100%. Why should he leave his kid in the line of fire? Now, just resign on 1/10/2025 so we fuck up all the 47 merch because then Kamala is 47 and Trump is 48.
Not only that but SCOTUS gave the president “Ghod Emperor of Dune” powers, so Biden resigns 1/10, Kamala the prosecutor becomes president, and “the hammer of Ghod” descends on Trump etal.
If Don, Eric, Ivanka and Jared aren't going to prison for what they've done, why should Hunter?
Will Biden pardon Jack Smith, Mark Milley, and some Members of Congress and his administration to preempt Pam Bondi and Kash Patel from prosecuting them? And let's not forget Liz Cheney.
I responded to an online complaint about the pardon as follows:
"The controversy followed Biden’s June statement that he would 'abide by the jury’s decision…"
As a pardon for a crime is an acknowledgement by both the pardoner and the pardonee that the pardonee was convicted of a crime (pardons are for the guilty), nothing about the pardon abrogates the jury’s decision in any way.
Biden did say multiple times that he would not pardon his son, but In light of Trump’s stated intention to seek revenge on his enemies—and his preparations to do so—and given the lack of respect Hunter Biden gave to Republicans while they targeted and abused him both inside and outside the Capitol, I think that President Biden had a greater duty to take care of his son than to gratify the base desires of the shithole nation that Trump intends to create.
Screw the optics. They're meaningless and especially when compared to those around the miscreants Demento pardoned (and presumably will pardon). Joe Biden bent over backwards to let justice play out, down to keeping the Demento-appointed US Attorney pursuing the Hunter Biden case in place, when he took office. His DOJ allowed Weiss, the US Attorney, to become a special counsel and pursue new charges when the original plea deal fell apart. It also allowed Bill Barr's special counsel, John Durham, to continue his fool's errand of an investigation into the FBI probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election. The country owes Joe Biden a round of thanks for what will be more than 50 years of dedicated public service. If allowing his son, under the law, to be free of spurious charges is one way to do that, so be it. Demento has permanently stained this country far more than a pardon of Hunter Biden will even come close to matching
Hunter's been fighting an uphill battle because of his parentage. That's just not right. With Trump in charge, he's a sitting duck if he hasn't been pardoned. At least this way, he'll be beyond the reach of political malevolence.
I don't like the "if you can't beat him, join him" message that this sends. Joe just lowered himself bigly in my eyes, but I know my opinion is in the minority here. He said he would not pardon his son but then he did. He is well within his rights as the President to do this, but I don't like it. You can all think what you want to think about me for this.
It might help your case if you were more specific about the so-called message this "sends." The prosecution was politically motivated one way or another and the charges wouldn't have likely been brought (and historically have not been) against any defendant not named Biden. Thus, compared to the other guy's pardons of miscreants Stone, Flynn, Bannon, Kushner et al the pardon of Hunter Biden doesn't come anywhere close.
The promise was ill advised in the first place. Circumstance changed. He changed his mind. That's not a lie, it's learning from experience and changing one's approach when it becomes clear that what you have done in the past didn't work. That's wisdom. Joe followed his highest duty to protect his family. Keeping a promise when you realize it will cause damage if you do so is not honor, is arrogant and just plain stupid.
Fact is, it was an intention and one that rightly changed when it became obvious the other side taking the reins of power was not going to respect the rule of law and long-standing norms. You don't make conditional pardons. And certainly don't publicly announce them. Even worse optics and especially with a campaign in sight.
The orange clown is going to pardon all of the assholes who stormed the Capitol and tried to destroy democracy, so I'm totally okay with Hunter getting pardoned.
Watching the documentary or special or whatever it was From Russia with Lev, especially the video of Parnas apologizing to Hunter at the end gave me a much more sympathetic view of Hunter.
President Biden's pardon of Hunter has raised the possibility of his issuing blanket or preemptive pardons to Jack Smith and others. While presidential pardoning power is broad, it does have the significant limitation of applying only to federal criminal offenses --- and at the outside, possibly unadmitted evidence of, or even perhaps, the appearance of, criminal offenses. This raises the legally unsettled question of how specific these crimes must be. Pardons, except for amnesties, are typically given after a person has been convicted of a crime, and specifically reference that crime. And although there is historical precedent for a broad, undefined pardon --- the Nixon pardon (“...all offenses against the United States”) --- it is not legal precedent, since it was never tested in court. I think we can assume, however, that should Biden grant broad preemptive pardons, they would be immediately challenged.
