Let me state as clearly as I can my father was not financially involved in my business, not as a practicing lawyer, not as a board member of Barisma, not in my partnership with a Chinese private businessman, not in my investments at home nor abroad, and certainly not as an artist.
And not as an artist.
WHOA wow, look out the moving gold posts almost crushed me. Funny how that's evolved. We'll discuss that and more with the fabulous Andrew McCarthy, Senior Fellow at the National Review Institute, National Review contributing editor. And I've often claimed that there are no other podcasts. Ours is the only one, but I'm forced to admit The McCarthy Report is an excellent podcast if you're interested, particularly in legal issues. In the headlines, Andy McCarthy, Andrew, how are you, sir.
I'm doing great, Jens. Great to be with you.
We just recorded the podcast, so I appreciate the plug. Well, then I'll be listening later today because I hear everyone. Here's my number one question, because this is what the hunter Biden crowd keeps saying, and everybody on the left. If his last name weren't Biden, none of this would be happening. Is that true or false? Well, it's true in the sense that if his last name weren't Biden, he would have been prosecuted in twenty nineteen on multiple felonies.
So I suppose that at this point, is that his name warn't Biden. You know, all the stuff wouldn't be happening, which includes a sweetheart deal that no one else would have had a chance of getting. And that imploded when a district judge asked a few rudimentary questions about what the basic understandings of it were, including its scope.
And is there any truth to it at all? Since it is like the number one talking point, Is there any truth to it at all that he's getting any harsher treatment as opposed to you're saying he's getting a better case that he's getting any harsher treatment because his last name is Biden.
No, there's no truth at all.
In fact, when they finally indicted him on tax charges, which have been out there for like a million years, some of the most egregious conduct could no longer be charged because the statute of limitations had run on it. Because the Biden Justice Department wouldn't prosecute.
Him so on the topic of the sweetheart deal, I have the outrage, certainly, but not the expertise to adequately describe how incredible it is that that deal a existed b was dismantled in a moment by a competent judge. And see the fact that the guy who crafted it remains in charge of the investigation. Help people understand how tawdry that is.
Well, it's really corrupt. I mean, Biden has been known to have tax problems going back to probably twenty sixteen, twenty seventeen, when I think that was when they started to put leans.
On his property.
The Biden laptop, which the public became aware of in the waning weeks before the twenty twenty election, is actually in the FBI's possession for about a year before that. So there's been monumental evidence of dodgy income and his failure to pay taxes for years and years. But if the prosecutors had gone after the most egregious misconduct, which appears to have occurred between twenty fourteen and twenty sixteen, I might take it back to twenty thirteen twenty sixteen.
You couldn't prove that case.
Without showing that the way he was raking in the money, was selling access to his father, and precisely because.
His name was Biden.
And that he was making the biggest killing when Biden was vice president of the United States. So the prosecutor let that lapse. The statute of limitations on most crimes in the Federal Code is five years. Tax crimes, the relevant ones here it's six years. So he simply waited it out so that the evidence of what was going on when Joe Biden was vice president was no longer prosecutable. And then to try to make the case go away. First his plan was to just completely make the case
go away, just like dismiss it entirely. He had to back off from that.
We're talking about David.
Wiss, now the US attorney in Delaware. He had to back off of that because these irs whistleblowers came forward and explain that Hunter Biden had gotten ridiculously favorable treatment that no other American would get. So then the Justice Department and wife had to try to figure out a way to have a plausible that they could sell the public, but at the same time make sure that the president's
son didn't go to jail. So what they came up with, was let him plead guilty to two puny misdemeanors despite the mountainous evidence of tax evasion, which is a felony, Has it be a no jail plea? And then, probably most absurd at all of all, have this gun case that he has where he obtained a gun by misrepresenting his drug abuse and then lost it in I think it was twenty seventeen if I'm remembering right, maybe twenty eighteen.
But have that, which is a ten year felony instead of prosecuting that, arrive at a diversion agreement where he would not be subjected to prosecution if he kept his nose clean, which I guess you have to literally say with Hunter for a year or two, and under the Justice Department guideline, gun offenses are not available for you know, divergent is not available for gun offenses. So they basically had to blow up every norm of how you prosecute
cases in order to try to do this. And when the judge asked a couple of basic questions about what is Hunter being immunized for if he pleads guilty, what Hunter's lawyers said, and I believe they were actually accurate about this, because this is what.
The Biden Justice Department wanted.
What they were saying is if he pleads guilty to this, then.
All conduct over this five.
