Biden Pardons Son
President Joe Biden, at the end of the Thanksgiving break, decided to pardon his son Hunter. This has led to some very mixed feelings among Democrats and a whole lot of gleeful "I told you so!" responses from Republicans. Both the decision and the ramifications of it are complex, obviously.
At the core of the matter is a father who had the extraordinary power of making his son's legal problems vanish with his signature. Few parents ever have such sweeping powers to affect their child's life in this fashion. And few parents would refrain from using such a power if it was available. If you have children, you have to ask yourself: "If my son or daughter were facing prison time and I could make it all go away, wouldn't I do so in a heartbeat?" That's a very personal thing, obviously. No parent wants to see their child pay such heavy consequences -- but almost no parents ever get such an extraordinary chance to erase such consequences.
Should Joe Biden have pardoned his son? Morally, politically, ethically? That is currently being debated by many. There are conflicting reasons pro and con, as with any such tough decision. Let's run down the ones I have heard today already (in no particular order, pro or con):
Biden broke his word. President Joe Biden repeatedly made an explicit promise not to either pardon his son or commute any sentence he received. He was adamant, every time anyone asked the question. The answer to whether he would do so was an unequivocal: "No." Now that the election is over and there can be no direct political fallout, Biden "evolved" and changed his mind. That is the very picture of a lying politician. When there's a price to be paid, stand firm, but when that price ebbs, quickly change your mind and do it anyway. Biden's entire political brand was that he's a righteous, stand-up guy and that you can trust his word. That legacy is now tarnished. His entire presidency's legacy is now at least somewhat tarnished. That was all reason enough not to issue a pardon... but he did.
Biden has a point that his son was singled out for political reasons. Let's let Biden make the case himself. Here is his entire official message that prefaced the pardon:
Today, I signed a pardon for my son Hunter. From the day I took office, I said I would not interfere with the Justice Department’s decision-making, and I kept my word even as I have watched my son being selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted. Without aggravating factors like use in a crime, multiple purchases, or buying a weapon as a straw purchaser, people are almost never brought to trial on felony charges solely for how they filled out a gun form. Those who were late paying their taxes because of serious addictions, but paid them back subsequently with interest and penalties, are typically given non-criminal resolutions. It is clear that Hunter was treated differently.
The charges in his cases came about only after several of my political opponents in Congress instigated them to attack me and oppose my election. Then, a carefully negotiated plea deal, agreed to by the Department of Justice, unraveled in the court room – with a number of my political opponents in Congress taking credit for bringing political pressure on the process. Had the plea deal held, it would have been a fair, reasonable resolution of Hunter’s cases.
No reasonable person who looks at the facts of Hunter’s cases can reach any other conclusion than Hunter was singled out only because he is my son – and that is wrong. There has been an effort to break Hunter – who has been five and a half years sober, even in the face of unrelenting attacks and selective prosecution. In trying to break Hunter, they’ve tried to break me – and there’s no reason to believe it will stop here. Enough is enough.
For my entire career I have followed a simple principle: just tell the American people the truth. They’ll be fair-minded. Here’s the truth: I believe in the justice system, but as I have wrestled with this, I also believe raw politics has infected this process and it led to a miscarriage of justice – and once I made this decision this weekend, there was no sense in delaying it further. I hope Americans will understand why a father and a President would come to this decision.
Biden could have ended the investigation, but didn't. Biden could have fired the federal prosecutor Donald Trump put on the Hunter Biden case and replaced him with someone he knew would close the investigation. He didn't -- to show fairness and restore the apolitical nature of the Department of Justice. He could have called his attorney general into the Oval Office at any time during the entire proceedings and told him to kill the case. He didn't. He could have easily at least tried to manipulate the case, right after the plea bargain fell apart. At that point in time, it was Republicans who were calling for the prosecutor's head. Biden could have removed him from the case and assigned it to someone else. He didn't. Biden, up until the pardon appeared, has been scrupulously hands-off with not just the Hunter Biden case but with the Justice Department in general. This will all be completely reversed, once Donald Trump takes control again. But Biden -- up to the pardon -- set a sterling example in this regard.
