Hunter Biden indicted today on 3 federal gun charges

[Subduction Zone]

Ahh I see
I swear. The more I hear about this case, the more I am confused lol

This may make matters worse. The "crime" that he has been accused of my not be constitutional. It punishes people for a crime that is only a misdemeanor, and not even a gross misdemeanor. Yet gun ownership is supposed to be a constitutional right.

Now I would like some more comprehensive gun control laws, but I will be the first to admit that one has to be aware of the limitations of the Second Amendment on those proposed laws. Ironically those that want to punish Hunter for this "crime" also tend to be staunch supporters of a very liberal interpretation of the Second Amendment. When I have asked the OP multiple times about whether he would follow a law that banned the ownership of his guns all that I got was crickets in response. But yet that is what he wants to do to Hunter.

When one cannot reason consistently without changing one's basic values then one's claims appear to be very very wrong. This is a a witch hunt. It is not about justice.

Oh, and Hunter had a plea agreement earlier. Plea agreements are often used to solve cases quickly and justly. They always tend to be much less severe than the worst case outcome of a trial. Hunter's plea agreement appeared to be very standard for someone with his sort of record. Also a plea agreement cannot be appealed. One could change one's mind and go through with a trial, in which case they would go back to the original charges with a likely much more severe outcome. At any rate, because the person cannot appeal the cases sometimes questionable but useful laws are used so that there is a record of the "crimes" that a person did. In this case he was going to plead guilty to the charges of this questionable law, but he would have had probation only. That is not unusual. This law has been used before, but it appears to be always in plea bargains where someone is pleading guilty to a less severe crime. I have seen it with traffic offenses multiple times where the person pleads guilty to doing something wrong that was very similar but not quite what he did because it would have no points on his license (a record that the insurance companies look at when deciding the rates that they will charge a person) and usually a lower fine too. The law used was acknowledged to be a "legal fiction" but since it was used in plea agreements that benefited both the guilty party and the state no one ever appeals it.

Okay, enough for now.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

That's a poor analogy.

What are you comparing it to?

 

[Secret Chief]

What are you comparing it to?

A simile.

 

[We Never Know]

President Biden can pardon his son Hunter, after any trial. These charges were offered by the Biden Justice Department, because they are the few charges that do not connect to the President, and can be reversed with a pardon. There is no real harm done for the President, after a pardon. Fake news will not report it or spin it.

The other charges connected to the family business, that connects all the Biden, was not offered. This is legal postering by the Left. The Right will not take the gun charge, as trade, to stop the inquiry. That is not a good deal.

Biden may next offer to diminish the Trump charges. I am not sure that will be enough, either. None of the Trump charges will stick in the long term, but were designed for optics and election interference. These charges will be repealed in the future, but this could take until after the election. If Biden wins he could bury all evidence or make up new charges for Trump and others with the Injustice Department

It may be best for the right to continue with the inquiry, allowing a new Republican Candidate to take it all. Americans are tired of the decline in the country; overwhelmed with immigrants and inflation, and will choose someone from the Right who can restore fiscal and practical sanity.

Well you gotta hand it to Joe for saying he wont pardon Hunter. Time will tell if he sticks with it.

"President Joe Biden will not pardon Hunter Biden if he's convicted on federal charges, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Friday.

Asked during the daily briefing if the president would pardon or commute his son's sentence if he gets convicted on the gun charges against him, Jean-Pierre told reporters he would not. It's the first time the White House has explicitly said a potential pardon is not on the table following Hunter Biden's indictment this week."

Biden won't pardon his son if he's convicted, White House says

Press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters that the president would not pardon or commute Hunter Biden's sentence if he's convicted on federal gun charges.

www-nbcnews-com.cdn.ampproject.org

 

[Guitar's Cry]

A simile.

That's like apples and oranges.

 

[esmith]

No, he can't. He could only pardon Hunter on federal trials. I do not know if he faces local or federal charges. A President cannot pardon someone for state crimes.

Lying of a ATF Form 4473 is a federal offense

Federal Prosecutors Aggressively Pursuing Those Who Lie in Connection With Firearm Transactions | ATF

OKLAHOMA CITY — The Western District of Oklahoma is aggressively seeking to keep firearms out of the wrong hands by pursuing those who lie in connection with gun purchases. Several recent cases charged in federal court highlight these efforts.

www.atf.gov

 

[Audie]

This may make matters worse. The "crime" that he has been accused of my not be constitutional. It punishes people for a crime that is only a misdemeanor, and not even a gross misdemeanor. Yet gun ownership is supposed to be a constitutional right.

