Subject: Re: Selective prosecution
I agree WTH, good analysis. The IRS is usually happy if it gets the money. As for the gun, I'm in favor of Hunter Biden getting no special treatment

Pros in the area of the gun charges think it's unusually harsh. No reason given, just guesses. I like this from the LA Times.

'The independent counsel ' operating in an area where so little is law and so much is discretion, is intentionally cut off from the unifying influence of the Justice Department, and from the perspective that multiple responsibilities provide,' the late justice (Scalia) wrote. 'How frightening it must be to have your own independent counsel and staff appointed, with nothing else to do but to investigate you until investigation is no longer worthwhile.'

Although Scalia's constitutional argument didn't carry the day, the policy concerns he expressed led Congress to repeal the independent counsel law. It was replaced with the special counsel structure through Justice Department regulations that were meant to be more aligned with standard policy. But peculiar political events have conspired to put Weiss in much the same insulated position as the independent counsels of yore, with the same toxic results.

As for Hunter Biden, he still has some legal cards to play. His aggressive and able counsel, Abbe Lowell, will no doubt argue that the charges amount to an unlawful vindictive prosecution. And recent appellate court rulings suggesting that even felons retain their 2nd Amendment rights could cast a constitutional shadow on at least one of the gun charges.

So we may have an odd situation here. I looked at influence peddling but I don't think the codes I looked at apply, so I'm off the beam in figuring out what laws apply to Hunter's behavior. I've spent most of this week with my head under a sink. :)