so what might we extrapolate/interpolate from the most recent developments?
1. the recent hunter - DOJ meetings may have had one overarching goal and two sub-goals. overarching goal: minimize political damage to joe/democrats/corporate backers. subgoal 1: a capstone plea bargain agreement which excludes mention of FARA accusations; and 2: a separate capstone plea bargain agreement which covers FARA charges.
2. lunden strategy might be to highlight treatment of other biden grandchildren and contrast their projected expenses with whatever small or nonexistent payments have been received from hunter.
the medium term goal to minimize damage to joe etc. is because joe etc. needs women voter support, and lunden is a political liability with women voters, especially mothers, especially single mothers.
a separate FARA capstone plea agreement is needed because the FARA charges are only distantly related to the child support issue in the court of public opinion. An omnibus capstone plea agreement would not be perceived as clean by women voters; at best it would be a big public relations albatross that republicans could exploit in an election year. so (presuming a thoroughly corrupt DOJ) a separate FARA capstone plea agreement would need to have been hammered out before hunter’s court appearance, but announced a significant amount of time (eg > 1 month) after the tax misdemeanor capstone plea agreement.