Alleged crimes (first actually considered as grounds for impeachment) committed by a sitting president is a completely different situation than what would be Trumped up (literally) charges for Smith and probably everyone else who might be granted blanket, preemptive pardons.
I couldn't agree with you more. I wouldn't leave my child in the line of fire for this crook and his vendetta agenda. And with his nomination of Charles Kushner (who brings his personal Trump pardon for all of his convictions for tax evasion to his role as Ambassador of France), Trump should sit this one out. But we know that won't stop him!
I would have been happier with it if it had been a part of a larger set of prisoner actions: clear the Federal death row, Free Mumia, Free Leonard Peltier, and pardon basically anyone else that left-wing groups have been petitioning for.
Biden should never have promised to NOT pardon his son after the plea deal fell apart following interference from House GOP.
News stories covering this case featured legal experts who all said Hunter had been overcharged. It was a political stunt. Yes, it was unfortunately facilitated by a man who was failing at life, but it was still a stunt. That's all Joe had to keep saying: "Look at what the experts are saying, so yes, I may have to pardon Hunter."
Based on the assessment by experts that no one else would have faced the same sentence (or charges), I think Biden actually had an obligation to pardon his son, especially when you layer in the confession and apology by Lev Parness in the "Let's get Joe via Hunter so we can get Trump elected and hand Ukraine to Putin" scheme." That scheme took down Manafort, eh? Have we forgotten this angle?
I worry for the Bidens, for the retribution that Trump will deliver for this, but even if there hadn't been a pardon, Trump would still harass the Bidens. Kash Patel has made that clearly apparent.
100%. Why should he leave his kid in the line of fire? Now, just resign on 1/10/2025 so we fuck up all the 47 merch because then Kamala is 47 and Trump is 48.
I love this idea!
Not only that but SCOTUS gave the president “Ghod Emperor of Dune” powers, so Biden resigns 1/10, Kamala the prosecutor becomes president, and “the hammer of Ghod” descends on Trump etal.
Genius!!!
Deus vult !!!
If Don, Eric, Ivanka and Jared aren't going to prison for what they've done, why should Hunter?
Will Biden pardon Jack Smith, Mark Milley, and some Members of Congress and his administration to preempt Pam Bondi and Kash Patel from prosecuting them? And let's not forget Liz Cheney.
The President cannot issue pre-emotive pardons, the person being pardoned has to already be accused of a specific crime
I responded to an online complaint about the pardon as follows:
"The controversy followed Biden’s June statement that he would 'abide by the jury’s decision…"
As a pardon for a crime is an acknowledgement by both the pardoner and the pardonee that the pardonee was convicted of a crime (pardons are for the guilty), nothing about the pardon abrogates the jury’s decision in any way.
Biden did say multiple times that he would not pardon his son, but In light of Trump’s stated intention to seek revenge on his enemies—and his preparations to do so—and given the lack of respect Hunter Biden gave to Republicans while they targeted and abused him both inside and outside the Capitol, I think that President Biden had a greater duty to take care of his son than to gratify the base desires of the shithole nation that Trump intends to create.
Screw the optics. They're meaningless and especially when compared to those around the miscreants Demento pardoned (and presumably will pardon). Joe Biden bent over backwards to let justice play out, down to keeping the Demento-appointed US Attorney pursuing the Hunter Biden case in place, when he took office. His DOJ allowed Weiss, the US Attorney, to become a special counsel and pursue new charges when the original plea deal fell apart. It also allowed Bill Barr's special counsel, John Durham, to continue his fool's errand of an investigation into the FBI probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election. The country owes Joe Biden a round of thanks for what will be more than 50 years of dedicated public service. If allowing his son, under the law, to be free of spurious charges is one way to do that, so be it. Demento has permanently stained this country far more than a pardon of Hunter Biden will even come close to matching
Hunter's been fighting an uphill battle because of his parentage. That's just not right. With Trump in charge, he's a sitting duck if he hasn't been pardoned. At least this way, he'll be beyond the reach of political malevolence.
Did he even have a choice? His son has a target on his back for no other reason than he is Biden's son.
It is unarguably a better use of the pardon power than Trump has demonstrated.
I don't like the "if you can't beat him, join him" message that this sends. Joe just lowered himself bigly in my eyes, but I know my opinion is in the minority here. He said he would not pardon his son but then he did. He is well within his rights as the President to do this, but I don't like it. You can all think what you want to think about me for this.