What would Trump have done? Joe Biden was probably rightfully worried what would happen to Hunter under Trump's new attorney general. Hunter has been repeatedly investigated for all sorts of things -- by the Justice Department and by the Republican House of Representatives -- with very little to show for it (other than the two charges they ultimately brought against him). All they have to show for the rest of this immense effort is lots of accusations and insinuations, but zero proof of any of them. But Trump could easily have allowed it all to be dredged up once again. Hunter's sweeping pardon precludes all of this.
Biden ignored the guidelines for pardons. Joe Biden could have waited a few weeks to see what sentences were handed down to his son. He could have commuted the sentences rather than issue a full pardon. If either of the cases had resulted in prison time, he probably would have had even stronger ground for claiming the whole thing was politically motivated. Neither crime -- lying on a federal gun form or not paying your taxes on time -- is usually even prosecuted without further crimes as extenuating factors. Hunter paid his back taxes, with interest and penalties, a full two years before he was investigated and charged. Most taxpayers who have already made restitution wouldn't have been criminally charged. But with the pardon being issued pre-sentencing, we'll never know what the judges would have done. Also, Justice Department guidelines state that full presidential pardons shouldn't be given until five years after the sentence was completed. This is obviously not the case with Hunter, although previous presidents have also ignored this guideline as well.
Closest presidential relative ever. Hunter Biden is Joe Biden's son. That's the closest familial tie for anyone pardoned by a president. In fact, there aren't even a whole lot of others who have been pardoned previously. Abraham Lincoln pardoned his wife's half-sister. Bill Clinton pardoned his half-brother. Donald Trump pardoned his son-in-law's father (who will be appointed as our new ambassador to France, apparently). That's it. That's the whole list. So this pardon will indeed go down in history in a big way. Biden's presidency may even be remembered for this pardon more than for anything else that has happened during his term (although it'll take some time to see whether this becomes true or not).
No one is above the law... except my son. It's already a hoary tenet. Everyone knows that the justice system works differently for those with money and power. But sanctimonious politicians could still trot out the principle whenever needed: "No one is above the law in America." Biden's pardon of his son makes this a lot harder to do with a straight face.
Breathlessly sweeping in scope. Biden didn't just pardon his son for the crimes he was about to be sentenced for. He issued:
A Full and Unconditional Pardon
For those offenses against the United States which he has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 1, 2014, through December 1, 2024....
That's a whopping big chunk of time, and it was chosen so that Trump and the Republicans can't even harass Hunter for the whole Burisma/Ukraine situation. It is a very sweeping and blanket pardon, for almost 11 years of his son's life. It is comparable to the pardon Richard Nixon got, which covered his entire time in office as president. Biden is already being criticized for the pardon not being limited and specific, but it will indeed achieve what Biden is attempting to achieve: putting Hunter beyond the reach of Trump and his minions.
Whataboutism ammo. Not just Donald Trump but plenty of Republicans are going to bring up Hunter's pardon ad nauseam. Guaranteed. Over and over and over again, to excuse any excesses of either Trump or any other Republican, from this point going forward. No matter how egregious things get, they'll be ready with: "But Joe Biden pardoned Hunter!" Count on it. They'll use it to justify any number of unethical or even illegal things. That right there is a strong argument for Joe not to have done it.
What has taking the high road actually ever done for Democrats? I saved this one for last. It's a political argument, not a moral or ethical or legal argument. Democrats are treated differently than Republicans. There is a massive double standard. This comes from other Democrats, the media (in an enormous way), and even the general public. Democrats are constantly expected to "do the right thing," even if it means giving up a chance to advance their own agenda or their own political careers. They are held to this high standard because they are Democrats. Republicans? Not so much. There are different -- much more lax -- standards for the GOP. Just look at not just Trump but his proposed cabinet. That's all the proof anyone should need.
