I think it's partly because they can't conceive that the trial was allowed to proceed fairly without interference from Joe Biden, so there must be something more nefarious going on. Why do they think that? Because what would Trump do if the situation were reversed: Trump assumes office from Obama in 2017 At the time, there's an ongoing FBI investigation into Trump Jr, being led by an Obama appointee, because of a laptop he left at a repair shop What are the chances that Trump allows that investigation to continue? I think we can safely say zero given what we know about him and the fact that he fired Comey over an investigation into his campaign, but let's suspend disbelief and say it continues The Obama-appointed prosecutor, who the Trump AG elevated to Special Counsel (ha!) reaches a plea deal with Trump Jr; however, an Obama judge tosses the plea agreement The trial then proceeds, with an Obama prosecutor and Obama judge Makes more sense why they can't process the Hunter Biden situation, right? There's absolutely no chance that Trump would have let the above scenario play out, and since they can't fathom that Biden would simply let the legal process play out and stand by the result, there must be something else going on.
This is the lie the left lives- “The Hunter Biden laptop story was Russian disinformation but the Trump dossier was true and accurate.” The folks still embracing this lie (a significant portion of the left) lack the mental capacity to vote.
If living a lie means not giving one single zero nano-shit about either the dossier or the laptop then yes I’m living a lie. Let’s just assume the laptop is 100% legitimate. And? Lock the piece of shit up! Why do I care what the president’s son did or what happens to him? If he broke the law he should be held accountable like any other human being. Does that mean I’m “living a lie?” Good lord man.
Of course as with most things, it's more nuanced than that. The actual laptop, the piece of hardware, probably was Hunter's. But it has passed through many hands including Giuliani's that could have altered the contents of the hard drive making what's on the laptop illegitimate. The Steele Dossier was raw, unvetted intelligence gathering. While some of it has been disproven, not all of it has been. That's usually the case with raw intelligence--some truth, some lies, some agenda driven content.
Anybody projecting what sentencing might be? I think it would be a kick if Hunter and DJT were cell mates.
Slap on the wrist for the orange guy. In spite of his rants about being the biggest victim in the history of the world. he's spayshul. Laptop boy: time in lockup, followed by probation.
Damn, if lying on a application to get a gun is 'violence based,' what is actually owning a gun or buying ammo?
Sorta odd that 2nd amendment hating liberals have no problem with a drug addicted Biden having a handgun. Can you say “profoundly inconsistent and hugely subjective”? Well, yes as that is a part of the definition of the American left.
So does this mean that we found the gun charge you agree with or just when it is a useful person charged with it?
To Bidenista's, justice is: - DOJ trying to let the president's son skate. - DOJ trying to give Hunter lifetime immunity - wow - A couple of whistleblowers come forward. DOJ is spotlighted and has no plausible explanation. Forced to move forward with undeniable charges. - Hunter still tries to deny them. - Jury convicts.
Thanks for explaining how the justice system works: Prosecutors and defendants can agree to a plea deal to avoid trial That plea deal is subject to oversight from a judge If the judge doesn't agree then the parties can either re-negotiate or go to trial At trial, the defendant puts on a defense even if the evidence is overwhelming Jury finds defendant guilty
Maybe it's just me but I don't recall any of the liberal posters defending Hunter's ownership of the gun. If you could find an example please provide a link. The argument was never that Hunter had a right to the gun but that failure to disclose drug dependency on a firearm application form although technically illegal is virtually never prosecuted as a standalone crime. In fact considering that the statute under which Hunter was convicted is being challenged in another case on the basis that it constitutes an infringement of the Second Amendment what's profoundly inconsistent is the defense of Hunter's prosecution and conviction by posters who are apparently members of the MAGA cult and are otherwise strong 2A supporters and perhaps the ultimate irony is that while Hunter's attorneys are very likely to appeal his conviction on the same basis the Biden Administration's Solicitor General is defending the constitutionality of the statute under which Hunter was convicted before the Supreme Court. Although not identical, the issue in Rahimi the case currently before the SCOTUS is the prohibition of possession of a firearm by a person subject to a protective order rather than someone with drug dependency the principle is the same and it's the same statute being challenged both cases involving disclosure on the application and prohibition of possession of a firearm.
And you're an idiot if you don't think there's something fishy about going from plea deal with lifetime immunity to plea thrown out and no immunity. Not to mention how big a deal it is for a judge to throw out a plea deal from the DOJ. That doesn't happen every day.
The deal didn't involve lifetime immunity which is why Hunter's attorneys and the special counsel couldn't reach an agreement in the end. Hunter's attorneys were concerned if Trump is elected his DOJ could find some pretext that Hunter violated the agreement. In the end they would have been better off accepting the agreement although I still think it's very unlikely that Hunter will actually be incarcerated.
