Trump campaign backtracks claim that he bought a Glock handgun in South Carolina after it became clear that would be illegal
Trump campaign backtracks claim that he bought a Glock handgun in South Carolina after it became clear that would be illegal
In a video posted by spokesman Steven Cheung, Trump pointed to the gun and said "Wow," before adding: "I've got to buy one. I want to buy one."
DOJ are you listening? These are the same charges Hunter is being indicted for
279Hunter 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?
6No, it isn't. Hunter is being charged with lying about drug use on a gun form. This would be Trump buying a gun with active indictments against him.
1Nah
-2
Do certain medications which are are strong as some and worse than many illegal disqualify someone from owning a firearm? Wasn't there pretty wide claims about Trump popping pills which would disqualify him from owning a firearm anyway?
PDF Warning: PERSONS WHO ARE UNLAWFUL USERS OF OR ADDICTED TO ANY CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE
0It's a question on a federal background check. For people who live in states where scheduled drugs are legal for recreation, it's a grey area. The state wouldn't care, but the feds do.
It's basically boils down to "gotcha" requirements. If you get investigated for federal crimes and also own firearms but live in a state where some scheduled drugs are legal that you use, the fed can still just flag any future checks and charge you with lying on any previous background checks.
I am not a fan of that kind of legal fuckery, especially if a person happens to be charged with a crime they didn't commit and still get investigated.
0
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.
68Permanently Deleted
67I mean, you don't want a Trump getting in office and then stopping someone from running for president with a bunch of bogus charges. That's why there aren't that many ways to completely disqualify someone. It's a concept that's proven to be timely as it's part of how Putin stays in power.
... the presumption is that we should all be smart enough to realize the charges are real and not put the felon in the Whitehouse.
24Many would argue that he can't run for president either.
23Permanently Deleted
3Because stopping him from running would require a constitutional amendment of some sort, OR he be disqualified under the 14th.
-2
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.
16I 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.
In other news, Bruen is terrible.
6
Permanently Deleted
1TIL…well good to know if I ever become indicted & feel the need to purchase a gun, which I’ve never done before.
1
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".
31I thought he only hired the “best and brightest”.
"they're not sending their best"
"And some, I assume, are good people"
15Turns out the best and the brightest insist on being paid.
14There's more evidence that Trump makes bad hiring decisions than there's evidence for gravity.
8
Wait, I'm still catching up. Why would it have been illegal?
14He doesn't live in that state.
22This is the reason.
4
He's been indicted on felony charges, felons can't own guns.
10He's not a felon (yet). Does that law apply to indictments?
Edit: No, it doesn't:
https://www.texastribune.org/2022/09/19/second-amendment-texas-case-buy-guns-felony-indictment/
3
People spend money on this abomination
9Holy everything messed up.
-1
Lying liar says what?
8I can't wait til he snorts a ton of coke he's next debate so any one that's ever done the drug can pretend he was totally sober, again.
3Woah 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.
0https://youtu.be/7RL1h6iqYBQ?si=TcDpZO-l7FRJYp2C it was swept under the rug
-1“ 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.”
That’s cause you’re a SINNER, not a GOOD CHRISTIAN!
-1
Plot twist: he runs out/spills his supply, they run to the nearest corner and it’s fent laced.
-1Spends the rest of the debate walking from his podium to the corner. You know just in case he sees any coke in the corner.
-1
The law only applies to brown people under indictment who want to purchase firearms, not
whiteorange ones.2He really wants to make sure nobody breaks his record as most indicted president of all time I guess...
1