Recently, former President Donald Trump's classified documents case was dismissed, and legal analyst Glenn Kirschner discussed the unexpected implications this ruling has on Hunter Biden's legal issues.
Judge Aileen Cannon, appointed by Trump in 2020, dismissed the case against Trump by arguing that the Department of Justice (DOJ) special counsel Jack Smith's appointment was unconstitutional. She referenced Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' opinion on presidential immunity to support her decision. Trump faced 40 federal charges related to his handling of sensitive documents seized from his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, after his presidency ended in January 2021. He was also accused of obstructing federal efforts to retrieve these documents and pleaded not guilty.
However, Smith filed a notice of appeal against Cannon's ruling, stating, "The United States of America hereby gives notice that it appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit from the order of the District Court entered on July 15, 2024, Docket Entry 672."
During an appearance on Brian Tyler Cohen's YouTube channel, Kirschner, a former assistant U.S. attorney and frequent critic of Trump, discussed the implications of Cannon's ruling. When asked about the surprise for Republicans, Kirschner explained how the GOP did not anticipate Hunter Biden, President Joe Biden's son, using Cannon's ruling to seek dismissal of his own cases.
Kirschner elaborated, "I don't think anybody saw this coming as a result of Judge Cannon throwing out Donald Trump's classified documents case because in her estimation special counsel was not lawfully appointed. Well guess what? Hunter Biden's lawyers just filed a motion to throw out his criminal conviction in Delaware. Why? Because he was prosecuted by another special counsel who was appointed under the same rules, regulations, and laws as Jack Smith was appointed."
Hunter Biden was recently convicted on three felony counts related to gun possession while using narcotics, and he is appealing the verdict. His charges arose from investigations by special counsel David Weiss, a Trump appointee. Weiss' investigations have also led to tax charges against Hunter Biden, which will be addressed in a trial later this year in California.
Following Cannon's ruling, Hunter Biden's lawyers filed motions arguing for dismissal, stating, "Based on these new legal developments, Mr. Biden moves to dismiss the indictment brought against him because the Special Counsel who initiated this prosecution was appointed in violation of the Appointments Clause as well."
Kirschner continued, "Nobody could have seen the kind of confluence of circumstances that would have allowed a really bad legal decision by Judge Cannon down in Florida to try and help out Donald Trump somehow boomeranging and potentially being used by Hunter Biden's lawyers to try and get his conviction thrown out."
Newsweek reached out to spokespeople for Trump and Hunter Biden for comments.
This situation arises as Republicans have persistently tried to link Hunter Biden and President Biden to illegal foreign business dealings, even launching an impeachment inquiry against the president. President Biden has denied involvement in his son's business affairs, and the White House has labeled the GOP's impeachment efforts as "sad, pathetic, and a waste of everyone's time." So far, the GOP's impeachment inquiry has not produced substantial evidence to support its claims.
On his YouTube channel, Kirschner noted that while Hunter Biden's motions are unlikely to succeed, they highlight the consequences of Cannon's ruling. He said, "I'm not surprised Hunter Biden's lawyers made these motions, but I think they are destined to fail because what Judge Cannon did in Donald Trump's classified documents case, tossed it out, ruled that special counsel is not a thing, not only doesn't have any precedential value anywhere else, it's a bad ruling. It's a bad ruling and it should be rejected and I suspect it will be rejected by all federal judges who have occasion to take up that issue."
"rejected by all federal judges who" are not owned by Donald Trump, as are two or three of Supreme Courts justices.
ReplyDelete