Joe Biden – .

Hunter Biden Incident Shows that Gun Laws are for the Little People

admin — Tue, 06 Apr 2021 05:12:29 +0000

Hunter Biden Incident Shows that Gun Laws are for the Little People

Monday, April 5, 2021

There is a central hypocrisy at the heart of the gun control effort. High-profile gun control-supporting politicians, the Hollywood elite, and billionaire tycoons, will advocate to strip ordinary Americans of their right to defend themselves and their family, all the while enjoying the security that armed men with guns provide. As Hunter Biden’s 2018 firearm incident shows, this hypocrisy extends even to incidents where a high-profile individual has taken the step of procuring their own firearm. The message from these elites could not be clearer: Gun laws are only for the little people.

For those who have yet to learn of Hunter’s escapades in firearm ownership, according to a report from Politico, the troubled son of the president purchased a .38-caliber revolver from a Delaware Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL) on October 12, 2018. In order to acquire the gun, Hunter filled out the required BATFE Form 4473. On October 23, Hallie Biden, widow to Joe Biden’s son Beau and then-companion to Hunter, searched the ne’er-do-well’s truck, which was parked at her home in Wilmington, Del., and found the handgun. Apparently fearing for Hunter’s safety, Hallie wrapped the revolver in a shopping bag and threw it into a trash receptacle outside nearby gourmet grocery store Janssen’s Market – which is located across the street from the campus of Alexis I. du Pont High School.

Later that day, after Hunter told Hallie to retrieve the firearm, Hallie returned to where she had disposed of the gun but could not find it. At this point law enforcement was notified of the missing firearm, prompting an investigation that reportedly involved the Delaware State Police, the United States Secret Service, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

As it happens, between Hallie’s disposal of the firearm and her return to the market, a man who routinely searches the store’s trash receptacles for recyclables recovered the firearm. This man returned the revolver a few days after finding it.

According to Politico, prior to the firearm’s return a pair of Secret Service agents visited the FFL where Hunter purchased the firearm in an attempt to obtain the corresponding Form 4473.

The Politico report noted,

Secret Service agents approached the owner of the store where Hunter bought the gun and asked to take the paperwork involving the sale, according to two people, one of whom has firsthand knowledge of the episode and the other was briefed by a Secret Service agent after the fact.

The gun store owner refused to supply the paperwork, suspecting that the Secret Service officers wanted to hide Hunter’s ownership of the missing gun in case it were to be involved in a crime, the two people said. The owner, Ron Palmieri, later turned over the papers to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, which oversees federal gun laws.

As has been made clear in a previous item regarding this incident, NRA does not allege that Hunter or Hallie engaged in any criminal conduct. However, Hunter and Hallie’s conduct give rise to several legal questions.

Hunter was discharged from the U.S. Navy Reserve in 2014 after he tested positive for cocaine. Further, at various times, Hunter has been a notorious and admitted drug user. Hunter’s lengthy battle with drugs has been chronicled by himself and the Biden family in numerous interviews and a forthcoming memoir titled, “Beautiful Things.”

An April 1, 2020 USA Today piece on Hunter’s memoir contained the following summary of some of its contents,

In the spring of 2018, he used his “superpower – finding crack anytime, anywhere” – in Los Angeles. At one point, a dealer pointed a gun at his head before he realized Biden was looking for drugs.

He later learned how to cook drugs and spent a lot of time with thieves, addicts and con artists. “I never slept. There was no clock. Day bled into night and night into day,” he writes.

The situation grew out of control. “I was smoking crack every 15 minutes,” he writes.

Biden returned to the East Coast in the fall of 2018, again wanting to get better, though that didn’t happen.

Eventually, his family tried to stage an intervention. “I don’t know what else to do,” Joe Biden told him. “I’m so scared. Tell me what to do.” His son replied: “Not (expletive) this.”

