Hunter Biden

[nigel99 466]

I’m glad Joe stepped in for Hunter. Although I think it acknowledges that the US judicial system is politicised. 

There becomes a time when you have to adapt to the new rules to survive. With MAGA it’s the law of the jungle.

[wmw999 2,439]

27 minutes ago, nigel99 said:

I’m glad Joe stepped in for Hunter. Although I think it acknowledges that the US judicial system is politicised. 

There becomes a time when you have to adapt to the new rules to survive. With MAGA it’s the law of the jungle.

Except it's like playing the "let's hit each other, you go first" game. The one where one person socks the other's arm lightly, in a friendly manner, and the second one wallops the first. Watch for details on who he pardons, and watch for all the "you did it first." 

Personally, I'm sick of that shit. Bad is bad, good is good, and context is context. 

Wendy P.

[Phil1111 1,149]

Sorry Nigel but you're dead wrong. Biden claims Hunter charges were politically motivated. Here are what the facts show LA Times story: "Earlier this year, a federal jury in Delaware convicted Biden of federal gun crimes, including lying about being drug-free when he purchased and briefly owned a gun while he was addicted to crack cocaine.

Biden was on trial for three felony charges, and the jury convicted him of all three. In addition to lying on a federal background check form and giving a false statement to a federal firearms dealer, he was also convicted of possessing a gun while being an illicit drug user." He lied on the gun application forms....“It was not politically motivated. Politics played no part in this whatsoever. Again, we just went by the evidence,” the juror said.

In September, Hunter Biden pleaded guilty to all nine federal tax charges he faced, just as jury selection was about to begin in a downtown Los Angeles courtroom.

The indictment in the tax case included racy details of Biden’s life between 2016 and 2019 — the period during which now he admits he failed to pay at least $1.4 million in federal taxes — including the hundreds of thousands of dollars he spent on escorts, a pornographic website, hotels, luxury car rentals and other lavish personal expenses."

Instead of letting his son face a judge who could determine if he was unfairly prosecuted when a deal was on the table. Instead of putting to rest the whole idea of a "politicized justice system". Biden just confirmed that it is.

[Phil1111 1,149]

3 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Except it's like playing the "let's hit each other, you go first" game. The one where one person socks the other's arm lightly, in a friendly manner, and the second one wallops the first. Watch for details on who he pardons, and watch for all the "you did it first." 

Personally, I'm sick of that shit. Bad is bad, good is good, and context is context. 

Wendy P.

Agree. trump's pardons are in a completely other world.

"Among those receiving pardons was Kushner’s father, Charles Kushner. The elder Kushner had been convicted for crimes that included extorting his own brother-in-law by hiring a prostitute to lure him into a sexual encounter, video recording the encounter and then sending the film to his wife, Charles Kushner’s own sister."

All of this pardon B.S. makes banana republics look princely compared to the US.

[normiss 798]

1 hour ago, Phil1111 said:

Sorry Nigel but you're dead wrong. Biden claims Hunter charges were politically motivated. Here are what the facts show LA Times story: "Earlier this year, a federal jury in Delaware convicted Biden of federal gun crimes, including lying about being drug-free when he purchased and briefly owned a gun while he was addicted to crack cocaine.

Biden was on trial for three felony charges, and the jury convicted him of all three. In addition to lying on a federal background check form and giving a false statement to a federal firearms dealer, he was also convicted of possessing a gun while being an illicit drug user." He lied on the gun application forms....“It was not politically motivated. Politics played no part in this whatsoever. Again, we just went by the evidence,” the juror said.

In September, Hunter Biden pleaded guilty to all nine federal tax charges he faced, just as jury selection was about to begin in a downtown Los Angeles courtroom.

The indictment in the tax case included racy details of Biden’s life between 2016 and 2019 — the period during which now he admits he failed to pay at least $1.4 million in federal taxes — including the hundreds of thousands of dollars he spent on escorts, a pornographic website, hotels, luxury car rentals and other lavish personal expenses."

Instead of letting his son face a judge who could determine if he was unfairly prosecuted when a deal was on the table. Instead of putting to rest the whole idea of a "politicized justice system". Biden just confirmed that it is.

I can't tell you how many people I know that smoke weed and snort coke, yet that lie on their weapons forms never bit them.

Most IRS tax issues are done once the disputed numbers are settled, paid, interest, and fines.

Yet this one guy was pursued, simply because he was the son of POTUS. The republicans shit their pants over the fact that he had a deal, which is odd because most people do that in similar cases.

Why is this one so special and dear to The Great Rapist Leader and his minions?

Meanwhile, the criminals pardoned by Trump were fine.

[nigel99 466]

46 minutes ago, normiss said:

I can't tell you how many people I know that smoke weed and snort coke, yet that lie on their weapons forms never bit them.

Most IRS tax issues are done once the disputed numbers are settled, paid, interest, and fines.

Yet this one guy was pursued, simply because he was the son of POTUS. The republicans shit their pants over the fact that he had a deal, which is odd because most people do that in similar cases.

Why is this one so special and dear to The Great Rapist Leader and his minions?

