Legal developments ahead of Hunter Biden’s tax trial reveal that he received funds from Romanian businessman Gabriel Popoviciu, who aimed to influence U.S. policy and end a criminal investigation against himself in Romania.
A filing from special counsel David Weiss indicated that Hunter Biden agreed to assist in influencing U.S. government agencies in exchange for millions, with the total payments reportedly around $3 million.
“G.P. sought to retain Business Associate 1, the defendant, and Business Associate 2, to attempt to influence U.S. government agencies to investigate the Romanian criminal investigation of G.P, and thereby cause an end to the investigation of G.P. in Romania,” the filing stated.
“Business Associate 1 and the defendant were concerned that lobbying work might cause political ramifications for the defendant’s father,” the filing read.
The filing suggested that despite receiving this compensation, Hunter Biden performed minimal work.
Additionally, it stated that evidence would show efforts to avoid registering as foreign agents while reaching out to U.S. government officials.
“This evidence will not include evidence that the defendant performed lobbying activity in exchange for this compensation,” the filing said.
“Rather, the evidence will show the defendant performed almost no work in exchange for the millions of dollars he received from these entities,” the filing said.
The filing noted that Weiss “will introduce evidence that Business Associate 1 structured a business relationship in an effort to avoid having to register as a foreign agent, and that the defendant and his business partners did reach out to government officials, specifically the United States Department of State.”
The prosecution intends to counter any defense related to Hunter Biden’s addiction by asserting his mental state was consistent with someone fully aware of their actions.
The case will not explore allegations of any funds being directed to President Joe Biden.
“That evidence is relevant because it establishes that the defendant received income, when he earned the income, and his state of mind was not consistent with someone with a diminished capacity,” the filing said.