It wasn’t until he met now-wife Melissa Cohen in Los Angeles – whom he married after only a week of knowing – that he got sober again. They told each other they loved each other on their first date; she had the same eyes as Beau, he writes. She championed his sobriety and dumped out his crack.

It is illegal for a person “who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance” to possess a firearm. Possession of a firearm by a prohibited person is punishable by up to 10 years imprisonment.

In order to purchase a firearm from an FFL, a buyer must fill out a Form 4473. The form asks, “Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?” Hunter answered “no” to this question.

Lying on a form 4473 is two separate crimes. It is a crime when a person “knowingly makes any false statement or representation with respect to the information required by this chapter to be kept in the records of a person licensed under this chapter,” such as the Form 4473. A violation of this provision is punishable by up to 5 years imprisonment. It is also a crime for a person to “make any false or fictitious oral or written statement” to a dealer “with respect to any fact material to the lawfulness of the sale.” A violation of this provision is punishable by up to 10 years imprisonment.

Janssen’s Market is located less than 250 yards from the campus of Alexis I. du Pont High School.

As a U.S. senator, Joe Biden was a key proponent of the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990. The initial version of this unconstitutional and unwise policy was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in U.S. v. Lopez. A later, similarly constitutionally dubious, version remains on the books.

18 USC 922(q)(2)(A) provides,

(A) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.

18 USC 921 (a)(25) defines school zone as,

(25) The term “school zone” means—

(A) in, or on the grounds of, a public, parochial or private school; or

(B) within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of a public, parochial or private school.

18 USC 922(q)(2)(B) does provide for some exemption for possession of a firearm,

(i) on private property not part of school grounds;

(ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;

(iii) that is—

(I) not loaded; and

(II) in a locked container, or a locked firearms rack that is on a motor vehicle;

(iv) by an individual for use in a program approved by a school in the school zone;

(v) by an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a school in the school zone and the individual or an employer of the individual;

(vi) by a law enforcement officer acting in his or her official capacity; or

(vii) that is unloaded and is possessed by an individual while traversing school premises for the purpose of gaining access to public or private lands open to hunting, if the entry on school premises is authorized by school authorities.

Maybe Hallie had a Delaware License to Carry a Concealed Deadly Weapon or placed the firearm in a locked container while she brought the gun to the store. However, a reasonable person might wonder whether an individual who would throw a handgun wrapped in a shopping bag away in a publicly accessible trash receptacle, would comport their conduct within these narrow exceptions while traversing the public roadways to Janssen’s Market.

If Hunter and Hallie are guilty of any illegal conduct, it’s difficult to fault the pair for ignoring the potential legal ramifications of their actions. After all, these gun control measures were not designed to be followed by well-connected elites like them.

This point is underscored by the Secret Service’s alleged involvement in the case. Rather than having their conduct scrutinized by federal law enforcement, if the Politico report and Hunter’s contemporaneous text messages are to be believed, the federal government tried to cover up for the prominent pair.

As well-protected politicians and their establishment allies push for new gun controls, ordinary law-abiding Americans should know that these hypocrites have no intention of parting with their own elaborate security measures or being otherwise inconvenienced by the burdens they foist upon the rest of us.

Biden’s COVID Relief Checks Help Spur Another Record Month of AR-15 Sales

admin — Tue, 06 Apr 2021 04:39:46 +0000

Biden’s COVID Relief Checks Help Spur Another Record Month of AR-15 Sales

byJonathan Davis

There are a lot of ironies when it comes to increased Democrat calls for more gun control — which always happens when they are in power — and corresponding record increases in gun sales, but this one might just be the granddaddy of them all.

As reported by “Washington Secrets” columnist Paul Bedard, gun sales hit another record in February as Joe Biden and congressional Democrats once again ramped up calls for new gun control measures, politically exploiting, as they always do, a series of tragic mass shootings.

Bedard writes:

For the second time in three months, the FBI broke its record for gun sales, concealed carry, and other firearms background checks in March.

