0:10:20.760 --> 0:10:25.280 identifications that has the purchaser's address on it. At the 0:10:25.320 --> 0:10:27.840 time that they got the form in the first place, 0:10:28.040 --> 0:10:31.360 they got Hunter Biden's passport, which did not have his 0:10:31.800 --> 0:10:35.840 address on it, and later at a point they filled 0:10:35.880 --> 0:10:37.960 out the form again to say that they'd gotten his 0:10:38.080 --> 0:10:42.199 driver's life. The judge barred the defense from introducing evidence 0:10:42.240 --> 0:10:44.920 of the altered form and said that it was a 0:10:45.000 --> 0:10:49.200 quote unquote conspiracy theory and unsupported rhetoric. I find that 0:10:49.480 --> 0:10:52.600 hard to believe and just a ruling that really has 0:10:52.640 --> 0:10:55.640 no merit, because this is a case all about who 0:10:55.720 --> 0:10:58.000 filled out the form and when they filled out the form. 0:10:58.040 --> 0:11:00.680 The fact that the form was altered, for the fact 0:11:00.840 --> 0:11:03.920 is very key evidence, and frankly, I think is some 0:11:04.040 --> 0:11:06.800 grounds for appeal that that was not allowed to be 0:11:06.920 --> 0:11:09.720 introduced at trial. The other thing is that the defense 0:11:09.800 --> 0:11:13.400 tried to call a Columbia psychiatrist named doctor l Eiun 0:11:13.559 --> 0:11:18.000 to testify at trial about hunter Biden's state of mind 0:11:18.040 --> 0:11:20.040 at the time that he filled out the form. There 0:11:20.080 --> 0:11:23.240 is a knowledge requirement here, and the defense was trying 0:11:23.280 --> 0:11:25.839 to show to the jury that at the time he 0:11:25.920 --> 0:11:27.920 filled out the form he did not believe himself to 0:11:27.960 --> 0:11:29.800 be an addict, and I think there's some support to 0:11:29.840 --> 0:11:32.800 that in the evidence, because Hunter Biden had just finished 0:11:32.880 --> 0:11:35.840 an eleven day rehab program and also was living with 0:11:35.920 --> 0:11:38.679 a sober companion. And I think that anyone who's been 0:11:38.679 --> 0:11:41.600 through addiction or understands addiction knows that you take it 0:11:41.640 --> 0:11:44.000 one day at a time, and so somebody who is 0:11:44.360 --> 0:11:46.840 sober for even one day or two days or eleven 0:11:46.920 --> 0:11:49.840 days may not consider themselves to be an addict. And 0:11:49.880 --> 0:11:52.240 it's something that I think the defense should have been 0:11:52.280 --> 0:11:55.360 allowed to argue and was precluded from arguing, and that 0:11:55.440 --> 0:11:58.400 really gutted the defense case in many ways. So they 0:11:58.440 --> 0:12:01.480 were really left with this very narrow argument that at 0:12:01.480 --> 0:12:03.680 the time of filling out the form he was not 0:12:03.760 --> 0:12:06.320 addicted to drugs, because there's no evidence he was doing 0:12:06.360 --> 0:12:09.719 drugs that day. So I think the judgment really out 0:12:09.760 --> 0:12:13.080 of her way to recap the defense, and so they 0:12:13.080 --> 0:12:16.360 do have some appeals here that they can pursue as 0:12:16.400 --> 0:12:20.720 to whether Hunter Biden should have testified. The conventional wisdom 0:12:20.840 --> 0:12:22.720 is that it is never a good idea for a 0:12:22.760 --> 0:12:26.200 defendant to testify. In this particular case, it was difficult 0:12:26.240 --> 0:12:29.640 for him because of these pending tax charges. The judge 0:12:29.640 --> 0:12:32.600 had again made a ruling that the prosecutors would be 0:12:32.600 --> 0:12:36.320 allowed to cross examine him on these tax charges, which 0:12:36.320 --> 0:12:40.400 would have exposed him to incredibly grave legal danger in 0:12:40.480 --> 0:12:42.599 this trial that he had coming up. So there was 0:12:42.640 --> 0:12:45.120 really no choice but to make the strategic decision not 0:12:45.200 --> 0:12:48.959 to testify even if he could have testified convincingly about 0:12:49.000 --> 0:12:51.960 these charges that would have put him at grave legal 0:12:52.280 --> 0:12:55.600 risk with his upcoming trial in September coming. 0:12:55.400 --> 0:12:57.520 Up next on the Bloomberg Law Show, I'll continue this 0:12:57.640 --> 0:13:01.840 conversation with Duncan Levin talk more about the possible appellate 0:13:01.880 --> 0:13:04.480 issues and the next trial for Hunter Biden. 