From: ScottW48@hotmail.com   
      
   On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 11:13:48 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:   
   > On 8/17/23 12:54 PM, ScottW wrote:    
   > > On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 10:36:50 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:    
   > >> On 8/17/23 11:13 AM, ScottW wrote:    
   > >>> On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 5:04:03 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:    
   > >>>> On 8/16/23 11:17 PM, Art Sackman wrote:    
   > >>>>>> Thank you, I already quoted the original document. This confirms that    
   > >>>>>> Biden's lawyers claim the agreement was made with the prosecution and    
   > >>>>>> didn't involve the judge.    
   > >>>>>    
   > >>>>> Duh!!!! That's the normal course of business.    
   > >>>>>    
   > >>>>> that is typically how it us.    
   > >>>>> JUDGES DO NOT NEGOTIATE PLEA DEALS.    
   > >>>>> They are negotiated between prosecution and defense attorneys.    
   > >>>>> BUT, they are subject to the eventual acceptance or rejection ut the   
   judge,    
   > >>>>>    
   > >>>>> YOU    
   > >>>> You wouldn't go wrong if you made it a practice to edit out anything    
   > >>>> you've typed in all-caps.    
   > >>>>> A plea deal not is NOT a binding contract, if NOT accepted by the   
   judge.    
   > >>>> Hunter's lawyers are saying they have a valid diversion agreement, not   
   a    
   > >>>> plea deal, which does not require a judge's approval.    
   > >>>    
   > >>> Stephen doesn't understand, Judges can't file charges.    
   > >> Who mentioned charges?    
   > >    
   > > You were your teacher's worst nightmare.   
   > Good answer! The filing:   
   > 1 The Government stated in open court    
   > that the Diversion Agreement was a    
   > “bilateral agreement between the    
   > parties” that “stand[s] alone” from the    
   > Plea Agreement, and that it was “in    
   > effect” and “binding.” (Hr’g Tr.    
   > 46:9–14) (Government: “Your Honor, I    
   > believe that this is a bilateral    
   > agreement between the parties that the    
   > parties view in their best interest.”);    
   > id. at 91:6–8 (Government: “Your Honor,    
   > the Diversion Agreement is a contract    
   > between the parties so it’s in effect    
   > until it’s either breached or a   
   > determination [sic], period.”)...   
      
     So the judge has no say in the matter of immunity buried in the diversion   
   agreement.   
     How convenient for the Biden crime syndicate and after all this blah blah...   
   Stephen has circled back to my original post.   
      
   ScottW   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)