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System conducted 4,691,738 checks, an all-time high. It broke the record set in January of 4,317,804.

Gun sales generally track with the NICS numbers, though the FBI doesn’t make public how many were for gun purchases. Gun industry groups typically release those numbers after the FBI.

However, the numbers show that sales also likely hit a record high, a trend confirmed by sellers.

But this gets better — or worse, depending on your Second Amendment perspective.

Firearms groups note that Biden’s threat to use executive authority (if he, in fact, actually has the power to do so) to expand background checks and even ban the sale of semi-auto rifles like popular AR-15 models are what is driving the new sales (and take note, many gun calibers were already in short supply).

Here’s the irony: Gun sellers say that many buyers are using their $1,400 COVID stimulus checks to buy new firearms, and in particular, AR-15s.

Like we said, the ultimate irony.

“Our sales are already well ahead of last March,” said Justin Anderson, the marketing director of Charlotte, North Carolina’s Hyatt Guns, who frequently updates Bedard regarding gun sales and gun trends.

“There are obvious factors at play here: Biden’s gun rhetoric being No. 1, as well as two mass shootings that were heavily covered in the media. However, we also saw a lot of transactions of around $1,400 starting on March 17, so it appears many people are using their stimulus money to buy guns,” Anderson added.

He then said: “I think it’s ironic that a Democrat Party-led Congress and a Democrat president passed legislation to give people financial relief, and a significant amount is being spent on gun purchases, many of which are for AR-15s!”

Yep. So do we.

As for gun sales, they have been setting records for the past year as Democrat-run cities devolved into chaos and mayhem, with looting and riots that quickly escalated well beyond the George Floyd incident that was exploited by Black Lives Matter and Antifa, both groups of which also pushed a “Defund the Police” initiative that actually took hold in some cities.

As for Biden’s executive actions on guns, it’s not at all clear that they’ll pass constitutional muster and are likely going to be challenged in court no sooner than they drop. He no doubt knows this so maybe he’s just going to issue them and see where the legal chips fall.

Meantime, many Americans appear to be making good use of their COVID relief money.

biden infrastructure plan gun control

admin — Sat, 03 Apr 2021 15:23:28 +0000

Biden infrastructure plan would boost gun violence prevention groups

Proposal would directly help minorities in low-income communities, supporters say.

By Todd Ruger

Posted March 31, 2021 at 2:54pm

Advocates and veterans of local gun violence prevention programs see a great victory in the $5 billion included in President Joe Biden’s infrastructure proposal and plan to make sure Congress sees the value in what would be a historic expansion of funding for their work.

“The way that we really turn the tide on this is by investing in solutions that work, and we’ve been making this case as a coalition, as a campaign, for months and years now,” Greg Jackson of the Community Justice Action Fund said on a group call with a number of those leaders. “And it is beyond inspiring to see that we’ve finally been heard and that action is happening.”

Biden’s proposal would give the first significant federal funding for gun violence prevention programs, keep it going for eight years, and would directly help minorities in low-income communities, Antonio Cediel of the LIVE FREE Campaign said. Biden was outlining the proposal in Pittsburgh after the White House released a fact sheet on the plan.

Traditionally there have been smaller grants within the Justice Department budget, such as $10 million or $15 million at a time, and they are highly competitive, so that funding usually lasts for a short time even for the few programs that can get it, Cediel said.

Many violence prevention programs in areas with high homicide rates have strategies with good track records of success, only to struggle for money to keep going or expand, Cediel said. A mayor changes and local funding evaporates or philanthropic money dries up, “so people have been just really kind of been piecing together a little bits of money as we go,” Cediel added.

Congress might question why gun prevention would get funding in the same legislation that would invest $2 trillion in the nation’s roads, waterways, airports, electric grid and broadband. The full proposal will face political headwinds from Republicans, who say only part of the funding goes to infrastructure and criticize the tax increase needed to fund it.

