For months, I have been expressing disbelief that Hunter Biden and his defense team were going to take the gun case to trial. Even on the eve of the trial, I thought that the defense might snap into sanity and plead out the case. The reason was simple. A guilty plea would have materially improved the chances that Hunter could get probation and avoid jail by accepting responsibility. Conversely, a trial in a case with overwhelming evidence of guilt would make it less likely that a judge would depart from the guidelines at sentencing. Nevertheless, Hunter went forward with a nullification strategy and, in so doing, it may have nullified his best chance to reduce the risk of jail time.
After the verdict, I have been stating that jail time is a real possibility in this case despite the fact that this is a first offender. Frankly, I do not see any real need for incarceration in this type of case and many judges would be likely tempted to grant “downward departures” in sentencing or disregard any recommended prison sentence.
It is also important to note that, after the Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v. Booker, sentencing guidelines are discretionary. Judge Maryellen Noreika could sentence him to probation in light of his struggle with his addiction and his status as a first offender (as well as the absence of other aggravating factors).
Yet, while many view this as a relatively minor offense, the sentencing guidelines do not.
Judges regularly sentence people to prison for these offenses. The sentencing guidelines put the recommendation at 15 to 21 months in prison. Moreover, over 90 percent of those convicted are sentenced to prison time.
The chances of probation are increased with guilty pleas, which generally allow for a downward departure of two levels for taking responsibility. That may not seem like a lot but it could prove determinative for a judge on a marginal call over the need for incarceration. By pursuing the nullification strategy, Hunter lost that benefit and now would have to belatedly accept responsibility just before sentencing after putting the court and public through a trial.
If the defense reviewed Judge Noreika’s past cases, they would have seen that she takes a tough approach on gun cases. In May, she sentenced defendant Zhi Dong to a year in jail for lying about his address on a gun form. Notably, that was twice the recommended sentence of the prosecutors.
One point of distinction is that Dong purchased 19 pistols and 10 “lower receivers” rather than the single gun purchased by Biden. It is also notable that the prosecutors were only seeking six months of incarceration in that arguably more serious case.
The defense strategy also makes it more difficult for Special Counsel David Weiss, who has shown remarkable lenience at critical stages of his investigation. It was Weiss who allowed the most serious tax offenses to lapse under a statute of limitations (despite reportedly having an agreement to extend the period). It was Weiss who sought to give Hunter an obscene sweetheart deal that would have avoided any jail time and given him immunity for all crimes.
Many remain skeptical of Weiss and his actions in this case. For that reason, the failure to plead guilty puts Weiss in a box. Given the sentencing guidelines of prison time, any recommendations for probation would be read as more favoritism for the president’s son. Weiss may feel compelled to follow the recommendations to show that Hunter is being treated the same as other defendants.
Given the calculation for the three felonies, the defense had to know that they were increasing the chances of prison time by pursuing a nullification defense. The hope was that Wilmington is Bidentown and no local jury would convict the son of the favorite son of Delaware.
It didn’t work out that way. The team seemed to overplay its hand with defenses that were so implausible as to be insulting for the jury. They suggested that Hunter might not have checked the box or signed the form during a brief window where he was not using drugs. The prosecutors demolished those defenses within two days of the trial.
Accepting responsibility after a trial does not guarantee a downward departure. For example, in U.S. v. Womack, a defendant sought a departure for accepting responsibility before trial as a drug dealer. However, he still went to trial on other issues and the trial judge refused any departure on the basis of his earlier admissions of guilt. It found that he was still minimizing his responsibility for the underlying crimes. That decision was upheld on appeal.
Now, Hunter may have painted both the prosecutors and the court into a corner. In a play for a hung jury, Hunter may have hoisted himself on his own petard. Guilt was never in doubt, but his efforts also removed any question of accepting responsibility before he was facing actual sentencing for his offenses.
Interesting but a couple of corrections. Prof Turley writes the difference between the Dong case and Bidens is that Dong purchased multiple firearms. That’s half correct. That is “one” of the differences but certainly not the primary one.
The real difference and the one the made the judge come down on him was it was clear to the DA and the judge that Dong was “trafficking” in firearms, just the government couldn’t prove it apparently.
He didn’t just “lie about his address”, he bought a whole slew of firearms in Delaware using a fake Delaware drivers license, then he drove the guns from Delaware all the way across the country to California where he left them.
