Hunter Biden investigations (from GOP primary thread)

[Dave Gray]

If there is evidence to charge Hunter Biden with a crime of some substance, do it.  Nobody gives a shit.

My guess is that they can't.  This is all fundraising and whataboutism.  The left doesn't care about Hunter Biden.  Y'all fall for the dumbest shit over and over again.

[pondwater]

Lying on form 4473 is a felony. Hunter Biden lied on form 4473? His admission of his drug use during the period he purchased the firearm does two things. It disqualified him from purchasing a firearm for 12 months from the time he made his admission. It also establishes as fact, that he did indeed lie on his original purchase back in 2018. Therefore, he should be charged with felony for lying on form 4473. From there, a judge or jury would decide if he's guilty or not guilty.

Also, it's not a coincidence that, if charged, his lawyers will claim that he had a RIGHT under the 2nd amendment to purchase a gun while he was addicted to crack cocaine. As opposed to claiming that he wasn't addicted to crack cocaine when he purchased a gun. That is a major distinction.

Does anyone here think that we have a 2nd amendment right to purchase firearms while addicted to illegal drugs?

[Spider-Dan]

Lying on form 4473 is a felony. Hunter Biden lied on form 4473? His admission of his drug use during the period he purchased the firearm does two things.

You have not proven that he did drugs, and he was not under oath when he made any confessions.  Again, the reason why you won't agree that Hunter needs to be convicted of possession first is that you know any prosecutor would lose that case.

Also, it's not a coincidence that, if charged, his lawyers will claim that he had a RIGHT under the 2nd amendment to purchase a gun while he was addicted to crack cocaine.

Welcome to law practice.  It is a competent attorney's job to throw every possible escape route against the wall and hope that any one of them sticks.  So, yes, any lawyer worth their salt would argue 1) my client cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to have been on drugs, and 2) even if that point could be proven, he would still have the right to own a firearm anyway.

Does anyone here think that we have a 2nd amendment right to purchase firearms while addicted to illegal drugs?

Good to hear you agree that "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" is not to be taken literally.

[CF DolFan]

You have not proven that he did drugs, and he was not under oath when he made any confessions.  Again, the reason why you won't agree that Hunter needs to be convicted of possession first is that you know any prosecutor would lose that case.
Welcome to law practice.  It is a competent attorney's job to throw every possible escape route against the wall and hope that any one of them sticks.  So, yes, any lawyer worth their salt would argue 1) my client cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to have been on drugs, and 2) even if that point could be proven, he would still have the right to own a firearm anyway.
Good to hear you agree that "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" is not to be taken literally.

Ummm admitting guilt he did as another conspiracy theory comes true. You'll be happy to know that Hunter was given what amounts to a speeding ticket for his tax fraud scheme and gun charges. Kind of cool to have a sweetheart deal in place before the charges are even filed. I'm sure we would have received the same treatment.  I'm also sure they are hoping people will forget about the bribery case being conducted in the House oversite committee.

[pondwater]

You have not proven that he did drugs, and he was not under oath when he made any confessions.  Again, the reason why you won't agree that Hunter needs to be convicted of possession first is that you know any prosecutor would lose that case.

LMFAO, unfortunately for you and your pseudo internet law degree, Hunter Biden to plead guilty to tax crimes and admit gun offense. "In theory, he still faces a maximum penalty of a year in prison on each of the tax charges and 10 years in prison on the gun charge, the justice department said in a statement. The proposed deal would need to be approved by the judge in the case, who will also determine the sentence."

Hopefully, the judge rejects the deal and he has his day in court and is held accountable for his felonious criminal actions to the fullest extent of the law.

Just as a reminder, you don't plead guilty and admit you broke the law unless charges being filed are imminent. I hope this clears up all of your word salad and copypasta cope that's been falsely spread in this thread. It must suck taking the "L" all the time and never having the personal awareness to even admit it.

Kyle Rittenhouse is highly disappointed that you haven't learned your lesson from the past "L's" you've been dealt. Therefore, the participation trophy you were awarded last week is hereby revoked. Anyhow, It's been entertaining and amusing engaging with your diversion, deflection, and distraction tactics in this thread. Have a great day old friend, see you later.


Also, Inb4 the spin
 

[Spider-Dan]

Wait, I thought the "conspiracy" was that Biden's corrupt DOJ was looking the other way on Hunter's blatant lawlessness...?  That obviously cannot be true if prosecutors are announcing a plea deal less than 1 week later.  So now I guess the real concern this whole time was the tax evasion and gun charges?



The only person in this thread who has even commented on any Hunter Biden tax charges was CF.  If Hunter has struck a plea deal on the tax and gun charges then... fine?  I have no problem with our justice system working as intended; signing a plea deal means you have admitted guilt.  Hunter Biden should be held accountable for any crimes he has been convicted of or confessed to, just like anyone else.

But I'm sure this outcome means that conservatives are done mentioning Hunter Biden going forward.  The legal issues are now resolved, right?    Y'all whine about "spin" but you've already started complaining about the sentence being too light before you even know what it is.  We will move seamlessly from "Biden's corrupt DOJ is suppressing Hunter Biden's crime spree" to "Biden is intervening to force the judiciary branch (?!) to give his son a cupcake sentence."

And if we're counting Ls, we should probably start looking at who made comments defending Amber Guyger and Derek Chauvin, to say nothing of the extensive commentary on Hillary Clinton's eternally impending convictions.  I'm happy to tally the scoreboard any time you like.

[CF DolFan]

Wait, I thought the "conspiracy" was that Biden's corrupt DOJ was looking the other way on Hunter's blatant lawlessness...? 

Keep reaching buddy. The Feds had the same evidence in 2019 that they have now. It wasn't until they were forced by conservatives to do something 4 years later that it even was considered.

[Spider-Dan]

Keep reaching buddy. The Feds had the same evidence in 2019 that they have now.

Apparently you have forgotten who was president in 2019.  (Hint: not Joe Biden)

How can it be that Biden has personally directed his corrupt DOJ to ignore Hunter's crimes when, according to you, Trump's DOJ had the same evidence in 2019 and 2020 and did nothing about it?

The goalposts continue their journey.

[Sunstroke]

Unless there is some news about "Joe" Biden committing any crimes, then a story about Hunter Biden is as meaningful to me as a story about Beyonce's cousin getting busted for spitting on the sidewalk.

[Spider-Dan]

The whole point is that Hunter's actions are supposed to take down Joe.  That's the reason why we are endlessly hearing about laptops, or gun permits, or tax evasion.  No one cares - especially not Republicans! - about Hunter's guilt or innocence.  The GOP doesn't have dirt on Joe, so this is the next best thing.

So it's either "Biden is directing his DOJ to ignore his criminal son," or "Biden is interfering to get his son a sweetheart sentence" (note: Biden has no control over the judiciary).  And all the while, the same people who are insisting that Hunter Biden being given anything other than the maximum sentence is Obvious Corruption will, in the same breath, complain about politicized prosecutions when Trump is charged after bragging on tape about a felony as he commits it.

[pondwater]

will, in the same breath, complain about politicized prosecutions when Trump is charged after bragging on tape about a felony as he commits it.

Try again

if they have evidence that Trump actually broke laws I fully support charging him. But they don't need my support to charge him and (this is important) he has already been charged. So your question is a moot point used to redirect the original question I asked.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

That's it.  I am NEVER voting for Hunter Biden again.