The indicted FBI informant who allegedly lied about the Biden's ties to a Ukrainian power company now says he got his information from Russian intelligence officials. Prosecutors say that Alexander Smirnoff has also been, quote, actively peddling new lies that could impact U. S. Elections. After meeting with Russian spies late last year, these lies are some Republicans have long been using them to try to undermine President Biden and smear his son Hunter. The foreign national who allegedly bribed Joe and Hunter Biden allegedly has audio recordings. We already know the president took bribes from Burisma. Even a trusted FBI informant has alleged a bribe to the Biden family.
Okay, let's bring in criminal defense attorney and legal analyst to talk more about this. So this is now kind of making its way into the discussion around Hunter Biden's plea deal because his lawyers are accusing the special counsel in that instance, David Weiss of using these discredited bribery allegations to blow up that plea deal that he had last year. Is there a recourse for Hunter Biden in this case? How do you understand what's played out here?
There certainly needs to be recourse. This is awful and certainly a black eye on the Justice Department yet again. And I think it goes to the notions of whether people trust the government and trust justice. Looking back before we look forward, what happens? You're entering into what's called a diversion agreement last July. What on earth does that mean? It means that, you know what, the government has a case that we can build against you. In fact, we have two. We have a case predicated upon your tax filings that we believe to be misleading and fabricated. And we have a case predicated upon you owning guns when you shouldn't because apparently you had a problem associated with an addiction. But we're going to forgive all and we're gonna enter into a program. You're going to get yourself better. All's going to be well and this will go away. That's the essence of the deal last July.
A question is asked by a judge. Fair question. Before you plead any client guilty, you want that to be comprehensive. You want any plea to cover everything and anything that your client may face with respect to a governmental prosecution. What happens? The judge asks, does this cover anything related to the Foreign Affairs Registration Act? No. What? It doesn't cover that? So there's a dispute between prosecutors regarding FARA, right? And there's a dispute of whether Mr. Biden, the younger, can be prosecuted. His lawyers, Biden's, are thinking this plea agreement covers everything, right? Prosecutors saying, no, it doesn't. Now we're learning that the reason that they weren't committing to it, they being prosecutors, is because they were relying on information that was flawed, faulty, misleading, and completely a lie.
And then you add to that, the fact that you have House Republicans opening up an impeachment inquiry based upon information which is fabricated, what? What world are we living in? And so I think the recourse is the filing of these motions to get at what precipitated this diversion agreement being blown up. Why was it blown up? Let's come clean. And if he should have gotten diversion, he should still get diversion and the immunity agreement should still be operative. So that's what we're all facing a lot to unpack. But it's just horrible in this day and age that you can have misinformation ruin someone's life. That should not happen. And I think that's why Biden's lawyers, the younger are looking for recourse.
I mean, this is kind of a political question, but the way that this kind of fits into everything that we've experienced in our politics over the last four or six years where Republicans, you hear from Donald Trump, the phrase Russia hoax all the time. This is going to get swept up in that as well. But I mean, I just kind of want to underscore these recent revelations. I mean, they say now, these prosecutors are alleging that this guy has had recent contacts with Russian intelligence officials and that there is additional information, probably things we don't know. I mean, we know that this is what he said about Hunter Biden, but things that could actually affect this 2024 election.
Based on what you understand about how these cases can play out, are we going to learn what that is at some point? Isn't it potentially in the national interest for us to know? Yeah, you know, great question and political or not, I mean, it's hard to separate the two. And that's the problem. The two meaning the legal questions from the political, because I think so many people are thinking, look, what is the Justice Department doing? Is it predicated upon law or is it predicated upon politics? Where's the information come from? Is it reliable? Doesn't the public have a right to know? were you relying upon and when? Did he have information and intel from Russian context? Did he not? Is this fabricated as well? So many questions to answer, right, you with respect to your question to me, but those are the realities.
And I think there is a public interest in knowing what information is being relied upon in the prosecution. And if it's up to Hunter Biden's team, yes, we will know specifically and exactly what these reliances are upon, who these foreign officials were, what influence they had over him. Is this just another thing that is made up? It's just scary. The government has a lot of power. They can ruin people's lives. And if you're going to pursue claims against people, they should be credible. They should be based on information that is vetted and investigated before you have people. And the clip you showed, the speaker, right, of the House of Representatives is talking about bribes that are not true. It's just insane. But I think hopefully we'll get to the bottom of that information. just cannot happen in a civilized society.
Yeah, and it's, I mean, it is the challenge of our time, separating myths and disinformation from the truth in an era when it's just becoming more and more confused.