Now I would like some more comprehensive gun control laws, but I will be the first to admit that one has to be aware of the limitations of the Second Amendment on those proposed laws. Ironically those that want to punish Hunter for this "crime" also tend to be staunch supporters of a very liberal interpretation of the Second Amendment. When I have asked the OP multiple times about whether he would follow a law that banned the ownership of his guns all that I got was crickets in response. But yet that is what he wants to do to Hunter.

When one cannot reason consistently without changing one's basic values then one's claims appear to be very very wrong. This is a a witch hunt. It is not about justice.

Oh, and Hunter had a plea agreement earlier. Plea agreements are often used to solve cases quickly and justly. They always tend to be much less severe than the worst case outcome of a trial. Hunter's plea agreement appeared to be very standard for someone with his sort of record. Also a plea agreement cannot be appealed. One could change one's mind and go through with a trial, in which case they would go back to the original charges with a likely much more severe outcome. At any rate, because the person cannot appeal the cases sometimes questionable but useful laws are used so that there is a record of the "crimes" that a person did. In this case he was going to plead guilty to the charges of this questionable law, but he would have had probation only. That is not unusual. This law has been used before, but it appears to be always in plea bargains where someone is pleading guilty to a less severe crime. I have seen it with traffic offenses multiple times where the person pleads guilty to doing something wrong that was very similar but not quite what he did because it would have no points on his license (a record that the insurance companies look at when deciding the rates that they will charge a person) and usually a lower fine too. The law used was acknowledged to be a "legal fiction" but since it was used in plea agreements that benefited both the guilty party and the state no one ever appeals it.

Okay, enough for now.

More than enough to obfusculate the simple.

 

[F1fan]

Lying of a ATF Form 4473 is a federal offense

Federal Prosecutors Aggressively Pursuing Those Who Lie in Connection With Firearm Transactions | ATF

OKLAHOMA CITY — The Western District of Oklahoma is aggressively seeking to keep firearms out of the wrong hands by pursuing those who lie in connection with gun purchases. Several recent cases charged in federal court highlight these efforts.

www.atf.gov

Do you think they have evidence that Hunter was on drugs when he filled out the form?

If he was drugged out then it could be argued he did not have awareness of his offense. If he wasn't on drugs then who is to say he believed he was dedicated to be sober when he filled out the form?

 

[Audie]

Do you think they have evidence that Hunter was on drugs when he filled out the form?

If he was drugged out then it could be argued he did not have awareness of his offense. If he wasn't on drugs then who is to say he believed he was dedicated to be sober when he filled out the form?

That's not how it works

 

[anna.]

This may make matters worse. The "crime" that he has been accused of my not be constitutional. It punishes people for a crime that is only a misdemeanor, and not even a gross misdemeanor. Yet gun ownership is supposed to be a constitutional right.

Now I would like some more comprehensive gun control laws, but I will be the first to admit that one has to be aware of the limitations of the Second Amendment on those proposed laws. Ironically those that want to punish Hunter for this "crime" also tend to be staunch supporters of a very liberal interpretation of the Second Amendment. When I have asked the OP multiple times about whether he would follow a law that banned the ownership of his guns all that I got was crickets in response. But yet that is what he wants to do to Hunter.

When one cannot reason consistently without changing one's basic values then one's claims appear to be very very wrong. This is a a witch hunt. It is not about justice.

Oh, and Hunter had a plea agreement earlier. Plea agreements are often used to solve cases quickly and justly. They always tend to be much less severe than the worst case outcome of a trial. Hunter's plea agreement appeared to be very standard for someone with his sort of record. Also a plea agreement cannot be appealed. One could change one's mind and go through with a trial, in which case they would go back to the original charges with a likely much more severe outcome. At any rate, because the person cannot appeal the cases sometimes questionable but useful laws are used so that there is a record of the "crimes" that a person did. In this case he was going to plead guilty to the charges of this questionable law, but he would have had probation only. That is not unusual. This law has been used before, but it appears to be always in plea bargains where someone is pleading guilty to a less severe crime. I have seen it with traffic offenses multiple times where the person pleads guilty to doing something wrong that was very similar but not quite what he did because it would have no points on his license (a record that the insurance companies look at when deciding the rates that they will charge a person) and usually a lower fine too. The law used was acknowledged to be a "legal fiction" but since it was used in plea agreements that benefited both the guilty party and the state no one ever appeals it.