Meanwhile, the criminals pardoned by Trump were fine.

That’s what I read. Essentially this was treated differently than ‘normal’.

[normiss 798]

7 minutes ago, nigel99 said:

That’s what I read. Essentially this was treated differently than ‘normal’.

Due to the republican obsession with getting a democrat because their side keeps getting caught and convicted is what it looks like to me. Her emails, BidensUkraineRussia, just more nothing burgers than Big Macs. 

NEVER has America had a presidential administration with what appears to be a majority of them being convicted criminals.

Trump is clearly focused on continuing this in his next administration, with a much heavier foot on the pedal this time.

Having grown up during the Cold War, in a military family no less, I really thought America won the Cold War when it appeared to have bankrupted the USSR.

I was wrong. Putin won and we have yet to see the true impact of that around the world. It's coming hard and fast now.

[Phil1111 1,149]

1 hour ago, normiss said:

I can't tell you how many people I know that smoke weed and snort coke, yet that lie on their weapons forms never bit them.

Most IRS tax issues are done once the disputed numbers are settled, paid, interest, and fines.

Yet this one guy was pursued, simply because he was the son of POTUS. The republicans shit their pants over the fact that he had a deal, which is odd because most people do that in similar cases.

Why is this one so special and dear to The Great Rapist Leader and his minions?

Meanwhile, the criminals pardoned by Trump were fine.

He wasn't pursued. He came to the attention of prosecutors who made a deal to let him off, more or less. It was a trump appointed judge that threw the deal out. Thats not to say that a judge wouldn't have given him a light sentence or no jail time. The fact is he admitted to the tax charges which were serious and the gun charge is a felony.

Does the law apply to all equally or not? trump's pardons are an obscene exception. If a Black man was prosecuted for the same gun "crime" the president's son should be as well. Using trump's pardons as a example or precedent to justify Biden's actions is sinking to trump's level.

The entire concept of the pardons is intended to be centred around making right unfair convictions. US presidents are giving pardons to people they know personally or have had involvements with. All to subvert the concept of all equally before the law.

[Phil1111 1,149]

26 minutes ago, normiss said:

....Having grown up during the Cold War, in a military family no less, I really thought America won the Cold War when it appeared to have bankrupted the USSR.

I was wrong. Putin won and we have yet to see the true impact of that around the world. It's coming hard and fast now.

The west and free markets won the cold war. Putin is nothing more or less than a criminal kleptocrat. He as a temporary alliance with a communist dictator. With a family dictatorship and a Islamic theocracy. Not one of which enjoys domestic popular support. Each of which is propped up by the power of a gun.

After trump's second term, American justice will come roaring back and trump will spend the remainder of his life buried in litigation. IMO

[jakee 1,489]

6 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

Agree. trump's pardons are in a completely other world.

"Among those receiving pardons was Kushner’s father, Charles Kushner. The elder Kushner had been convicted for crimes that included extorting his own brother-in-law by hiring a prostitute to lure him into a sexual encounter, video recording the encounter and then sending the film to his wife, Charles Kushner’s own sister."

All of this pardon B.S. makes banana republics look princely compared to the US.

And Trump just made that same criminal scumbag Charles Kushner the ambassador to France - one of the absolute prime cushy socialite reward posts out there. 
 

Hunter’s pardon sucks, but Republicans are literally not allowed to be angry about it. They’ve just elected an man who campaigned on the principle of doing the exact same thing, wholesale. 

[SkyDekker 1,465]

9 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

: "Earlier this year, a federal jury in Delaware convicted Biden of federal gun crimes, including lying about being drug-free when he purchased and briefly owned a gun while he was addicted to crack cocaine.

Of course charges were brought in a court not bound by the 5th Circuit ruling that prior drug use cannot infringe on 2nd Amendment rights.....

But, I am sure that wasn't political at all.......

[tkhayes 348]

22 hours ago, normiss said:

Due to the republican obsession with getting a democrat because their side keeps getting caught and convicted is what it looks like to me. Her emails, BidensUkraineRussia, just more nothing burgers than Big Macs. 

NEVER has America had a presidential administration with what appears to be a majority of them being convicted criminals.

Trump is clearly focused on continuing this in his next administration, with a much heavier foot on the pedal this time.

Having grown up during the Cold War, in a military family no less, I really thought America won the Cold War when it appeared to have bankrupted the USSR.

I was wrong. Putin won and we have yet to see the true impact of that around the world. It's coming hard and fast now.

just another nail in the coffin of America.  We are truly finished as a civilized and law-and-order country.  It is done, finished, kaput, the corruption that is being installed will go on for generations and is pretty much impossible to undo.  Bannon said they will now rule for 50 years.  I have no trouble believing that.  Just look at any number of authoritarian governments in the world today and that existed throughout the last 50-60 years.  All of them either still exist as authoritarian, or were only undone by violence

And even when I say 'undone', that means they still do not operate as a functioning democracy or any semblance of normal or sane government.  The damage that will be done can never be undone.  We are now officially a banana republic.

