By PRINCE ODETA.

The recent indictment of Hunter Biden on three gun-related criminal charges marks a significant development in the ongoing and increasingly complex saga involving the Biden family.

This indictment, issued by U.S. Attorney David C. Weiss, who has also been appointed as a “special counsel” despite regulations suggesting an independent selection process, follows the rejection of a previous plea agreement by Judge Maryellen Noreika.

It’s worth noting that the initial plea deal sought to resolve the same gun-related offenses Hunter is now facing with a lenient pretrial diversion agreement.

However, Hunter’s dishonesty in declaring that he was not addicted to controlled substances when purchasing a Colt revolver in 2018 is clear-cut.

He openly admitted his addiction in his 2021 memoir, making it evident that he was untruthful during the firearm transaction.

Although there is debate about the constitutionality of the third count in Weiss’ indictment, which criminalizes firearm possession by an “unlawful user of, or addicted to, any stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance” under 18 U.S. Code Sec. 922(g)(3), this argument may not hold in Delaware, as it falls outside the jurisdiction of the conservative-leaning Fifth Circuit Court.

Furthermore, pursuing such a defense could ironically place someone with the Biden name in the position of advocating for a strong Second Amendment stance akin to the National Rifle Association.

Regardless of the constitutional debate, the first two counts of the indictment remain, and in theory, these three criminal charges could carry a maximum penalty of up to 25 years in prison, though the likelihood of such a severe outcome is uncertain.

At first glance, Weiss’ sudden change of direction in just a month and a half may seem like someone caught doing something wrong and now remorseful.

Some might speculate that Weiss felt embarrassed after Judge Noreika rejected his unclear, favorable plea agreement and now wants to make amends. While this theory is plausible, it’s likely incorrect.

Taking a broader perspective, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy recently initiated a formal impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden, who is implicated in Hunter’s questionable overseas business dealings.

There’s growing evidence that Joe was aware, at the very least, of Hunter’s involvement with Ukrainian oligarchs, Romanian tycoons, Chinese investors, and others, and may have personally benefited from it.

Meanwhile, Joe Biden, in his eighties, faces increasing pressure from Democratic Party voters, the ruling elite, and media outlets to not seek reelection next year.

Some, like David Ignatius in The Washington Post, have even explicitly argued that “President Biden should not run again in 2024.”

It’s possible that Hunter had a conversation with his father, where the president instructed his son to be the sacrificial lamb.

The Weiss indictment could serve as a convenient distraction amid all the controversy surrounding the president.

Is this indictment a way to make House Republicans forget about the impeachment inquiry they just launched? Worse yet, could this be the end of the Weiss “special counsel” investigation, letting Hunter off the hook for his potentially more serious overseas business dealings?

Ultimately, how the Biden administration handles Hunter’s indictment will reveal a lot about the nature of the regime. It’s a moment of truth, a “put up or shut up” moment.

If Weiss concludes his investigation here, only charging Hunter with firearms offenses and turning a blind eye to his potential involvement in foreign bribery and corruption related to presidential impeachment, it would validate conservative criticisms of a “two-tier system of justice.”

This conclusion also stands if Hunter manages to avoid significant jail time in a future plea agreement for firearms offenses that would land anyone else in prison for years.

In short, Weiss’ indictment has raised the stakes, and it’s not just about Hunter’s fate as a free man. Game on.