0:13:04.880 --> 0:13:05.760 This is Bloomberg. 0:13:07.760 --> 0:13:10.680 Now that Hunter Biden has been convicted of three felony 0:13:10.760 --> 0:13:15.880 gun charges, he faces sentencing and another trial in California 0:13:15.960 --> 0:13:19.720 on tax charges in September. I've been talking to former 0:13:19.760 --> 0:13:24.200 Manhattan prosecutor Duncan Levin of Leven and Associates. I want 0:13:24.200 --> 0:13:27.280 to go over some of the other appellate issues they 0:13:27.280 --> 0:13:30.040 may be able to raise. They may use some of 0:13:30.080 --> 0:13:33.640 the same arguments they made prior to trial to try 0:13:33.679 --> 0:13:35.040 to get the case dismissed. 0:13:35.400 --> 0:13:36.679 They argued the gun law. 0:13:36.559 --> 0:13:40.440 Was unconstitutional following a ruling by the US Supreme Court 0:13:40.520 --> 0:13:43.040 in twenty twenty two, the New York case that expanded 0:13:43.080 --> 0:13:46.840 gun rights, and the Fifth Circuit has struck down the 0:13:46.960 --> 0:13:51.520 law barring users of illegal drugs from possessing firearms, ruling 0:13:51.600 --> 0:13:55.360 it was unconstitutional. So could that be a good appellate argument? 0:13:55.760 --> 0:13:58.360 I think this is a great suppellent argument, and we 0:13:58.400 --> 0:14:01.199 can all expect to see it. Frankly, it may at 0:14:01.200 --> 0:14:03.640 some point win. At the point that it wins, however, 0:14:04.040 --> 0:14:07.720 he will have already been branded a sellon and done 0:14:08.320 --> 0:14:10.600 time if he does time or served out a sentence, 0:14:10.640 --> 0:14:12.480 because this is unlikely to wind his way through the 0:14:12.520 --> 0:14:15.960 course anytime soon. But if you look at the statute itself, 0:14:16.080 --> 0:14:19.200 which is nine twenty two G. Three, it basically makes 0:14:19.200 --> 0:14:22.680 it unlawful to possess a gun if you are a 0:14:22.920 --> 0:14:27.320 user or addicted to any controlled substance. And the terms 0:14:27.320 --> 0:14:30.520 are ill defined. And you know, anyone who's gone through 0:14:30.560 --> 0:14:35.480 addiction and is understanding of the challenges facing addicts knows 0:14:35.560 --> 0:14:38.640 that this is something that is a day by day struggle. 0:14:38.760 --> 0:14:41.800 And the term addict is one that is very loaded, 0:14:41.840 --> 0:14:44.480 and the term user is one that's very loaded. And 0:14:44.520 --> 0:14:46.680 it's unclear whether it means that you have to be 0:14:46.800 --> 0:14:49.080 a user at the time you're filling out the form, 0:14:49.440 --> 0:14:53.200 or what that even means. If somebody does crack or 0:14:53.280 --> 0:14:56.440 some controlled substance and two days later goes to fill 0:14:56.440 --> 0:14:59.680 out this application, are they a user? Are they an addict? 0:15:00.120 --> 0:15:02.320 The terms are ill defined, They're very vague, and I 0:15:02.320 --> 0:15:04.760 think as a result of it, the statute is really 0:15:04.800 --> 0:15:07.640 subject to being struck down as unconstitutional. 0:15:08.400 --> 0:15:12.360 They also argued that the plea deal that he struck 0:15:12.440 --> 0:15:16.240 last year remains in effect even though prosecutors rescinded it. 0:15:16.960 --> 0:15:19.320 A plea deal is not a plea deal until it 0:15:19.360 --> 0:15:22.400 is approved by all the parties and approved by the judge, 0:15:22.440 --> 0:15:25.280 And in this case, the judge refused to approve it. 0:15:25.320 --> 0:15:28.360 And just because the parties agree on it, it's all 0:15:28.400 --> 0:15:32.240 still subject to approval by the United States District Court. 0:15:32.320 --> 0:15:35.040 And in this case, Judge Noria got struck it down. 0:15:35.080 --> 0:15:37.320 And so just because it was a signed plea agreement 0:15:37.400 --> 0:15:40.800 between the parties, it is not so ordered, as they say, 0:15:40.880 --> 0:15:42.960 until the judge orders it. So I don't think that 0:15:43.440 --> 0:15:46.280 argument is likely to carry any weight, even though it 0:15:46.320 --> 0:15:49.440 was something that was agreed upon by the Department of Justice, 0:15:49.480 --> 0:15:52.520 and by Hunter Biden with his attorneys. Now, I do 0:15:52.560 --> 0:15:54.720 think that that is going to play into sentencing, because 0:15:54.760 --> 0:15:58.400 it's hard to believe that when the Department of Justice 0:15:58.440 --> 0:16:01.600 feels it is appropriate for a defendant to get pre 0:16:01.680 --> 0:16:04.520 trial diversion and no jail time, for them to turn 0:16:04.560 --> 0:16:07.360 around and issue some kind of trial penalty. This is 0:16:07.400 --> 0:16:09.920 a trial that Hunter Biden did not want, he did 0:16:09.920 --> 0:16:12.720 not ask for, It was poisted upon him, and so 0:16:12.840 --> 0:16:14.920 I don't think there should be any trial penalty. And 0:16:14.920 --> 0:16:18.040 as a result of the Department of Justice agreeing that 0:16:18.080 --> 0:16:21.480 this case should be subject to pre trial diversion, I 0:16:21.600 --> 0:16:24.040 would find it shocking if they now turned around and 0:16:24.080 --> 0:16:27.240 asked for any kind of jail time on this Really, do. 0:16:27.160 --> 0:16:30.480 You really think that this Special Council, with all the 0:16:30.520 --> 0:16:32.240 political pressures, won't ask. 0:16:32.040 --> 0:16:32.880 For jail time. 0:16:33.640 --> 0:16:36.480 I think it's going to be shocking if he does 0:16:36.560 --> 0:16:40.400 ask for jail time, given the fact that they have 0:16:40.600 --> 0:16:44.720 also already basically offered him no jail time. This is 0:16:44.760 --> 0:16:47.480 a trial that he did not ask for, he did 0:16:47.480 --> 0:16:50.320 not want, it was poisted upon him, and I think 0:16:50.400 --> 0:16:52.880 if the Special Council turns around and asks for jail 0:16:52.920 --> 0:16:56.000 time now, his politics will be showing. 0:16:56.280 --> 0:16:58.600 Fair enough, Let's turn to what happens next. 0:16:58.960 --> 0:17:03.720 There's the probation interview, the sentencing memos, and Biden friends 0:17:03.760 --> 0:17:07.640 and families sending in letter after letterature the judge. Which 0:17:07.680 --> 0:17:10.040 part of that is most important. 0:17:10.920 --> 0:17:15.119 The probation interview is meant to give the judge a 0:17:15.280 --> 0:17:17.800 sense of who he is as a person that may 0:17:17.840 --> 0:17:20.879 not emerge from the trial, and the same thing for 0:17:20.960 --> 0:17:25.240 the sentencing memo. In large measure, it's meant to educate 0:17:25.320 --> 0:17:28.920 the judge on who a defendant is, who their friends are, 0:17:29.440 --> 0:17:34.320 to character references and explain any mitigating circumstances. Here, the 0:17:34.400 --> 0:17:37.199 judge is very familiar with this defendant, and so it 0:17:37.280 --> 0:17:40.360 may be of less weight to have a probation officer 0:17:40.520 --> 0:17:44.040 interviewing him and giving any information to the court. A 0:17:44.119 --> 0:17:47.000 parallel to be drawn to Donald Trump and his criminal 0:17:47.119 --> 0:17:49.040 hush money trial in New York, where there was a 0:17:49.040 --> 0:17:53.760 probation interview recently. These are probation interviews that are highly 0:17:53.840 --> 0:17:56.320 vetted people, and so it may not sway the judge, 0:17:56.320 --> 0:17:59.919 who's likely very familiar. But this judge may see how 0:18:00.200 --> 0:18:02.480 Biden is an addict, and that is how she sees 0:18:02.560 --> 0:18:04.879 him and views him, and I think that both the 0:18:04.920 --> 0:18:08.919 sentencing memo process and the probation interview are meant to 0:18:08.920 --> 0:18:11.320 give a much more holistic view of some of the 0:18:11.320 --> 0:18:13.800 good things he's done, the work he's done his family, 0:18:14.320 --> 0:18:17.480 and educates her on all of the other parts of 0:18:17.520 --> 0:18:20.320 his personality and being that have not come through so 0:18:20.400 --> 0:18:22.040 far in any of the brief thing in the trial. 0:18:22.640 --> 0:18:26.520 So he technically faces twenty five years. Do you think 0:18:26.560 --> 0:18:27.959 he'll even be sent to prison. 