Kansas Crimson

KUTradition wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 4:18 pm https://salon.com/2023/06/20/worse-than ... heir-face/

Feral wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 4:25 pm Today In: "The dildo of consequences rarely arrives lubed" :

Sparko wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 6:34 pm Nah. These are mostly charges that would never have been brought save for the neon "find something to prosecute him to death" sign.

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 8:22 pm OMG! You cereal, Clark?

And other SDNY chief Andy McCarthy (the guy who prosecuted the Blind Sheik) said that "Democrats are not hiding the two-tiered justice system; they’re flaunting it . . . quite intentionally."

So...? Goodjobgoodpost?

Feral wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 10:05 pm

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 8:22 pm OMG! You cereal, Clark?

And other SDNY chief Andy McCarthy (the guy who prosecuted the Blind Sheik) said that "Democrats are not hiding the two-tiered justice system; they’re flaunting it . . . quite intentionally."

So...? Goodjobgoodpost?

^^^

I think we can all agree that the DOJ should spend another 5 years investigating Hunter, too.

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Sat Apr 01, 2023 3:13 pm "You got Trump fer boolshit! Well...whatabout Hunter? We're gonna get him now too!"

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 10:04 pm Indeed, as McCarthy notes:

Biden apologists have tried to minimize that transaction as a “lie and try” case, which they say is often not prosecuted. But such non-prosecution (though it shouldn’t happen) occurs because of what you’d infer from the “try” part — i.e., the liar got caught and failed to obtain the gun. Hunter’s case, to the contrary, is a lie and succeed case. He got the gun. What’s more, he was then seen playing with it while cavorting with an “escort” (see the New York Post’s pictorial, if you’ve got the stomach for it). Shortly afterwards, he and his then-paramour — Hallie Biden, the widow of his older brother — managed to lose the gun near a school (it was later found by someone else).

Those are the kinds of gun cases that get charged by the Justice Department even if the suspect hasn’t, in addition, committed tax felonies by dodging taxes on the millions of dollars he was paid, apparently for being named Biden. Yet after refusing for years to appoint a special counsel despite the five-alarm conflict of interest attendant to investigating the president’s son ( . . . and family . . . and the president himself), the Biden Justice Department is permitting Hunter Biden to dispose of the case with misdemeanor tax charges that will allow for a probation sentence, and diversion — essentially, no prosecution — on the gun felony that would result in imprisonment for most Americans who engaged in similar conduct.

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Jun 21, 2023 8:14 am

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 10:04 pm Indeed, as McCarthy notes:

Biden apologists have tried to minimize that transaction as a “lie and try” case, which they say is often not prosecuted. But such non-prosecution (though it shouldn’t happen) occurs because of what you’d infer from the “try” part — i.e., the liar got caught and failed to obtain the gun. Hunter’s case, to the contrary, is a lie and succeed case. He got the gun. What’s more, he was then seen playing with it while cavorting with an “escort” (see the New York Post’s pictorial, if you’ve got the stomach for it). Shortly afterwards, he and his then-paramour — Hallie Biden, the widow of his older brother — managed to lose the gun near a school (it was later found by someone else).

Those are the kinds of gun cases that get charged by the Justice Department even if the suspect hasn’t, in addition, committed tax felonies by dodging taxes on the millions of dollars he was paid, apparently for being named Biden. Yet after refusing for years to appoint a special counsel despite the five-alarm conflict of interest attendant to investigating the president’s son ( . . . and family . . . and the president himself), the Biden Justice Department is permitting Hunter Biden to dispose of the case with misdemeanor tax charges that will allow for a probation sentence, and diversion — essentially, no prosecution — on the gun felony that would result in imprisonment for most Americans who engaged in similar conduct.

Yea, OK. Pretty sure that there are ample examples of rich, white non-Bidens who get similar sentences for poor handling of guns that end up not being used in any crimes and for not paying taxes that they ended up just paying late.

Even more ridiculous,

"Hunter Biden was charged with violating a provision of 18 U.S. Code § 922 that prohibits anyone “who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance” from possessing a firearm"

How many times do you even SEE that charge made? Anyone see any other coked up rich white guys facing charges just for possessing a weapon they legally purchased and did not use to commit any crime? Half of Wall Street would be facing charges.

Feral wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 10:57 pm It sounds like your problem is with the deal that was negotiated by a Trump-appointed US Attorney in Delaware, David Weiss, who said he had "ultimate authority over the matter", to decide "where, when, and whether to file charges". And, if the deal is so egregious, a federal judge, who I heard was also appointed by Trump, has to approve the deal, but can change it if s/he doesn't think it fits the charges.

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 21, 2023 9:12 am

Feral wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 10:57 pm It sounds like your problem is with the deal that was negotiated by a Trump-appointed US Attorney in Delaware, David Weiss, who said he had "ultimate authority over the matter", to decide "where, when, and whether to file charges". And, if the deal is so egregious, a federal judge, who I heard was also appointed by Trump, has to approve the deal, but can change it if s/he doesn't think it fits the charges.

Nah. My "problem" isn't with the deal. It's with the hippo-crits.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 21, 2023 9:42 am

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 21, 2023 9:12 am

Feral wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 10:57 pm It sounds like your problem is with the deal that was negotiated by a Trump-appointed US Attorney in Delaware, David Weiss, who said he had "ultimate authority over the matter", to decide "where, when, and whether to file charges". And, if the deal is so egregious, a federal judge, who I heard was also appointed by Trump, has to approve the deal, but can change it if s/he doesn't think it fits the charges.

Nah. My "problem" isn't with the deal. It's with the hippo-crits.

All of them? On both sides?