LTP News Sharing:

AP Photo/Matt Slocum

It took roughly seven hours, but by 4:20 p.m. Monday, 12 jurors and four alternates were chosen to decide Hunter Biden’s guilt or innocence in his trial, where he stands accused of lying on a federal gun form. Six of the jurors are men, while six are women, and all of the alternates are female. 

The First Son faces some serious charges:

COUNT 1: False Statement in Purchase of a Firearm

Faces a maximum of 10 years’ imprisonment, a fine of $250,000, three years of supervised release, a special assessment of $100.

COUNT 2: False Statement Related to Information Required to be Kept by Federal Firearms Licensed Dealer

Faces a maximum of five years’ imprisonment, a fine of $250,000, three years of supervised release, a special assessment of $100.

COURT 3: Possession of a Firearm by a Person who is an Unlawful User of or Addicted to a Controlled Substance

Faces a maximum of 10 years’ imprisonment, a fine of $250,000, three years of supervised release, a special assessment of $100.

The charges carry a maximum sentence of 25 years in prison; Hunter has pleaded not guilty to all three.

Our sister site Townhall’s Mia Cathell was at the courthouse and gave a play-by-play of some of the goings-on in her live coverage from the scene.

Cathell wrote about a possible foreshadowing of Team Hunter’s defense:

The defense asked that the word “knowingly” be added to [juror] Questions 2i. and 2ii., which specify Hunter Biden’s charges of making a false statement in the sale of a firearm and making a false statement on a firearms transaction record. Hunter Biden’s defense attorneys are heavily relying on the argument that he didn’t “knowingly” lie when he answered “No” to the question of whether he was an addict or user of a controlled substance, i.e. crack cocaine. The defense insists Hunter Biden didn’t understand exactly what those terms meant at the time he filled out the form and truly believed he wasn’t either one in the “present tense.”

“The terms ‘user’ or ‘addict’ are not defined on the form and were not explained to him,” the defense disputed.

 Potential jurors were questioned by the judge, defense lawyers, and prosecutors, and a number of them were dismissed for their political views or for admitting that they didn’t think they could be impartial:

In some cases, potential jurors brought up Donald Trump’s criminal cases when asked about their politics — with two prospective jurors saying they thought the 45th president was prosecuted for electoral reasons.

Another woman, juror 40, said people shouldn’t be allowed to buy guns and “kill children in schools,” NBC News reported.

“I’d ban [guns] altogether to be honest,” she added, before the judge dismissed her.

 These aren’t Hunter’s only legal woes—he also must face trial for federal tax charges in California, where special counsel David Weiss accuses him of failing to pay $1.4 million in taxes between 2016 and 2019.

Some pundits like Fox News’ Jeanine Pirro wonder whether we’ll see any actual justice in this case, considering that the politically motivated conviction of Donald Trump last Thursday over business fraud charges was a complete clown show.

If the jury convicts, he won’t accept the outcome? So are the Democrats now fully supporting the second amendment?

The Trump case and the Hunter trial mark two historical moments: one, the first conviction of a former U.S. president, and two, the first criminal trial against a sitting U.S. president’s child. 

This could be a very interesting trial indeed.