The first son’s attorneys argued the case against their client is a “selective and vindictive prosecution” and “a breach of separation of powers” because special counsel “buckled under political pressure” from former President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans.
Noreika did not find the argument convincing, blasting Hunter Biden’s claim as “nonsensical.” ~ NY Post
The defense is “nonsensical”. Are we to believe that the first son is not getting a fair shake because he’s a Biden? His father is the president.
What will really be interesting though, is whether Hunter will argue that the statute that makes it a crime to possess a firearm as someone who is a user or addicted to drugs is unconstitutional. The new test as decided in the SCOTUS Bruen case is based on the “text, history, and tradition” of the 2nd Amendment.
Guy Relford:
We’ve already seen decisions that say that non-violent felons being prohibited from possessing firearms, that’s unconstitutional. If you don’t have a history violence, and you’re not considered being dangerous, there’s not a history or tradition of depriving you of your 2nd Amendment rights.
So, it’s possible that Hunter could appeal this case all the way to the Supreme Court arguing the constitutionality of the case being made against him. If the Supreme Court were to take his case and rule in Hunter’s favor, Guy laughingly remarks:
Joe Biden’s son will have just made available the 2nd Amendment rights to potentially hundreds of thousands, if not millions of drug users in this country. How do you think Dad is going to think about that?
Please listen to the discussion in full on the player above.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO THE PODCAST
The Gun Guy Podcast on Apple Podcasts
The Gun Guy Podcast | Podcast on Spotify
♫ The Gun Guy Podcast | IHeart Radio
Listen to the show in its entirety along with older shows here:
Watch the show in its entirety on YouTube:
