Rep. Duncan Hunter, 42, has been in hot water following his August, 2018 indictment on charges that he and his wife, Margaret Hunter, misused $200,000 in campaign funds.
His attorneys, however, are claiming the charges against him should either be dismissed or the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of California should be recused.
Hunter’s lawyers filed a motion with the federal court on Monday, alleging that the appearance of U.S. Attorneys Emily Allen and Alana Robinson at a 2015 Hillary Clinton president campaign fundraiser proves political bias against Rep. Hunter.
“In light of subsequent events and their initiation of the criminal investigation of Congressman Hunter, their attendance at the event raises serious concerns regarding a conflict of interest and a loss of impartiality,” the motion reads.
The motion goes on to allege that the attorneys misused their status to attend the event, bypassing payment in order to take a photo with Clinton for personal reasons.
Additionally, the motion points out that the investigation into Hunt¬er began shortly after he became the first sitting member of Congress to publicly endorse Donald Trump for President of the United States on Feb. 24.
“The totality of their conduct calls into question the loss of impartiality in the investigation of Congressman Hunter and at a minimum creates the appearance of a conflict of interest,” the motion reads.
Rep. Hunter released his own two-part statement on Monday, further rehashing what was alleged in the motion while also championing for the right to a fair trial.
“It is every American’s constitutional right to have equal protection under the law. It is clear by the prosecutor’s actions that they have a political bias that merits the court’s attention and consideration. The U.S. Constitution and federal law exists to protect us against these types of bias. Political agendas have no place in our courtrooms and when lies and their cover-up are exposed, accountable action should be taken,” the second part of Duncan. Hunter’s statement read.
The move comes 11 days after Margaret Hunter switched her plea from not-guilty to guilty in a San Diego Federal District Court.
Margaret Hunter’s plea agreement claimed the Hunter’s “agreed to knowingly and will¬fully convert Campaign funds to personal use by using them to fulfill personal commitment, obligations, and expenses that would have existed irrespective of Hunter’s election campaign and duties as a federal officeholder.”
The agreement goes on to allege that, among other things, the Hunter’s overdrew their bank account more than 1,100 times in a seven-year period, resulting in $37,761 in overdraft and insufficient bank fund fees.
A hearing has been set for Monday, July 1, in federal court.