The White House, in a fact sheet on the plan, included a line on the funding in a section that describes how the plan “would target workforce development opportunities in underserved communities.”

Erica Ford of LIFE Camp Inc., a program in New York City that seeks to break the cycle of violence, said the $5 billion would come inside legislation “that is going to rebuild the roads and the blocks that many of our children died on.”

“Because recovery is real, recovery for our people is real,” Ford said. “And yes, it’s jobs, but it’s a lot of hope, and therapy, and services to help heal from the generation of death and destruction.”

The funding would help secure jobs at violence prevention programs, but the results of successful violence reduction efforts would put a significant dent in the estimated $2 trillion in costs of violence and trauma in the next eight years, said Fatimah Loren Dreier of the Health Alliance for Violence Intervention.

A study from Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund found that federal, state and local governments are spending a combined average of $34.8 million each day to deal with the aftermath of gun violence across the country. That totaled $280 billion a year.

“So you put that investment in upstream, you don’t have to pay for it downstream, so there’s significant economic impact to these investments,” Loren Dreier said. “There’s return on investment in terms of life and prosperity.”

And Cediel said that violence prevention has to be a key part of any broader push for economic recovery. “Certain businesses will not invest in neighborhoods because they think it’s too risky,” Cediel said. “It’s very difficult for vulnerable communities to get an economic foothold when the violence is rampant.”

Those on the call celebrated the inclusion of the funding in the bill itself as an achievement decades in the making. Anthony Smith of Cities United, which seeks to eliminate violence related to Black men and boys, said this is a crisis that needs a response just like the COVID-19 pandemic.

“So we need to move and we need to move quick. We need to be putting the pressure on Congress and others to make sure this happens,” Smith said. “We celebrate this moment where we know there’s much more work to do.”

The advocates say they will press the House and Senate to include the gun violence funding in the infrastructure bill, but that “it goes to the people on the ground and not pet projects, that it goes to the people who’ve been doing the work for years and years and years,” Ford said. “And that we use it to really break the cycle of death and trauma, and build generational wealth and generational health for our families.”

Biden Administration Urges Supreme Court To Let Cops Enter Homes And Seize Guns Without A Warrant

admin — Fri, 26 Mar 2021 03:36:53 +0000

People view the Supreme Court building from behind security fencing on Capitol Hill in Washington, … [+] ASSOCIATED PRESS

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday will hear oral argument in Caniglia v. Strom, a case that could have sweeping consequences for policing, due process, and mental health, with the Biden Administration and attorneys general from nine states urging the High Court to uphold warrantless gun confiscation. But what would ultimately become a major Fourth Amendment case began with an elderly couple’s spat over a coffee mug.