But what has this ever done for Democrats? Not much, at least not in today's political era. The standards weren't quite so blatantly partisan a while back, but ever since Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, Democrats are expected to walk the straight and narrow or they face being denounced by other Democrats, shunned, or even drummed out of the party. Republicans -- the one-time "party of family values" who used to excoriate "moral relativism" -- don't even pretend to care anymore about anything immoral, unethical, or illegal on their side of the aisle.
Michelle Obama used to urge Democrats: "When they go low, we go high." That is a fine upstanding and righteous ideal, but today's political reality is that you don't get any Brownie points for doing so. You don't win any political advantage by doing so. You in essence tie one hand behind your back before the political fight even begins.
Does anyone think if Joe Biden hadn't pardoned his son he would have been praised for his restraint by his political foes? I don't. Does anyone think not pardoning Hunter would have helped Democrats in any future election? I don't. Biden may well have sacrificed his legacy as being a standup kind of guy by this one action. He knows his political reputation is going to take a big hit by this. But it's not going to change anybody's mind in any future election -- unless Hunter somehow deludes himself into thinking he should run for office (which I do not consider likely).
But at the end of the day, the decision was likely made not primarily through weighing the pros and cons and political angles. It was not likely made while thinking about any presidential legacy. It was not likely made with concern for the optics of doing so.
At the end of the day, a father knew he could make his son's life better by one simple act. I am not a father, but from the parents I have talked to throughout my whole life, I can indeed understand the protectiveness and love involved. So I can't fault President Joe Biden for pardoning his son. Joe's going to pay a steep price when it comes to his own presidential legacy, and he knows it. But being a protective father was more important to him. That's what the decision likely boiled down to, plain and simple.
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
I'm sorry to say that Biden's legacy was going to be a very tarnished one before this pardon.
Even given the impact on the decision by the outcome of the election, it's still hard to believe that Biden wouldn't have pardoned Hunter had Harris won. Mostly because it has been getting harder and harder to believe much of anything the Biden Harris administration has said on some very big issues.
One thing not mentioned here by Chris is the impact that the unpleasant forcing out of Biden from the presidential race by his fellow Democrats and media/blogosphere (all parts of both) had on his decision-making process. I'm guessing that it had quite A LOT to do with making the decision to pardon a much easier one than it otherwise might have been.
I think you're being a little too hard on Biden from a political angle, in particular on this point of why he shouldn't have pardoned his son:
"Whataboutism ammo. Not just Donald Trump but plenty of Republicans are going to bring up Hunter's pardon ad nauseam. Guaranteed. Over and over and over again, to excuse any excesses of either Trump or any other Republican, from this point going forward. No matter how egregious things get, they'll be ready with: 'But Joe Biden pardoned Hunter!' Count on it. They'll use it to justify any number of unethical or even illegal things. That right there is a strong argument for Joe not to have done it."
This seems ridiculous to me. Trump abused the pardon power repeatedly as president, and has promised to do so ten times more inappropriately during his second term. The idea that the Republicans will even try to pretend that the "unethical or even illegal things" they will be doing starting in January will be easier for them to defend or justify, because of this pardon of Biden's, doesn't make sense in today's American politics.
That's not how the GOP works anymore. Try to imagine there was no pardon this week, and then explain how any future Republican defenses of Trump's upcoming crimes and misdeeds would be any different at all except for whom on the Democratic side they will scapegoat to excuse the inexcusable Trump.
I wonder if Biden will pardon others who have gotten a raw deal from the justice system.
If Basement Biden wanted to fade the heat on this pardon, he would pardon President Trump's EQUALLY politicly motivated persecutions.
Such a pardon would definetly take the winds out of the sails of the GOP vis a vis pitching about this First Druggie pardon.... :)
If Democrats want to have a viable Political Party again, they need to take a good long look in the mirror and realize that the problem is not messaging, it's the message..