They knew he was trafficking in guns he bought a small arsenal with a fake drivers license then drove them 3000 miles across multiple state lines to hand them off to where they’d be distributed. I don’t see many similarities between the two cases.
Also if pleading guilty would help him then its important to point out that Dong plead guilty and it didn’t seem to help him. So I think the two cases are quite different.
See below, as Dennis McIntyre, the brilliant “lawyer” demonstrates an utter miscomprehension and ignorance of the law.
Trump, when told he could not possess a firearm while awaiting trial, or own one if convicted, gifted his guns to each of his sons, as is his right to do.
Dennis would have you believe that instead, Trump just let NY have them. LMAO he never even stops to think if the bull shit he reads in Vox is even plausible.
Dennis and the left….just makin’ shit up.
See below, as Dennis the Draft Dodger parachutes in like a coward Gazan terrorist, laying his steaming turd after everyone has moved on. He likes for his Supermarket Tabloid to get archived at the top of the board.
So archive this. Dennis McIntyre is under investigation by the Cherokee County, TX sheriff, for his involvement in a child pornography ring. He is what we refer to in law enforcement as an unconvicted pedophile.
Jonathan: The real Q is whether DJT is more likely to get jail time? And who says DJT doesn’t get special treatment by the criminal justice system? On Monday DJT met with his probation officer for a presentencing interview. He got to do that in a video conference call from Mar-a-Lago. What other “convicted felon” would be allowed that privilege?
In the 30″ interview DJT had to admit he owned 3 firearms–two of which he turned in as a condition of release in all his other criminal indictments. But DJT said he still possesses/owns a third weapon he said had been ‘lawfully” shipped back to Mar-a-Lago. Wait a minute! Under federal law neither a criminal defendant or “convicted felon” can possess/own a weapon.
No doubt this information will be brought to the attention of Justice Merchan when he sentences DJT on 7/11–as well as the other judges presiding over his other criminal cases. In any other case a criminal defendant who violates his terms of release would immediately be put in jail. DJT is in flagrant violation of both his conditions of release and his status as a “convicted felon”. He has now committed another felony. Will that factor in when Justice Merchan makes his sentencing decision? No doubt it will.
Many get to video interview their pretrial information to probation. There’s nothing unusual about that. I’ve spent 27 years in the federal criminal justice system in five years in municipal federal justice system.
I won’t even address the other absurdities of the DJT Charges and trial. No one with even rudimentary, legal knowledge or understanding, believes that DJ T has received any preferential treatment. Quite the contrary.
“Under federal law neither a criminal defendant or “convicted felon” can possess/own a weapon.”
Here, Dennis the pedophile shows that he does not understand Federal law.
Also, he is lying about the interview, because Trump gave his guns to his sons before the conviction, which is perfectly his right to do.
Also, as proof Dennis is lying, DJT owned about 200 firearms.
When will the Sergeant at Arms arrest AG Garland and force him to comply with lawful Congressional subpoenas?
Garland’s lawlessness cannot go unmet by force of law.
“What this case does is it undermines Trump’s claim that the DOJ is [. . .] weaponized.”
A thug kneecaps James. Then he kneecaps Susie.
The Left’s conclusion from the Susie kneecapping is: See, James wasn’t kneecapped.
Nice non sequitur.
Jail ALL Bidens
For whatever reason, the many nullifiers on the jury changed their minds overnight, between days 1 and 2 of deliberation.
No facts changed overnight. But jury votes did. Is this common?
Politics and tests of which way the wind is blowing nothwithstanding, however, Hunter Biden will be pardoned or otherwise sent away with a finger wag before January 2025.
For one thing, I believe Hunter Biden may have a lot of dirt on his father.
For another, I don’t think President Biden thinks Hunter Biden did anything wrong. Not based on the fact pattern in his conviction here, but based on the fact that Hunter Biden is Hunter Biden.
Rumors in media that Biden May commute , ( not pardon) Hunter’s sentence
Hunter’s lawyers went to trial because they had nothing to lose and everything to gain if there was a hung jury. Despite what the Big Guy said about not pardoning Hunter, nobody believes that including Hunter and his lawyers. However, if there ended up a hung jury than the Big Guy wouldn’t need to pardon Hunter, at least for a while. The game plan now is to delay sentencing for as long as possible and to keep Hunter out of jail pending appeal. They just need to keep Hunter from being sentenced to jail until the day after the election, at which point the Big Guy can pardon him without political consequences. That’s what’s going on here.