In August 2015, 68-year-old Edward Caniglia joked to Kim, his wife of 22 years, that he didn’t use a certain coffee mug after his brother-in-law had used it because he “might catch a case of dishonesty.” That quip quickly spiraled into an hour-long argument. Growing exhausted from the bickering, Edward stormed into his bedroom, grabbed an unloaded handgun, and put it on the kitchen table in front of his wife. With a flair for the dramatic, he then asked: “Why don’t you just shoot me and get me out of my misery?” Perhaps unsurprisingly, the tactic backfired and the two continued to argue. Eventually, Edward took a drive to cool off. But when he returned, their argument flared up once again. This time, Kim decided to leave the house and spend the night at a motel. The next day, Kim phoned home. No answer. Worried, she called the police in Cranston, Rhode Island and asked them to perform a “well check” on her husband and to escort her home. When they arrived, officers spoke with Edward on the back deck. According to an incident report, he “seemed normal,” “was calm for the most part,” and even said “he would never commit suicide.” However, none of the officers had asked Edward any questions about the factors relating to his risk of suicide, risk of violence, or prior misuse of firearms. (Edward had no criminal record and no history of violence or self-harm.) In fact, one of the officers later admitted he “did not consult any specific psychological or psychiatric criteria” or medical professionals for his decisions that day. Still, police were convinced that Edward could hurt himself and insisted he head to a local hospital for a psychiatric evaluation. After refusing and insisting that his mental health wasn’t their business, Edward agreed only after police (falsely) promised they wouldn’t seize his guns while he was gone. Compounding the dishonesty, police then told Kim that Edward had consented to the confiscation. Believing the seizures were approved by her husband, Kim led the officers to the two handguns the couple owned, which were promptly seized. Even though Edward was immediately discharged from the hospital, police only returned the firearms after he filed a civil rights lawsuit against them. Critically, when police seized the guns, they didn’t claim it was an emergency or to prevent imminent danger. Instead, the officers argued their actions were a form of “community caretaking,” a narrow exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement. First created by the Supreme Court nearly 50 years ago, the community caretaking exception was designed for cases involving impounded cars and highway safety, on the grounds that police are often called to car accidents to remove nuisances like inoperable vehicles on public roads. Both a district and appellate court upheld the seizures as “reasonable” under the community caretaking exception. In deciding Caniglia’s case, the First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals acknowledged that “the doctrine’s reach outside the motor vehicle context is ill-defined.” Nevertheless, the court decided to extend that doctrine to cover private homes, ruling that the officers “did not exceed the proper province of their community caretaking responsibilities.” Siding with law enforcement, the First Circuit noted that a police officer “must act as a master of all emergencies, who is ‘expected to…provide an infinite variety of services to preserve and protect community safety.’” By letting police operate without a warrant, the community caretaking exception is “designed to give police elbow room to take appropriate action,” the court added. In their opening brief for the Supreme Court, attorneys for Caniglia warned that “extending the community caretaking exception to homes would be anathema to the Fourth Amendment” because it “would grant police a blank check to intrude upon the home.” That fear is not unwarranted. In jurisdictions that have extended the community caretaking exception to homes, “everything from loud music to leaky pipes have been used to justify warrantless invasion of the home,” a joint amicus brief by the ACLU, the Cato Institute, and the American Conservative Union revealed. This expansion could also have perverse effects and disincentivize people from calling for help. As that brief noted, “When every interaction with police or request for help can become an invitation for police to invade the home, the willingness of individuals to seek assistance when it is most needed will suffer.” But in its first amicus brief before the High Court, the Biden Administration glossed over these concerns and called on the justices to uphold the First Circuit’s ruling. Noting that “the ultimate touchstone of the Fourth Amendment is ‘reasonableness,’” the Justice Department argued that warrants should not be “presumptively required when a government official’s action is objectively grounded in a non-investigatory public interest, such as health or safety.” “The ultimate question in this case is therefore not whether the respondent officers’ actions fit within some narrow warrant exception,” their brief stated, “but instead whether those actions were reasonable,” actions the Justice Department felt were “justified” in Caniglia’s case. As a fail-safe, the Justice Department also urged the Supreme Court to uphold the lower court ruling on qualified immunity grounds, arguing that the officers’ “actions did not violate any clearly established law so as to render the officers individually liable in a damages action.” But the Biden Administration, along with the courts that have extended the community caretaking exception, overlook a key component of the Fourth Amendment: the Security Clause. After all, the Fourth Amendment opens with the phrase, “the right of the people to be secure.” In an amicus brief, the Institute for Justice noted that “to the Founding generation, ‘secure’ did not simply mean the right to be ‘spared’ an unreasonable search or seizure” but also involved “harms attributable to the potential for unreasonable searches and seizures.” Expanding the community caretaking exception to “allow warrantless entries into peoples’ homes on a whim,” argued the IJ brief, “invokes the arbitrary, looming threat of general writs that so incited the Framers” and would undermine “the right of the people to be secure” in their homes. The IJ brief further argued that extending the “community caretaking” exception to the home would “flatly contradict” the Supreme Court’s prior rulings, which “has only discussed community caretaking in the context of vehicle searches and seizures.” In those cases, “the animating purpose for the exception [was] to allow officers to remove damaged or abandoned vehicles that pose a risk to public safety.” By contrast, the IJ amicus asserted, “that justification is entirely absent” when it comes to homes. “The Fourth Amendment protects our right to be secure in our property, which means the right to be free from fear that the police will enter your house without warning or authorization,” said Institute for Justice Attorney Joshua Windham. “A rule that allows police to burst into your home without a warrant whenever they feel they are acting as ‘community caretakers’ is a threat to everyone’s security.”

