Hunter is most likely going to walk for good reason. What he was charged with are unconditional laws. If he walks, so will Trump. And that's assuming you can pin Trump with unlawful use first.
DOJ knows they are getting crushed with Hunter. Even 2A orgs offered legal help to him. They know the laws can't be upheld by an honest judge. So why hit Trump with the same charges that they're losing their shit over with Hunter?
There are multiple things. Part of it is that they never hear of news like this part of it is that "there's no way he did all of that, the fake news/dwu state/globalists are making things up, because they are scared of him. And for the remaining: "yeah, dauber he did it, but democrats are already doing it/would do it if they had a chance".
While Trump remains the frontrunner in the GOP race for the White House, he has also been indicted in four criminal cases this year, and therefore cannot purchase a gun under the law.
A federal judge in texas ruled last year that preventing people under indictment from purchasing firearms was unconstitutional based on the Supreme Court's Bruen decision, just FYI. So I don't think the situation is as cut and dry as it would have been just a couple years ago.
I don't really think it's super worthwhile to spend a bunch of time discussing if and should about those cases here. The larger point is that he apparently tried to lie about his gun cred by pretending to buy a gun. And that of he had, he would have been committing the same crime they got Hunter with.
The same Secret Service that conveniently yet 'accidentally' deleted all of their texts from January 5-7 after they were subpoenaed and told to preserve those texts? The same Secret Service where Mike Pence said (like a Criminal Minds victim), "I'm not getting in the car, Tim. I trust you, Tim, but you're not driving the car. If I get in that vehicle, you guys are taking off. I'm not getting in the car."
I wouldn't particularly hold your breath about Trump's Secret Service detail being particularly loyal to the United States.
So a spokesman posts on Twitter that he bought a gun and then someone has to delete the post and say it is not true? Sounds like amateur hour for his campaign but I thought he only hired the "best and brightest".
Woah woah - as someone who has never done cocaine, is that why he was so nuts (even for him) in the first presidential debate? I've been wondering how anyone could have witnessed that and still voted for him, but it never clicked for me that he might be on something.