Hunter’s Gun Charge Is A Big Problem For The Biden Crime Family thumbnail

Hunter’s Gun Charge Is A Big Problem For The Biden Crime Family

By Josh Hammer

Thursday’s indictment of presidential prodigal son Hunter Biden on three gun-related criminal counts is the latest twist in the long, winding and rapidly escalating saga that is the Biden crime family.

The indictment, served up by U.S. Attorney — and now “special counsel,” despite the fact 28 Code of Federal Regulations Sec. 600.3 requires that a special counsel be “selected from outside the United States Government” — David C. Weiss, comes a month and a half after Weiss’ obfuscatory plea agreement was summarily rejected by Judge Maryellen Noreika. That prior plea deal, curiously, would have handled the same gun crimes for which Hunter has now been indicted with a slap-on-the-wrist pretrial diversion agreement. The fact is, Hunter transparently lied that he was “not an unlawful user of, or addicted to, any stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance” when he filled out a Firearms Transaction Record to purchase a Colt revolver in 2018. It is indisputable that Hunter was a drug addict at the time he purchased the firearm; he openly admitted as much in his ill-advised 2021 memoir.

True, the third count of Weiss’ indictment, invoking the federal provision (18 U.S. Code Sec. 922(g)(3)) that criminalizes possession of a firearm when one is “an unlawful user of, or addicted to, any stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance,” is arguably unconstitutional under the Supreme Court’s current Second Amendment jurisprudence; in fact, just last month, a panel of the conservative-leaning U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held just that. But Delaware is not part of the Fifth Circuit, which only covers Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. A criminal defense on such grounds, moreover, would put someone named “Biden” in the highly ironic position of advancing a maximalist, National Rifle Association-style Second Amendment argument. And even if Hunter did make such an argument, the first two counts of the indictment would remain untouched. In sum, the three criminal counts could in theory — and assuredly only in theory — yield up to 25 years in the slammer. (RELATED: JOSH HAMMER: Biden Can’t Gaslight Struggling Americans Into Thinking His Economy Is Good)

At first blush, Weiss’ 180-degree turn over the course of a mere month and a half gives off the impression of someone who got their hand caught in the cookie jar, and who is now penitent. Under this theory of the case, Weiss was thoroughly embarrassed by Judge Noreika’s rejection of his murky, sweetheart plea agreement, and he now seeks to redeem himself. That is a plausible explanation, but it is probably wrong.

Zoom out a little bit. Earlier this week, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) announced the commencement of a formal impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden, the “big guy” implicated in Hunter’s myriad shady overseas business dealings. There is increasing evidence that Joe knew all about, at minimum, and probably even personally profited from Hunter’s foreign dalliances with Ukrainian oligarchs, Romanian tycoons, Chinese investors, and others. At the same time, the senescent octogenarian faces increasingly vocal calls from Democratic Party voters, ruling class elites, and Regime-approved media apparatchiks alike to pack it in and not seek reelection next November. On Tuesday evening, for instance, Regime stenographer David Ignatius used his Washington Post column to argue, in a straightforwardly titled enough manner: “President Biden should not run again in 2024.”

Perhaps Hunter had a little chat with his father, wherein Don Corleone — sorry, the president of the United States — instructed his addlebrained son to take one for the team and be a useful fall guy. The Weiss indictment sure does make for a nice, shiny distraction amidst all the smoke now engulfing the “big guy.” Is this indictment intended to make McCarthy and House Republicans forget about the impeachment inquiry they just opened? Even worse, is this where the Weiss “special counsel” probe somehow ends — thus letting Hunter off scot-free for his significantly more dastardly, possibly money laundering- or Foreign Agents Registration Act-implicating business pursuits overseas?

Ultimately and perhaps most importantly, the Biden Regime’s handling of the Hunter indictment will tell us everything we need to know about the Regime’s nature. It will be a moment of truth — a “put up or shut up” moment. If Weiss ends his investigation here, content with his firearms charges and willing to look the other way as to Hunter’s presidential impeachment-adjacent foreign bribery and corruption, then the Regime will necessarily vindicate the conservatives who have long lambasted its “two-tier system of justice.” That same conclusion also holds if Hunter somehow avoids all jail time, in a possible future plea agreement, for firearms offenses that would certainly land anyone else in prison for years.

Weiss’ indictment has thus clarified the stakes. We all now know what is on the line — and it isn’t just Hunter’s fate as a free man.

Game on.


This article was published by the Daily Caller News Foundation and is reproduced with permission.


As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.