My brother is doing the Trump dance
Democrats are eating a giant helping of crow since voters delivered a stunning victory for the Republican candidate
https://www.irishtimes.com/world/americas/2024/11/30/my-brother-is-doing-the-trump-dance/
This is the ONLY way that the Democrat Party becomes a relevant Political Party...
Liz,
I'm sorry to say that Biden's legacy was going to be a very tarnished one before this pardon.
Yea it was.. But the pardon debacle ended all hope of a return to grace..
One thing not mentioned here by Chris is the impact that the unpleasant forcing out of Biden from the presidential race by his fellow Democrats and media/blogosphere (all parts of both) had on his decision-making process. I'm guessing that it had quite A LOT to do with making the decision to pardon a much easier one than it otherwise might have been.
Very good point, Liz..
I am sure that Biden's thought process was, "Well, my family got frak'ed over so I am going to save my son and to hell with the Party.."
Considering the circumstances of Biden being stabbed in the back by the Party, one can hardly blame Biden for putting his family before the Party.
JMCT,
"Whataboutism ammo. Not just Donald Trump but plenty of Republicans are going to bring up Hunter's pardon ad nauseam.
You mean like you and the other Democrats have brought up President ELECT so-called "crimes" ad nasuem??
You mean like that??
This seems ridiculous to me. Trump abused the pardon power repeatedly as president,
No more than and a lot less than DEMOCRAT Presidents have abused the pardon power...
Why is it OK for Democrats and not for Republicans??
Isn't that hypocritical on your part??
Try to imagine there was no pardon this week, and then explain how any future Republican defenses of Trump's upcoming crimes and misdeeds would be any different at all except for whom on the Democratic side they will scapegoat to excuse the inexcusable Trump.
It would be extremely "different" because Democrats simply have no moral, ethical or legally leg to stand on..
Explain to me how Hunter Biden's legitimate prosecutions were nothing but political machinations yet President Trump's lawfare persecutions were legitimate prosecutions.
Can you explain the logic of your position??
No, you cannot.. Which is why you won't even try to..
The facts are clear.
Basement Biden has a valid point when he says that no one NOT named Biden would have been prosecuted for those crimes.
It's ALSO an equally valid point to say that no one NOT named Trump would have been prosecuted for those "crimes".
At least Hunter Biden's crimes were REAL crimes that had to jump thru ZERO hoops to be prosecuted..
President Trump's "crimes" required Democrats to use novel, NEVER BEFORE ATTEMPTED legal theories, requiring the addition of NEW laws and changing existing laws to allow the persecutions...
That's the different between President Trump's made up "crimes" and Hunter Biden's real and actual crimes..
These are the facts that NO ONE can argue..
Interesting article over at the Democrat Propaganda Flagship, VOX..
As an aside, THIS is exactly why I always kick ya'all's asses all over Weigantia.. ALL ya'all ever have is WaPoop, NY Grime and other Democrat Propaganda outlets to try and support ya'all's points.. I use those same outlets to prove how wrong ya'all are.. :D
Anyways, the question is:
Are progressive groups sinking Democrats' electoral chances?
Of course they are..
What troubles the Democratic Party? Following Kamala Harris’s loss, numerous Democrats and center-left analysts have placed the blame on one factor: "the groups."
They argue that progressive advocacy and activist organizations have not only shifted too far to the left but have also gained excessive sway within the Democratic coalition. This influence, they claim, has driven the party to embrace positions that are misaligned with the average voter on various issues. As a result, they believe this miscalculation has hurt the party’s electoral chances and may ultimately harm the very communities these groups aim to support.
“Many of today’s lawmakers and leaders have come up at a time when alienating the groups is seen as anathema, but they should start seeing it as both right and necessary.”
-Democrat Staffer Adam Jentleson
“I’m quite comfortable — morally and politically — with the position that Dem presidential candidates shouldn’t let voters believe they want to defund the police, abolish ICE, decriminalize border crossings, or provide transition surgeries for undocumented immigrants in prison.”