0:18:28.640 --> 0:18:30.840 I think he will not be sent to prison on 0:18:30.880 --> 0:18:35.760 this case because the case merits no prison. It's a 0:18:35.880 --> 0:18:39.399 case involving nothing violent. Even though there was a gun. 0:18:39.640 --> 0:18:42.119 This was a gun that he possessed for eleven days. 0:18:42.200 --> 0:18:46.080 It was never loaded. The charges are never really brought 0:18:46.119 --> 0:18:50.840 a standalone cases. He had no other offenses. This is 0:18:50.840 --> 0:18:55.240 his first criminal offense. The cases are brought fewer than, 0:18:55.600 --> 0:18:58.199 as I say, three hundred times a year out of 0:18:58.240 --> 0:19:02.679 twenty five million background checks. It's a very minor case 0:19:02.880 --> 0:19:06.720 in terms of the federal sentencing guidelines, and DOJ is 0:19:06.760 --> 0:19:10.879 really already on record with their recommendation to the judge 0:19:10.920 --> 0:19:13.040 that he should not go to jail over this. Frankly, 0:19:13.080 --> 0:19:17.440 over the tax case either, there was no jail requirement involved, 0:19:17.480 --> 0:19:21.520 and so there's been some outcry from Congressional Republicans that 0:19:21.560 --> 0:19:26.520 he should see jail time, but DOJ and the parties 0:19:26.560 --> 0:19:28.800 have already all been agreed that he should not see 0:19:28.840 --> 0:19:31.080 jail time in this case. I will find it highly 0:19:31.160 --> 0:19:34.199 unlikely that prosecutor is going to turn around and all 0:19:34.200 --> 0:19:36.359 of a sudden recommend it. And the only thing calling 0:19:36.400 --> 0:19:40.320 for that is the outcry and public political pressure from 0:19:40.600 --> 0:19:43.719 Congressional Republicans. So that's really the only thing mitigating in 0:19:43.800 --> 0:19:46.120 favor of any kind of jail term for this case. 0:19:46.600 --> 0:19:50.520 So he's going to trial in September in California. The 0:19:50.600 --> 0:19:53.440 judge said sometime within the next four months. I mean, 0:19:53.480 --> 0:19:57.760 should this sentencing be held off until the case in 0:19:57.800 --> 0:20:01.120 California is over? Is there any kind of coordination? 0:20:01.800 --> 0:20:05.639 Now? The cases are standalone, they're in different courts, different judges, 0:20:05.840 --> 0:20:09.280 and I think it's unlikely that he's going to serve 0:20:09.280 --> 0:20:12.880 any jail time anyway. So the process will probably move 0:20:12.920 --> 0:20:15.960 along on two different schedules. And this is not the 0:20:16.000 --> 0:20:20.040 first time there's been a defendent with multiple cases open. Obviously, 0:20:20.080 --> 0:20:21.959 I'm on't familiar with the fact that Donald Trump has 0:20:22.000 --> 0:20:25.480 four cases open at this time, and he's being sentenced 0:20:25.520 --> 0:20:27.439 in the New York case in the next few weeks. 0:20:27.520 --> 0:20:29.760 That is not going to be waiting for any of 0:20:29.760 --> 0:20:32.639 the other cases to wind their way through the court system. 0:20:32.800 --> 0:20:35.000 So no one knows what's going to happen with the 0:20:35.040 --> 0:20:37.680 California case. Maybe it's put off for more months, or 0:20:37.680 --> 0:20:40.439 maybe it actually gets tried on time. But they operate 0:20:40.520 --> 0:20:44.480 very independently from one another, and I think that you'd 0:20:44.520 --> 0:20:47.479 likely see him get sentenced on this case either before 0:20:47.640 --> 0:20:49.840 contemporaneous to that September case. 0:20:50.000 --> 0:20:52.080 Thanks so much for sharing your insights with us. 0:20:52.119 --> 0:20:52.479 Duncan. 0:20:52.840 --> 0:20:56.399 That's former Manhattan prosecutor Duncan Levin. Coming up next on 0:20:56.440 --> 0:20:58.760 the Bloomberg Lawn Show, we're going to be looking at 0:20:58.760 --> 0:21:02.639 the controversial case the Supreme Court has yet to decide on. 0:21:03.119 --> 0:21:06.960 I'm June Grosse and you're listening to Bloomberg. The Supreme 0:21:07.040 --> 0:21:10.399 Court is moving at a glacial pace. With just a 0:21:10.440 --> 0:21:13.159 few weeks left in the term, Nearly half of the 0:21:13.240 --> 0:21:17.760 cases argued remain undecided, and among those are the expected 0:21:17.840 --> 0:21:22.600 blockbusters on abortion, guns, and presidential immunity, where we may 0:21:22.680 --> 0:21:26.480 see ideological splits on the court. Joining me is someone 0:21:26.480 --> 0:21:30.240 who is watching for those decisions. Bloomberg News Supreme Court 0:21:30.280 --> 0:21:33.480 reporter Greg Storr, Greg, the justices are going to be 0:21:33.520 --> 0:21:37.119 handing down these high stakes cases in the midst of 0:21:37.240 --> 0:21:40.639 so much controversy for the Court. In your time covering 0:21:40.680 --> 0:21:44.159