It might help your case if you were more specific about the so-called message this "sends." The prosecution was politically motivated one way or another and the charges wouldn't have likely been brought (and historically have not been) against any defendant not named Biden. Thus, compared to the other guy's pardons of miscreants Stone, Flynn, Bannon, Kushner et al the pardon of Hunter Biden doesn't come anywhere close.
The message this "sends" me is that his promise not to pardon his son was an empty one. I'm used to the "other guy" breaking promises, not Biden.
The promise was ill advised in the first place. Circumstance changed. He changed his mind. That's not a lie, it's learning from experience and changing one's approach when it becomes clear that what you have done in the past didn't work. That's wisdom. Joe followed his highest duty to protect his family. Keeping a promise when you realize it will cause damage if you do so is not honor, is arrogant and just plain stupid.
Suggest you conserve your supply of righteous indignation. There will be plenty more appropriate opportunities to use it in the four years to come.
If Harris had won, do you really think Biden would have pardoned Hunter? The "promise" wasn't empty; it was conditional.
If it's conditional, we should know that at the time it's made. "I won't pardon Hunter unless . . . "
Fact is, it was an intention and one that rightly changed when it became obvious the other side taking the reins of power was not going to respect the rule of law and long-standing norms. You don't make conditional pardons. And certainly don't publicly announce them. Even worse optics and especially with a campaign in sight.
And none of this will matter in the 2026 mid term elections.
The only reason I don't like the pardon is that he said he wouldn't do it and then did. Period.
The orange clown is going to pardon all of the assholes who stormed the Capitol and tried to destroy democracy, so I'm totally okay with Hunter getting pardoned.
In 2016 Michelle Obama famously said, “When they go low, we go high.” “We” could wrap ourselves in moral virtue, but “we” still lost the election.
I think Biden pardoned Hunter as much to throw Trump’s methods back in his face as anything else.
Watching the documentary or special or whatever it was From Russia with Lev, especially the video of Parnas apologizing to Hunter at the end gave me a much more sympathetic view of Hunter.
I like the idea that he pardoned Hunter to own the magas.
President Biden's pardon of Hunter has raised the possibility of his issuing blanket or preemptive pardons to Jack Smith and others. While presidential pardoning power is broad, it does have the significant limitation of applying only to federal criminal offenses --- and at the outside, possibly unadmitted evidence of, or even perhaps, the appearance of, criminal offenses. This raises the legally unsettled question of how specific these crimes must be. Pardons, except for amnesties, are typically given after a person has been convicted of a crime, and specifically reference that crime. And although there is historical precedent for a broad, undefined pardon --- the Nixon pardon (“...all offenses against the United States”) --- it is not legal precedent, since it was never tested in court. I think we can assume, however, that should Biden grant broad preemptive pardons, they would be immediately challenged.
I am not a lawyer, but a historic precedent seems significant when it is as important as the one for Nixon.
Alleged crimes (first actually considered as grounds for impeachment) committed by a sitting president is a completely different situation than what would be Trumped up (literally) charges for Smith and probably everyone else who might be granted blanket, preemptive pardons.
Hunter never would have gone to jail had he not been the president's son and therefore targeted. He might have had a fine or not even been prosecuted.
I couldn't agree with you more. I wouldn't leave my child in the line of fire for this crook and his vendetta agenda. And with his nomination of Charles Kushner (who brings his personal Trump pardon for all of his convictions for tax evasion to his role as Ambassador of France), Trump should sit this one out. But we know that won't stop him!
I would have been happier with it if it had been a part of a larger set of prisoner actions: clear the Federal death row, Free Mumia, Free Leonard Peltier, and pardon basically anyone else that left-wing groups have been petitioning for.
No doubt there will be more to come. Obviously it would have stuck out even if it had been one in a number of others granted at the same time.
Biden should never have promised to NOT pardon his son after the plea deal fell apart following interference from House GOP.
News stories covering this case featured legal experts who all said Hunter had been overcharged. It was a political stunt. Yes, it was unfortunately facilitated by a man who was failing at life, but it was still a stunt. That's all Joe had to keep saying: "Look at what the experts are saying, so yes, I may have to pardon Hunter."
Based on the assessment by experts that no one else would have faced the same sentence (or charges), I think Biden actually had an obligation to pardon his son, especially when you layer in the confession and apology by Lev Parness in the "Let's get Joe via Hunter so we can get Trump elected and hand Ukraine to Putin" scheme." That scheme took down Manafort, eh? Have we forgotten this angle?
I worry for the Bidens, for the retribution that Trump will deliver for this, but even if there hadn't been a pardon, Trump would still harass the Bidens. Kash Patel has made that clearly apparent.