“It’s the [Obama], stupid!”
– James Carville
___________________
Andrew C. McCarthy wrote, “[If Comey had indicted Hillary, Comey would have convicted Obama].”
Andrew C. McCarthy will soon write, “[If Weiss indicts Hunter, Weiss will convict Obama].”
Oh, wait. That already happened, didn’t it?
My bad.
Indiana Rep Victoria Spartz speaks for many Americans who fear their Federal Government
Now that US House has held Merrick Garland in contempt, it is time to arrest him. If he does not cooperate then maybe raid his house while he sleeps with his family, and intimidate the f*** out of his wife and kids like his Gestapo troops does to Americans
Perp Walk is Floyd James Estovir.
We are all Spartacus
I am you, you are me, he is her, they are you, we are him, he is it, you are them, it is you, we are them, it is her, she is them, yours are mine, it is ours, his is hers, yours is theirs,, mine is theirs, and you have way too much time on your hands.
I am yours, you are mine, we are what we are
Expert texpert choking smoker don’t you think the joker laughs at you
Would one of you constitutional scholars cite the Constitution for a requirement for the completion of a form for the acquisition of an arm that all citizens enjoy the right to keep and bear?
There is no legal basis for the requirement to complete a form related to the purchase of a gun other than to establish citizenship and the age of legal majority.
A valid court order may preclude acquisition of arms.
“cite the Constitution for a requirement for the completion of a form for the acquisition of an arm that all citizens enjoy the right to keep and bear?”
Red herring alert!
There is no such requirement.
Any person wishing to acquire a gun, other than from a GOVERNMENT LICENSED manufacturer, importer, or dealer, may do so without filling out a form.
Waters, red anonymous, Chuckiechan and Estovir are all the same poster.
I am Spartacus!
No, I am Spartacus!
No, I am Spartacus
Please cite the Constitution for any enumerated power of GOVERNMENT to LICENSE a manufacturer, importer, or dealer.
Manufacturers are private property and only the owner has the power to “claim and exercise” dominion thereof.
The closest you will come is Article 1, Section 8, which simply regulates commerce – buying and selling – among nations, States, and Indian tribes to preclude bias and favoritism.
What you are referring to is the Communist Manifesto which includes a “dictatorship of the proletariat (i.e. hired help)” that holds dominion and forcibly imposes central planning, control of the means of production, redistribution of wealth, and social engineering, none of which is invalid, illegitimate, illicit, and unconstitutional in the United States of America.
The Communist Manifesto is unconstitutional and its supporters are direct and mortal enemies of the American thesis of freedom and self-reliance, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, actual Americans, and America.
The Constitution provides absolute maximal freedom to individuals while it severely limits and restricts government.
Some refer to it as the land of the free; you may have heard of it.
Correction: Please modify “invalid” to valid, etc., line 7.
Thanks for that response, comrade.
You implied there was a requirement to fill out a form in order to acquire a gun.
You engaged in the tactics of the communists. There is no such requirement. That is a LIE. It could have been a misstatement, or you overlooked it, but because you moved on to obfuscating like a good lefty, it makes you a liar.
This is the problem with extremists on both sides. Point out their lies, and they just want to move on to the next. You asked a specific question, and got a very specific answer.
Your response is this:
Some refer to it as the land of the free; you may have heard of it.
That’s called gaslighting. You may have heard New George the Moron use it.
Article 1, Section 8, which simply regulates commerce – buying and selling – among nations, States, and Indian tribes to preclude bias and favoritism.
McCulloch v Maryland AND Marbury v Madison predate the Communist Manifesto or “Crazy Abe’s dissolution of America”.
There is nothing “simple” about regulating commerce. Not now, not then. The founders knew this, which is WHY they gave that power to Congress. As well as the power to make laws necessary and proper to execute that power.
Please show me the words “bias and favoritism” in Art 1, Section 8, Clause 3.
Makin’ shit up is a lefty trait, comrade.
The American Founders and Framers were intelligent, sufficient to write and use words accurately and correctly.
Commerce IS nothing more than simply buying and selling.
The Constitution provides Congress the power to regulate BUYING and SELLING (i.e. commerce) among nations, States, and Indian tribes.
The Constitution uses words and words mean things.