[wmw999 2,439]

Newt Gingrich was the first republican Speaker of the House in 40 years. Of course, previous Democratic SOHs were dealmakers, and the current Republican SOH approach is pretty exclusionary, but I'm hoping that's just a reaction to the pendulum swing. Hope hope hope. Because there's absolutely nothing I can do about it.

Wendy P.

[BartsDaddy 7]

On 12/4/2024 at 1:53 PM, SkyDekker said:

Of course charges were brought in a court not bound by the 5th Circuit ruling that prior drug use cannot infringe on 2nd Amendment rights.....

But, I am sure that wasn't political at all.......

That wouldnt have helped. He was charged with lying on a form 4473. If he would have told the truth on it and then been denied because of that than the 5th ciruits ruling may have helped him. As it stands his 2nd amendment rights were not infringed since he was able to purchase the firearm.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Just now, BartsDaddy said:

That wouldnt have helped. He was charged with lying on a form 4473. If he would have told the truth on it and then been denied because of that than the 5th ciruits ruling may have helped him. As it stands his 2nd amendment rights were not infringed since he was able to purchase the firearm.

Lol, that's not how this works.

If denying gun ownership due to drug use is illegal, then the answer to the question is fruit from a poisonous tree.

[BartsDaddy 7]

20 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Lol, that's not how this works.

If denying gun ownership due to drug use is illegal, then the answer to the question is fruit from a poisonous tree.

Wrong. Because he has no proof that it would have been denied because of that. Until someone gets denied for admitting that on form 4473 and file a law suit because of that they are able to keep the question on the form. There are plenty of gun rights organisations that would gladly take the case. Although it would take many years to get it changed, Because even if the plantif won it would be appealed and then held up in en bock for as long as posible. Thats the way government deals with gun cases. There are 3 cases now in California that the law was found to be unconstitutional that 10 years later are still tied up in courts.

Edited December 5, 2024 by BartsDaddy

[tkhayes 348]

10 hours ago, BartsDaddy said:

Wrong. Because he has no proof that it would have been denied because of that. Until someone gets denied for admitting that on form 4473 and file a law suit because of that they are able to keep the question on the form. There are plenty of gun rights organisations that would gladly take the case. Although it would take many years to get it changed, Because even if the plantif won it would be appealed and then held up in en bock for as long as posible. Thats the way government deals with gun cases. There are 3 cases now in California that the law was found to be unconstitutional that 10 years later are still tied up in courts.

arguably it is unconstitutional to not allow 5 years olds to open carry Glocks in schools.... If these three cases ruled it unconstitutional then how does it still exist?  Apparently the rulings , if they exist at all, have little or no weight.

[BartsDaddy 7]

3 hours ago, tkhayes said:

arguably it is unconstitutional to not allow 5 years olds to open carry Glocks in schools.... If these three cases ruled it unconstitutional then how does it still exist?  Apparently the rulings , if they exist at all, have little or no weight.

Because the state of california applealed it, it went to the 9th circuit court andthey issued a stay until it was setled. they then sent back to the lower court wich upheld the previous ruling then it was appealed again and now it is in en bock and who knows how long until they actualy rule on it. but the law stays in effect until they do. so they string it out as long as they can because they know they have allready lost

[tkhayes 348]

54 minutes ago, BartsDaddy said:

"so they string it out as long as they can because they know they have allready lost"

Does that logic apply to Trump?

[BartsDaddy 7]

23 minutes ago, tkhayes said:

Does that logic apply to Trump?

It applies to a lot of issues.

[tkhayes 348]

8 minutes ago, BartsDaddy said:

It applies to a lot of issues.

not an answer to my question.  You appear to have a problem with the way a judicial system works.....  What would your solution be then?

[BartsDaddy 7]

I think alot of things can be improved. But since i can not change any of them i dont spend much time dwelling them. the only thing that would come of posting them here is people would claim that i said "a" and therefore i support "b"and therefore im against "c" and "d" ad infinitum. thats why i dont post here verry much.

[brenthutch 441]

It’s not the pardon it was the repeated lies that Joe was not going to pardon Hunter (because of the deep respect he had for the judicial system and the rule of law).  The fact of the matter is that Hunter was going to be pardoned all along but it was to be Kamala who issued the pardon. When Trump won that all changed. The vast and comprehensive scope of the pardon is a tacit admission of guilt in other activities Hunter was engaged in otherwise Joe could have just commuted any sentence Hunter was given.

Edited December 8, 2024 by brenthutch

[normiss 798]

11 hours ago, brenthutch said:

It’s not the pardon it was the repeated lies that Joe was not going to pardon Hunter (because of the deep respect he had for the judicial system and the rule of law).  The fact of the matter is that Hunter was going to be pardoned all along but it was to be Kamala who issued the pardon. When Trump won that all changed. The vast and comprehensive scope of the pardon is a tacit admission of guilt in other activities Hunter was engaged in otherwise Joe could have just commuted any sentence Hunter was given.

Smoking some of Rich’s weed tonight?

[brenthutch 441]

10 minutes ago, normiss said:

Smoking some of Rich’s weed tonight?

Then why did Joe pardon Hunter after he repeatedly said he wouldn’t? Why the sweeping scope of the pardon when a simple commutation would suffice?