Okay, enough for now.

It's transparently about getting to President Biden through his son.

Investigations and prosecutions. Federal and selected state law enforcement agencies that process firearm-related background checks through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) collectively investigate and prosecute a small percentage of individuals who falsify information on a firearms form (e.g., do not disclose a felony conviction) and are denied a purchase. Federal NICS checks resulted in about 112,000 denied transactions in fiscal year 2017, of which the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) referred about 12,700 to its field divisions for further investigation. U.S. Attorney's Offices (USAO) had prosecuted 12 of these cases as of June 2018.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Lying of a ATF Form 4473 is a federal offense

Federal Prosecutors Aggressively Pursuing Those Who Lie in Connection With Firearm Transactions | ATF

OKLAHOMA CITY — The Western District of Oklahoma is aggressively seeking to keep firearms out of the wrong hands by pursuing those who lie in connection with gun purchases. Several recent cases charged in federal court highlight these efforts.

www.atf.gov

That is the claim. That does not mean that is the practice. Find a person where the primary charge on them was the law that Hunter broke. That means not a law that they pled to in a plea bargain. I gave that challenge to the OP on another thread and he found nothing.

 

[F1fan]

That's not how it works

If it goes to trial I think such questions could give a jury reasonable doubt.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's not how it works

Desire can make imaginations run wild.

 

[Audie]

If it goes to trial I think such questions could give a jury reasonable doubt.

That ain't how it works either.

 

[fantome profane]

Do you think they have evidence that Hunter was on drugs when he filled out the form?

I think Hunter wrote about that in his book. I guess he could walk that back and say he was just making it up, but that is a matter for the jury to decide.

If he was drugged out then it could be argued he did not have awareness of his offense. If he wasn't on drugs then who is to say he believed he was dedicated to be sober when he filled out the form?

Being on drugs is not a defence for crimes you commit.

 

[Audie]

I think Hunter wrote about that in his book. I guess he could walk that back and say he was just making it up, but that is a matter for the jury to decide.


Being on drugs is not a defence for crimes you commit.

" Hold my beer and watch this"

 

[F1fan]

I think Hunter wrote about that in his book. I guess he could walk that back and say he was just making it up, but that is a matter for the jury to decide.


Being on drugs is not a defence for crimes you commit.

I am referring to the mechanics of affirming some factual statement on a form. The question requires a person to check a box: YES/NO. This is a violation, but to put it in context it is a contractual violation, a white collar crime versus an act like driving while drunk which puts others in direct harm. What I am saying is that white collar crimes are often viewed with less seriousness than crimes against society. Note this is a separate crime from him taking posession of the gun. I think this is one reason why these violations are seldom prosecuted.

 

[fantome profane]

I am referring to the mechanics of affirming some factual statement on a form. The question requires a person to check a box: YES/NO. This is a violation, but to put it in context it is a contractual violation, a white collar crime versus an act like driving while drunk which puts others in direct harm. What I am saying is that white collar crimes are often viewed with less seriousness than crimes against society. Note this is a separate crime from him taking posession of the gun. I think this is one reason why these violations are seldom prosecuted.

I do believe that any gun related crime ought to be taken much much more seriously than it is in the U.S. I understand what you are saying and I understand these crimes are not taken very seriously. But I think they should be.

 

[Audie]

I am referring to the mechanics of affirming some factual statement on a form. The question requires a person to check a box: YES/NO. This is a violation, but to put it in context it is a contractual violation, a white collar crime versus an act like driving while drunk which puts others in direct harm. What I am saying is that white collar crimes are often viewed with less seriousness than crimes against society. Note this is a separate crime from him taking posession of the gun. I think this is one reason why these violations are seldom prosecuted.

You don't see the harm in drug addicts buying guns.

 

[F1fan]

You don't see the harm in drug addicts buying guns.

Too bad this wasn't a question, because my answer would have been that I do. I said nothing about whether addicts should have guns.

My post was only about how Hunter's defense could frame the charges.