By John Q. Hosedrinker 
President Joe Biden issued a full and unconditional pardon to his son, Hunter Biden, for gun and tax-related convictions. This action reverses previous statements by the president that he would not pardon his son, who faced sentencing this month. The pardon covers potential federal crimes committed between 2014 and 2024, encompassing Hunter Biden’s time on the Burisma board. The president cited unfair and politically motivated prosecution as his rationale for the pardon.
Read the original article here
President Biden pardoning his son, Hunter Biden, has undeniably ignited a firestorm of reactions, ranging from outrage to nonchalant acceptance. The sheer audacity of the act, some argue, is a blatant disregard for the principles of justice and equal application of the law. The perception of a two-tiered system, where the powerful escape consequences while others face the full weight of the legal system, is a deeply troubling one.
This pardon, however, occurs within a larger context of increasingly polarized political dynamics. Many feel that the current political climate, marked by a perceived erosion of established norms and a blatant disregard for legal processes by opposing political figures, has rendered this action almost inconsequential. The argument here is that if high-profile figures from the opposing party, like Trump, are perceived to be acting with impunity, the same standard should apply across the political spectrum.
The timing of the pardon, just before the Thanksgiving holiday, hasn’t been missed either. Some interpret this as a strategic move designed to minimize media attention and the intensity of public backlash. The fact that this announcement follows a period of highly contentious political battles only serves to fuel existing perceptions of partisan maneuvering.
Concerns about the legal basis of Hunter Biden’s conviction also surface. The charge itself is deemed by some to be trivial or legally questionable, further fueling the idea that the pardon is less about justice and more about a father protecting his son. This perception, however, fails to acknowledge the broader context of the current political landscape.
The reaction to the pardon is also colored by the looming presence of Donald Trump and his own potential pardons. The possibility of Trump pardoning numerous individuals involved in the January 6th insurrection, or those implicated in various other alleged crimes, is a significant factor. If such actions are deemed acceptable by a segment of the population, then a presidential pardon for a family member, while still ethically questionable, might seem less shocking by comparison.
Another compelling argument arises from the perspective of a lame-duck president. Knowing his time in office is limited and his influence waning, President Biden’s decision might be interpreted as a final act of defiance, a “fuck it” moment in the face of mounting pressure and overwhelming political turmoil. This perspective reframes the event not as a carefully calculated political maneuver, but as a spontaneous reaction to the relentless chaos of the current political reality.
The argument that laws no longer matter in the current political climate is a recurring theme. The election of a president facing multiple indictments and the apparent impunity enjoyed by high-ranking officials seem to lend credence to this cynical perspective. With this mindset, President Biden’s pardon of his son is merely another event in a long string of actions that appear to undermine the rule of law.
In essence, the reaction to President Biden’s pardon of Hunter Biden is multifaceted. It’s a blend of outrage over perceived injustice, weary acceptance of a degraded political system, and strategic calculation by those in power. It’s a reflection of the deeply divided political climate and highlights the erosion of trust in established institutions and the rule of law. Ultimately, the pardon serves as a symptom of a larger problem—a political climate where the lines between legality, ethics, and political expediency have become increasingly blurred. The controversy will likely continue to fuel the ongoing political battles long after the headlines fade.