Year period going back to actually going back to twenty fourteen, so it's more than five years all conduct arising out of that he could no longer be prosecuted for. And when the judge looked at the US Attorney and said is that true? I think it actually was true in the sense that that's what the Justice Department wanted to do. But they knew how politically embarrassing this would be, so they said, no, no, no, you know, if we find
other crimes, we can still prosecute them. So I think incompetently the Biden lawyers who do by the way, they do not include the lawyer he has now, Abbey Loll, But they allowed this agreement to be blown up because they were so angry at the US attorney misrepresenting what the understanding was about the scope of the non prosecution agreement. But I think it was foolish on their court because it's very clear that wife had absolutely no intention of
prosecuting Hunter Biden on anything serious. So if they had just nodded their heads and sort of said yeah, yeah, whatever. He would have pled guilty to these two misdemeanors. They would have tried to make the gun thing disappear, and there's no way he would have been prosecuted were anything more serious, particularly because the Statute of Limitations is run on all this stuff.
So if you could give me a yes or no on this, because I got a follow up question to it, do you think he'll spend time in jail? No, you don't think he'll spend time in jail. Interesting and well, much.
As if it was your if it was your son and you were the only guy in America who could pardon him and spare them from a penitentiary, what would you do?
Oh you think he okay?
You them?
You think he won't spend time in jail because his dad will pardon him. Okay, I get it. Much as being made of the change in language, was this on purpose from Hunter yesterday? As we know between the President and Hunter over the years, it's gone from my dad had no knowledge of my business dealings to my dad wasn't involved in my business dealings too. Whatever it was he said yesterday, specifically that my dad wasn't financially involved. Is that on purpose? Does that mean something?
Yeah?
I mean, remember he's got good legal representation. Now, all these statements that he makes are lawyered up, you know. So they know that Joe Biden has tons of involvement.
But what they.
Republicans haven't been able to prove yet is that a whole lot of money went from Hunter to Joe.
So they're leaning on that now.
But you're right, the goalpost, as you said before, have shifted dramatically from the beginning where you know, you would have believed there was a complete wall of separation between Joe and Hunter, and now there's so much evidence of Joe abetting the scheme that they have to now try to narrow their denial. I personally, I think the whole thing is the wrong way of looking at it. I think,
you know, this business is Joe Biden. To think of it as like it's Hunter's business and we have to see what threads we can show to connect Joe and Hunter is the wrong way to look at it. The only way this business worked is that Joe Biden allowed it to work.
It allowed it to go on to the years.
If if he hadn't done that, it would have been shut down in five minutes.
So he's the main actor here.
Well, this is ground so well plowed, there's probably no not any reason to go back to it. But I just find it astounding that the alphabet media, the so called legacy media, don't get that if my son, for instance, was trading on my name, which would be useless, uh, and he became so wealthy he bought a Rolls Royce that I drive all the time, that that that they don't understand how that benefits me. I mean I don't. I don't even know to where to start with you.
Yeah, the I R S, the I R S would know because they would charge the income to you. That's the thing I find amazing. You know that all this, you know, all these legalisms that you hear in the commentary.
The factor of the matter.
Is if I'm if somebody wants to pay me for something I've done for them, and I say, you know, don't pay me, give it to my son. The I R S considers that to be an income event as to me, not to not to my son, and they don't let me defeat the tax by having somebody.
Else be paid.
That's the that's the way the government itself looks at it.
And tell me this, mister McCarthy, to what extent is this true? A tax investigation always looks into where the money came from and where it went.
Correct, It's the only way to do it. And you know, one of the more and you know, one of the I think more unfortunate things about the attention that was given to Hunter's tax is long belated overdue tax indictment was all the salacious detail about how he spent the money kind of takes the spotlight away from the only thing that's important, which was how the money was generated
in the first place. Right, twenty four million dollars from corrupt and anti American regimes or their agents going into the Biden family coffers.
Over just a five year period.
What matters to the country is what did the Chinese and the rest of them think they were buying, not how Hunter or you know, not whether he spent it on prostitutes or crack or whatever he was buying.
Yeah, he's just that good a lawyer. I'm hearing a little jealousy out of Andy McCarthy. Yeah, you're right.
If he had used all that money to repave orphanages. It doesn't mean it's okay his paving orphanages.
The thing.
That sounds bad they're parking lots.
Eect that I've paid orphanages.
Is that what?
Uh yeah, well that's that is interesting. Yeah, that's an excellent point. Andy McCarthy of the National Review. His excellent podcast is The McCarthy Report. And I neglected to mention the book Faull of Collusion, the plot to rig an election and destroy a presidency, which is thorough and terrific as well. Andy, It's a great pleasure. I hope we can do it again sometime.
I'd love to you guys have have a merry Christmas and enjoy