__________________________________________________________
Merriam-Webster
commerce
noun
com·merce ˈkä-(ˌ)mərs
2: the exchange or buying and selling of commodities on a large scale involving transportation from place to place
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
commodity
noun
1: an economic good: such as
a: a product of agriculture or mining
agricultural commodities like grain and corn
b: an article of commerce especially when delivered for shipment
reported the damaged commodities to officials
c: a mass-produced unspecialized product
commodity chemicals
commodity memory chips
2a: something useful or valued
that valuable commodity, patience
also : thing, entity
b: convenience, advantage
… the many commodities incidental to the life of a public office …—
Charles Lamb
3: a good or service whose wide availability typically leads to smaller profit margins and diminishes the importance of factors (such as brand name) other than price
4: one that is subject to ready exchange or exploitation within a market
… stars as individuals and as commodities of the film industry.—Film Quarterly
5obsolete : quantity, lot
“As well as the power to make laws necessary and proper to execute that power.”
– Waters
___________
You are deliberately misunderstanding the words NECESSARY and PROPER.
Correct. Congress has the power to make the statutory laws necessary and proper to execute the clear fundamental law – that is ONLY to “regulate commerce among nations, states, and Indian tribes” – to regulate COMMERCE, as in “BUYING and SELLING,” AND NOTHING ELSE, no other aspect or facet of design, engineering, manufacturing, mining or marketing of any commodity, as in product, article, good, or service. It is NOT NECESSARY AND PROPER to regulate anything unrelated to commerce, or the buying and selling of goods and services, among nations, states and Indian tribes.
The only “commerce” to be regulated is that buying and selling among nations, states, and Indian tribes for the purpose of maintaining commercial equity, or the absence of bias and favoritism, among them.
All private property companies, organizations, corporations, etc., are free, and wise, to self-regulate and protect themselves from destructive litigation, protecting consumers as a corollary.
It’s called the land of the free, not the “dictatorship of the proletariat,” comrade.
Take a good look in the mirror, comrade.
You are making —- up, imagining that anything and everything you like is necessary and proper.
Wrong!
The only “commerce” to be regulated is that buying and selling among nations, states, and Indian tribes for the purpose of maintaining commercial equity, or the absence of bias and favoritism, among them.
Makin’ shit up. Well done comrade.
You are making —- up, imagining that anything and everything you like is necessary and proper.
Putting words in my mouth. Another marxist trait. Well done, comrade
You are deliberately misunderstanding the words NECESSARY and PROPER.
Defining my thoughts. Another marxist tactic. Well done, comrade.
Before we move on to commerce, lets see how serious you are about honest debate.
Are you prepared to apologize for, excuse, or mitigate your lie? Specifically
a requirement for the completion of a form for the acquisition of an arm
Do you admit that there is no such requirement? Words matter.
What?!!!
Every American who purchases a gun is illegally and unconstitutionally required to complete a form.
The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed…
in any way, including by the completion of forms.
Every American who purchases a gun is illegally and unconstitutionally required to complete a form.
Ignorant and specious.
I LEGALLY own no less than 30 guns which i purchased without filling out a form. I have another 2 dozen that i purchased and had to fill out a form. Come to my house and I will LEGALLY sell you any one of them, your pick. And you will fill out no form.
We cannot have this conversation if you are either a) ignorant of the law or b) willing to blatantly lie
Please cite the Federal regulation requiring the filling out of a form for “acquiring a gun”.
The true extent of the Biden Criminal Cartel will never be revealed to the public.
But rest assured, the “authorities” we, the deplorables, are all supposed to “respect & obey” know the truth…
and these so-called Intelligence & Law enforcement “authorities” are in service to protecting the Criminal Cartel that is the U.S. Government….(not the American people)!!
Do not confuse the situation.
The Fake News, run by the CIA, will make sure the public knows only the lies they want “out there.”
Biden, Inc. is a crime family. But rest assured, the gangsters in Washington, DC are all in on the criminality.
They are ALL IN ON IT.
This is a Gangster Government that is HOSTILE to its Citizens.
You know it is a set up aimed at Trump going behind bars. We just do more theater than normal banana republics.
@Chuckiechan
Yup. My thoughts exactly, and no one need share my cynicism. Do NOT fall for it. These people are beyond despicable, and this is just another cunning machination. I’m sure it was all prearranged for L’il Biden before he even set foot in the courthouse.
Again, I admire the Professor’s optimism and integrity, but he is placing faith is some seriously shady people.