Biden — ‘We must ban assault weapons!

admin — Fri, 26 Mar 2021 01:05:40 +0000

Sources: Secret Service inserted itself into case of Hunter Biden’s gun

admin — Thu, 25 Mar 2021 19:15:03 +0000

The bizarre incident involved a trash can, a man searching for recyclables and, eventually, federal law enforcement.

On Oct. 23, 2018, President Joe Biden’s son Hunter and daughter in law Hallie were involved in a bizarre incident in which Hallie took Hunter’s gun and threw it in a trash can behind a grocery store, only to return later to find it gone.

Delaware police began investigating, concerned that the trash can was across from a high school and that the missing gun could be used in a crime, according to law enforcement officials and a copy of the police report obtained by POLITICO

But a curious thing happened at the time: Secret Service agents approached the owner of the store where Hunter bought the gun and asked to take the paperwork involving the sale, according to two people, one of whom has firsthand knowledge of the episode and the other was briefed by a Secret Service agent after the fact.

The Secret Service says it has no record of its agents investigating the incident, and Joe Biden, who was not under protection at the time, said through a spokesperson he has no knowledge of any Secret Service involvement.

President-elect Joe Biden hugs his son Hunter Biden on stage Saturday, Nov. 7, 2020, in Wilmington, Del. | Andrew Harnik/ AP Photo

Days later, the gun was returned by an older man who regularly rummages through the grocery’s store’s trash to collect recyclable items, according to people familiar with the situation.

The incident did not result in charges or arrests.

But the alleged involvement of the Secret Service remains a mystery. One law enforcement official said that at the time of the incident, individual Secret Service agents at the agency’s offices in Wilmington, Del., and Philadelphia kept an informal hand in maintaining the former vice president’s security. The person cited an instance in 2019 when the Wilmington office of the Secret Service called the Delaware State Police to arrange security for a public appearance by Biden.

The Secret Service declined to answer a question about whether it had informal involvement in Biden’s security during this period.

Asked whether the Secret Service requested state police security for Biden during the period when he was not under the agency’s protection, a Delaware State Police spokesman said, “I have reached out to our sergeant who oversees the Executive Protection Unit with the Delaware State Police. He is unaware of any such requests or services provided.”

Any involvement by the Secret Service on behalf of the Biden family or on its own initiative would be inappropriate interference in an incident that was already being investigated by Delaware State Police with the involvement of the FBI, according to law enforcement officials.

POLITICO obtained copies of the Firearms Transaction Record and a receipt for the gun dated Oct. 12, 2018.

Hunter responded “no” to a question on the transaction record that asks, “Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?” Five years earlier, he had been discharged from the Navy Reserve after testing positive for cocaine, and he and family members have spoken about his history of drug use.

Lying on the form is a felony, though prosecutions for it are exceedingly rare.

Neither Hallie Biden nor George Mesires, a lawyer for Hunter Biden, responded to requests for comment.

The gun-store incident occurred during a period after Hunter Biden’s administrative discharge from the Naval Reserves for his positive cocaine test and his subsequent divorce from his first wife, Kathleen. At the time of the gun incident, Hunter was in a romantic relationship with Hallie, the widow of his latebrother, Beau.

