Hunter Biden's Felony Gun Charges, and if Biden DOJ is Political, with Dave Aronberg and Mike Davis

The DOJ, the Trump or the Biden defenders are out there kind of saying, see, this is fair. It's a fair DOJ because they've brought three felony counts against Hunter Biden. He got a gun while he was an active addict and he lied about it on the application that amounts to basically three felony charges. They're saying he could spend between 10 and 25 years in prison. My God, if anything, this is unfair treatment versus what the average civilian would get. How do you see it? I would say don't be fooled. This is the same Democrats picked Delaware U.S. attorney David Weiss, who has been covering for the Bidens for years. He let the statute of limitations expire on very serious tax charges. He buried evidence deemed credible by the Pittsburgh U.S. attorney that Joe Biden may have taken a $10 million foreign bribe from Burisma and changed American policy. This David Weiss is the one who came up with this secret sweetheart plea deal with Hunter Biden with this with this backdoor pardon for all these crimes. Remember what they're doing here. They are charging Hunter with this gun charge. He's not going to spend a day in jail. They're going to let this criminal process work its way through the presidential election until November 5th, 2024. Then either Joe Biden will pardon his son and maybe himself or David Weiss will come to another sweetheart deal, maybe another plea agreement where there's no jail time. In the meantime, they're going to protect the Bidens, particularly Joe Biden, from congressional subpoenas because then the Biden White House, President Biden himself, Hunter, the Biden Justice Department, they're going to say, sorry, we can't cooperate with you, Congress, because there's an ongoing criminal prosecution and ongoing criminal investigations and other matters. Hunter Biden, the second he's pardoned or the second he gets a plea agreement where he doesn't face criminal liability anymore, he no longer has his Fifth Amendment rights. They're not going to pardon him now. They're not going to do a plea agreement now. They're going to wait until this impeachment inquiry is done. They're going to wait until after the presidential election. All right, Dave, what do you think of it? It's good to be back with you, Megan, and my friend Mike. First off, is it Weiss or Weiss? I always thought it was Weiss. I think it's Weiss. I think I was giving Mike a pass. I'm pretty sure it's Weiss. Trust the Ehrenberg to know the difference between Weiss and Weiss, so yes, okay. I do agree with Mike that I do not believe that Hunter Biden will spend a day in jail. I agree with him on that, and it is ironic because I think this prosecution was motivated in part by the DOJ trying to show that, look, we're even-handed. This is not a weaponized DOJ. Look, we're even going after the former vice president, current president's son, but in trying to make everyone happy, they made no one happy. The left is infuriated because this gun charge is rarely invoked, especially when the gun is not used for another crime, and then the right, which thinks that Hunter Biden is the head of some international criminal conspiracy, is thinking this is small potatoes, so they made no one happy here. I would say this about the weaponization thing. I think when you add this to the fact that John Durham stayed on and was allowed to file his charges, the fact that the DOJ didn't file charges against Matt Gaetz, who was a big MAGA guy, the fact that DOJ, Merrick Garland, took the side of Donald Trump over E. Jean Carroll for a long time, and now you have this, I do think there's a very compelling argument that there is no weaponization of the DOJ, but of course, that's something that's going to live on in the right-wing ecosphere. Can you just expand on what you just said about E. Jean Carroll? That's the woman who accused Trump of rape in the Bergdorf Goodman changing room. Sure. The Department of Justice had a policy that they were going to defend Donald Trump against E. Jean Carroll because Donald Trump was president, and even though this didn't happen while he was president, his defamation occurred while he was president, and so the DOJ took the policy that they were going to defend, pay for the legal expenses of Donald Trump against E. Jean Carroll, and when Merrick Garland took over, he continued that policy. He said, yes, we will continue to defend Donald Trump. Only much later did they change their policy, but for a lot of us, it was like, wow, how can you say they're weaponizing the DOJ when they're backing Donald Trump over E. Jean Carroll? Can I just ask you a follow-up on that? I know this was a story, but it's many moons ago. Whether they did the same for Clinton when he was the sitting president and got accused by Paula Jones, the thing that got him on all the trouble for lying under oath, did the DOJ defend him in that? Was that the DOJ's lawyers? I don't remember what. It's a long time ago. I don't remember what happened there, but I can tell you when it comes to this case, Donald Trump's defamation occurred, alleged defamation. Well, it was proven to be defamatory. It occurred while he was president, but it didn't involve his presidential duties. It involved statements he made before he was president, so I don't know. That's a good question about Clinton and DOJ, but to me, I thought it was the wrong move by DOJ to defend someone who was making statements based on something that had nothing to do with his presidency. Right, outside the scope of his duties. I don't know, Mike, there's a lot of evidence. I mean, this is, Dave's making the sort of more liberal case for why the DOJ is fair and fair and balanced. There's a lot on the other side of that ledger, however, like indicting a former president twice on charges that none of us can totally understand, other than the obstruction case, like that I get, and we could go down the list. I mean, do you, is there any merit to what Dave's saying in terms of like, yeah, they didn't go after Matt Gaetz and they did go after Hunter and they defended him on E. Jean Carroll and so on? This is the most politicized and weaponized Justice Department that I've ever seen, even more so than the Obama Justice Department. Remember, they are indicting a former president and a leading presidential candidate for the first time in American history on bogus, on a bogus legal theory. Jack Smith's legal theory on January 6th is bogus. It is not a crime to object to a presidential election. It is specifically allowed by the Electoral Count Act of 1887. It is not a crime to twist arms politically. That is allowed by the First Amendment. If it were a crime to object to presidential elections, Democrats would be in jail for objecting to Republican wins in 1968, 2004, 2016. If politicians can go to jail for being jerks, just about every politician in Washington, besides my former boss, Chuck Grassley, the nicest man on the planet, would be in prison. This is definitely a politicized and weaponized justice system. Just look at what they're doing. They're going after President Trump. They're going after President Trump's top aides, disregarding 250 years of executive privilege, going back to George Washington. They're going after January 6th protesters, these goofballs who got out of control on January 6th at a lawful protest permitted by the National Park Service and turned into a riot. Yeah, you should charge the people who trespassed. Yeah, you should charge the people who were violent, but to charge them with insurrection? How many insurrectionists get to the floor, the Senate floor of a nation's capital and walk through velvet ropes and follow police direction and take selfies and don't burn down the damn place? And at the same time- Look what they did to Kavanaugh, right? Look at- Yeah, I mean- I mean, that's one of the things that's been coming to mind, what they did to Brett Kavanaugh. Convicting a murderer is a new 10-part true crime docuseries from Daily Wire Plus, hosted by Candace Owens, that dives deep into the infamous case of Stephen Avery. Making a murderer popularized the Stephen Avery case and portrayed him as an innocent victim of corrupt law enforcement. But is there more to the story? In this series, Candace unveils startling evidence, uncovers edited phone calls and testimony, and unravels a narrative that stands in stark contrast to the portrayal you might believe. Episodes one and two are available to stream for free on Daily Wire Plus. Episode three is also available now, but you gotta be a member of Daily Wire Plus to watch it. New episodes air every Thursday. Just check out this link, dwplus.watch.kelly, dwplus.watch.kelly, to start watching episode one for free now.