The pardoning of Hunter Biden has been a massive story. In fact, it's getting hard to find news that isn't about Hunter getting a pardon, at least when you're looking for gun-related content.

But part of that is because the ramifications are so many potential ramifications. I mean, sure Biden lied when he said he wouldn't pardon Hunter, but he's not called "Lyin' Biden" for nothing, now is he?

One potential ramification? He may have handed Trump and congressional Republicans some serious leverage.

President Biden’s decision to give his son Hunter a get-out-of-jail-free card undermines Democrats’ attempt to claim the moral high ground on debates over gun laws and taxes.

The pardon allows Hunter to sidestep the fate that awaits ordinary Americans in his position: sentencing for illegally purchasing a gun and failing to pay his taxes.

“It makes a mockery of the Democrats’ argument that everybody else should pay higher taxes when their own children decide not to pay taxes,” Grover Norquist, founder and president of Americans for Tax Reform, told The Washington Times.

...

The pardon hands Republicans more ammunition to use against Democrats as they gird for a series of political battles on Capitol Hill over the Trump agenda.

Republicans are expected to cite the pardon when the new Congress considers extending the expiring Trump tax cuts, the signature achievement of the president-elect’s first term.

It also could bolster the Trump team’s hand when defending Second Amendment rights and pursuing changes at the Department of Justice.

And, honestly, I can see it. After all, if gun control laws are so important, then why pardon someone who was convicted of violating those laws by a jury of his peers?

But I also wouldn't get too excited about it, either.

The truth of the matter is that anti-gunners haven't exactly shown us they have a great deal of principles when it comes to guns. They routinely talk about taking guns away from people even as they're protected by guns themselves. They tend to favor a "rules for thee but not for me" approach and that's common enough regardless of where that anti-gunner is found.

Does anyone else remember vehemently anti-gun Alyssa Milano admitting to both owning guns and suffering from mental illness, even as she advocated for more and more gun control, which would eventually lead to keeping guns out of the hands of people with mental illness?

She's not unusual.

Let's also note the overbearing silence of the most notorious anti-gunners in Congress at Hunter's pardon. They have said nothing at all. What that means is that partisanship trumps principle, even if such a thing exists among this bunch. They've been largely silent. Some might have popped off briefly on X, but that's about it.

If their principles don't require them to at least denounce the move in something more than a passing comment, why would anyone think they'd worry about them when challenged on gun issues? Yes, it's rank hypocrisy, but we see that all the time from this bunch.

So while I think it's a useful tool and Republicans should leverage this for all its worth, let's not think for a moment that some of the worst of the worst are going to budge one iota.