The incident began when Hallie searched Hunter’s pickup, which was parked at her home in Wilmington, because of unspecified “suspicions she had,” according to the Delaware State Police report. Inside the truck, she found a .38 revolver.

Hallie took the gun to Janssen’s Market, a nearby high-end grocery store where the Bidens are longtime regular customers. There, she tossed the gun, wrapped in a black shopping bag, into a trash bin outside of the store.

Later that day, Hallie informed Hunter of what she had done, and he instructed her to retrieve the gun, according to the police report. When Hallie returned to the grocery store, she found that the gun was missing from the garbage bin and reported the issue to the store. Police received calls from the store’s general manager, Paula Janssen, and from another person, according to the report.

The missing gun caused heightened concern, according to the police report, because the grocery store sits across the street from Alexis I. du Pont High School.

Arriving on the scene, Delaware State Police retrieved security camera footage from the store and interviewed Janssen, the store manager. “We complied with the police and gave them whatever security footage we could,” Janssen told POLITICO.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation also responded to the scene, according to people familiar with the situation. At the time, the FBI was monitoring Hunter Biden as part of an investigation that remains ongoing and that currently focuses on his taxes. The FBI declined to comment.

In addition to questioning Hallie, police called Hunter to the scene, where he was questioned outside the store’s loading dock area and explained he used the gun for target practice, according to the report.

At one point, two of Janssen’s employees, described by the police report as “Mexican males,” walked past the loading dock area, and Hunter told a police officer that the store had some suspicious people working for it. Asked if he was referring to those two staffers, Hunter responded, “Yea, prolly illegal,” according to the report.

When a police officer asked Hunter whether the gun had been used in a crime, the officer reported that Hunter “became very agitated with me and asked me if I was intentionally trying to make him mad,” according to the report.

When the officer asked Hunter whether he had been doing drugs or drinking heavily, he responded, “Listen, it isn’t like that. I think she believes I was gonna kill myself,” according to the report.

An officer asked Hunter whether he had called his father about the incident before he arrived. Hunter responded, “I have never called my dad for anything,” according to the police report.

After being questioned, Hunter retrieved the case for the gun — which included the gun’s serial number — from Hallie’s house and returned to the grocery store to hand it over to police, according to the report.

While police questioned Hunter and Hallie, two Secret Service agents arrived at the store where Hunter had purchased the gun, StarQuest Shooters & Survival Supply in Wilmington, according to the two people familiar with the incident. The agents showed their badges and identification cards to Palmieri, the store’s owner, and asked to take possession of the Firearms Transaction Record that Hunter had filled out to buy the gun earlier that month, according to the people familiar with the incident.

Palmieri refused to hand over the transaction record to the Secret Service agents because such records fall under the purview of the ATF. The Secret Service agents left without the records, according to the people familiar with the case. Later that day, the ATF arrived at the store to inspect the records.

Palmieri declined to comment on the episode.

ATF spokesman Andre Miller referred questions to the Delaware State Police. Jason Hatchell, a spokesman for the Delaware State Police, said any questions about the incident would have to be filed through a Freedom of Information Act Request. The Delaware State Police previously rejected POLITICO’s FOIA request for records related to the incident last November.

The incident has received scant attention, save for a report on the conservative website The Blaze that focused on the state police decision not to file charges against either Hunter or Hallie.

A Secret Service spokesperson said the agency has no record of involvement in the incident: “U.S. Secret Service records confirm that the agency did not provide protection to any member of the Biden family in 2018, and that the Secret Service had no involvement in this alleged incident.”

Biden and his family members had been under around-the-clock protection by the Secret Service during his eight years as vice president from 2009 to 2017. Biden’s Secret Service detail resumed in March 2020 after he locked up the Democratic presidential nomination.

A White House spokesperson said Biden was not aware of any Secret Service involvement in the episode: “President Biden did not have any knowledge of, or involvement in, the Secret Service’s alleged role in this incident, and neither he nor any family member was a protectee at that time.”