politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
I actually agree with this but its also an impossible situation in the sense that he has to answer for shit and society must answer by fully pursuing and prosecuting any rich asshole who plays games with the system. Hunter has a mitigating defense in the sense he was a drug addict who had major addiction issues but there needs to be consistency and predictabillity in how and to whom these cases are investigated, charged, prosecuted, and punished.
Indeed there should be consistency. What would normally happen in this situation was what would have happened if the judge hadn't blocked the original plea deal.
But the judge, another Trump appointee, no doubt saw the same opportunity that the GOP in congress did and rejected the plea deal. Because Hunter Biden is the son of the current Democratic president, he is not getting the same treatment that anyone else would have gotten in this situation.
In fact, the law about drug users being in possession of firearms is one that has been effectively ruled unconstitutional in the fifth circuit thanks to challenges to it and recent SCOTUS rulings.
Also...
Republicans want the law overturned but not until Hunter is convicted and sentenced for it. That is not consistent application of the law, that is political gamesmanship.
He's being prosecuted for something people are almost never prosecuted for, especially when they pay the money back, which he did. On top of that, there's a gun charge which, for some reason I can't imagine, Republicans aren't rushing to his defense about.
Yeah this is bullshit theater. But the prosecution decision came from the DoJ, not Congress. It’s not that you’re wrong per se it’s just that I find it hard to get up in arms about powerful people being held to account
DoJ wants to appear that it isn't working for the president, like it was with the previous guy, and they absolutely can be influenced to maintain that image.
This is unusual, as it never goes that far because of unpaid taxes. You just get a large fines, and apparently he already paid off everything.
I normally would be ok with this as, he committed a crime and he should be treated the same as anyone else, but can't help but notice that looks like he is treated worse to show the office is impartial.
My fear is that if judge clears him of any wrongdoing there still will be an outrage.
There will be an outrage over something no matter what. They will make one. There is no circumstance where republicans don’t make, find, exaggerate, or straight up fabricate outrage.
Thats the problem. Enough of the fucking kiddie gloves with rich fucks. Prosecute the fuck out of it and do that thing from Shrek where he binds the fuck out of the dragon in the crosshairs of the chains with the big fucking sword. I wish the US would go China all over rich fucks who pull this shit over and over again and only ever have to pay a consolation fee
Yeah it’s hard to describe how little I care about Hunter Biden as a political issue. As a human I want him to continue to get the help he needs to stay clean and healthy. As a member of society I want to see the rich and powerful held accountable. As a political event I could not care one iota less.
Ignoring the fact that it is extremely unusual to be indicted for tax fraud (usually just ends up with large fines and it looks like that this is done, because they desperately want something on his father), he is actually talking that they literally want to kill him. Biden was totally devastated when his other son died of cancer. That's why he didn't run in 2016.
That's the problem, right here officer. Fucking make it usual. Make it foreseeable, like in Billions (I practically wanna jerk of to that scene lol) where the DA's rich buddy's crying cuz his old friend is already writing the closing statement he's gonna need to put his pal in prison for his financial crimes
I want tax evasion to be prosecuted more aggressively, but not nearly as much as I want the legal system to treat all defendants equally. Throwing the book at one particular defendant and then going back to business as usual serves no legitimate purpose, especially when the motivation is so obviously political.
Hunter's gonna be fine, worst case he's looking at like 2 years in the plushest of Club Feds. He's gonna be just fine, like Martha Stewart. She's got more street cred than Snoop for God's sake
She's gangsta as—well, you know how it go
Edit: The Trump "boys" tho, well, they are in for a world of hurt and free shelter for a good long while. I don't even wanna think about their well-deserved sentencing guidelines once their party train really gets rollin'
Well worst case they are saying it is 17 years.
Watch Brucer Rivers analyze the sentencing guidelines and indictment(s). Its nowhere near gonna play out like that 😇
Well, the GOP is pushing this and at the same time pushing to remove funding to IRS that allows to go after rich fucks.
I don't have a problem with going after tax fraud, but this won't solve anything if it is an exception to a rule rather than a rule.
Its precedent