-Democrat Jon Favreau
The problem for Democrats is that, despite the claims of Favreau, those **ARE** the positions of the Democrat Party..
One only has to peruse any of the Democrat propaganda sites to find the FACTS that prove this..
Weigantia is a perfect example of this..
For the most part, ya'all are a bunch of progressives who hate cops, who support drug legalization, open borders and leniency for criminals..
And where ya'all (AND the Democrat Party) finds yerselves now is facing the result of that massive push to the Left..
A huge electoral and popular vote loss...
Until ya'all (AND the Democrat Party) can take that needed look in the mirror, what happened in 2016 and 2024 is going to continue to happen over and over and over again..
Just as sure as night follows day which follows night..
The debate now is over whether and how Democrats should respond to electoral defeat — by moving to the center and trying to moderate their positions, sticking to their guns, or moving even further left.
There IS no debate..
If Democrats EVER want to have a snowball's chance in hell of winning another election, they are going to have to STOP running further and further Left and get to the center or, even better, center-right..
As the rest of Americans are...
It's really that simple..
America is a center-right country.. Period. End Trans....
Having regained access to Chris' comments thread for a little more than a week now, I counted the number of replies that folks have made on the past seven CW posts before each thread was hijacked by a firehose of vitriol.
11/20 - 3 posts
11/21 - 8 posts
11/22 - 42 post - some anomaly relating to Thanksgiving?
11/25 - 5 posts
11/26 - 0 posts
11/27 - 11 posts
12/2 - 3 posts
That averages 11, but without the 11/22 outlier it's actually 6 posts before things go south.
So as I've been trying to do, it clearly pays to get your thoughtful and relevant comments to Chris' ideas and observation in early. I don't read whatever follows.
JMCT,
Passive Aggressive much?? :)
What YOU call a "firehouse of vitriol" is simply nothing more then a good healthy dose of FACTS and REALITY..
The massive and shaming spanking that you and your fellow Democrats just received proves that beyond any doubt whatsoever...
As long as you dismiss these FACTS you and your fellow Democrats will never return from the wilderness...
Think about it.. if you dare...
I don't read whatever follows
You are, of course, assuming that people actually care what you read and don't read... :)
And people say that I'M arrogant!! :)
"OF COURSE I'M ARROGANT!!! I'VE EARNED IT!!"
-Q
:D
hunter biden is merely a tiny part of a long and storied tradition.
what no one seems to want to understand about this is that America has always had a love affair with outlaws who find new and creative ways to avoid answering for their crimes; it feeds the dreams of the nation. we read serials about Jesse James and Billy the Kid. we watch endless films about Al Capone and John Gotti. yes, these are bad men who did bad things, but they're also evidence that it is possible, however briefly, for an unwashed outsider to fight the establishment and win.
hunter biden barely fits the mold, if at all; he's just the problem child of a powerful dad. Donald on the other hand isn't just a president, he's an institution. he's half outlaw and half robber baron, and he still hasn't been caught.
JL
and I should add at this point, probably never will be.
nyp on [13-14]:
I love your exposition on the American fascination with the outlaw beating the law. But as you say, that actually has nothing to do with Hunter Biden.
I do agree that Biden the younger is "part of a long and storied tradition". But that tradition is the one where wayward children with excellent connections are protected from the law by their parents and their parents' social status. He's no "unwashed outsider", he's the child of "the establishment" that the establishment goes out of its way to shelter and forgive when things go wrong.
And as for Trump, I'd say being a 'robber baron' for all that it's a metaphorical term, implies outlawry. One isn't half and half - one is both.
And yes, it does seem like he's dodged the sheriff and the jail and the scaffold, once and for all at this point.
@jmct,
disagree about robber barons being the same as outlaws. JP Morgan and Ike Clanton were both involved in the cowboy war with Wyatt Earp and doc holiday. one was an outlaw and the other a robber baron. not the same.