Biden pardons Hunter | Biden commutes sentences of nearly all federal death row inmates to life in prison

[Callatoroy]

You are absolutely correct- I don't care in the slightest.

And you most definitely have made the point over the months and years that you vote Republican because you believe in the rule of law and because you believe that the Republican Party is the party that upholds it. Very difficult to take your consternation seriously when you just voted for a felon. (It also makes you the h-word that you keep calling other posters!). No idea how you can square a vote for a felon with giving credence to caring about rule of law. Oh, sure, sure, I know you'll say that you had no choice because of inflation or immigration or Kamala Harris' weird laugh or whatever. I hear you. But just recognize that by voting for a felon, you and 75 million other people have permanently forfeited the right to claim that you care oh so deeply about "rule of law." And that's fine! Just say that you only care about winning, not being piously righteous about some notion of "rule of law."

OK, I have never said that I vote republican because I believe in the rule of law and that I believe the republican party is the one that upholds it. Ever. Especially on this board having voted for trump, so that's complete and utter bullshit. And further, I'm not the one on this board that used the rule of law to beat other posters over the head over their vote. Kind of hard position for a trump voter to take on here so again, BULLSHIT.

 

[CFordUNC]

My views on this ordeal are as follows:

1. Biden has the Constitutional and legal authority to pardon AND
2. It was probably wrong for Biden to use this Constitutional and legal authority to pardon Hunter especially given his explicit promise to not do so AND
3. I understand that as a father Biden may have instinctively tried to do the one thing that all parents want to do above all else: protect their child from harm AND
4. Donald Trump has pardoned far, far worse criminals and made it a campaign promise to pardon even more of the same in this second term AND
5. You forfeit the right to say that you care about the rule of law when you vote for a felon and someone promising preemptively to pardon his allies AND
6. Every single person is a hypocrite in some form or fashion when it comes to political stances AND
7. We're all- Republican and Democrat alike- probably about to have much, much bigger concerns than Hunter Biden being pardoned.

 

[finesse]

Yeah, there's trans people in women's bathrooms.

 

[CFordUNC]

OK, I have never said that I vote republican because I believe in the rule of law and that I believe the republican party is the one that upholds it. Ever. Especially on this board having voted for trump, so that's complete and utter bullshit. And further, I'm not the one on this board that used the rule of law to beat other posters over the head over their vote. Kind of hard position for a trump voter to take on here so again, BULLSHIT.

Well, then, I'm legitimately very proud of you for admitting your own hypocrisy, especially after whatever that weird 2 AM posting binge was not even 12 hours ago where you were calling everyone else a hypocrite. I mean that in all sincerity. It can't have been easy. I can honestly say that I've never seen someone openly state that they recognize that they can't claim to care about the rule of law because they know their candidate is a wanton lawbreaker. That took some guts and I applaud you for it.

 

[Geisterfahrer]

Bullshit. I believe (and I think there are millions like me) with my entire being that trump has broken laws and gained advantages the average person would have been prosecuted for and wouldn't have had the privilege to gain those advantages. I also believe just as much that the same is true for biden. This country was faced with maybe the worst choice of candidates it has ever had to choose from. From a used car salesman who grabs women by the pussy to an influence peddler with dementia, to an absolute idiot who fell out of a coconut tree and who wasn't democratically chosen to run. Rule of law didn't apply in this election because the country was not offered a virtuous choice and the direction of the country superseded it. I just wasn't among the majority of this board acting holier than thou and pretending that my side wasn't as guilty and looking down on others calling them all kinds of nasty names and hurling insults. Yes, you did participate in that name calling and pretending the left offered more virtue. This board is finding out just how politically wrong they were and how out of touch with mainstream America it is, and also how your side is no different with respect to rule of law. For you to point to the trump voters as those not voting for the rule of law is pure hypocrisy as evidenced by hunter's pardon. 75 million voters do care about the rule of law. They just have more clarity than the voters on this board because they saw the same perversion of the rule of law on the left and voted based on the direction of the country. The left ran an entire potus election being nothing more than hypocrites. "Rule of law" was a theme of this election. It was parroted by your celebrity influencers and media. It was used in the two debates by your candidates. And in the stroke of a pen, the left, this board, and anyone who denounced trump voters as not being concerned about the rule of law has had their hypocrisy exposed. Of course, lawtig, wmheel, and a couple of others had the guts to call it what it is.

It’s skillful how you can vomit with a straight face.

 

[Callatoroy]

Thanks.
But according to your own rules about lobbying the “hypocrite” moniker, the person using the word must have evidence of the poster being a hypocrite.
So, do you or don’t you have evidence of me claiming the “rule of law,” is why I voted for Biden or Harris?

I’ll make it easy for you…as others pointed out, the pardon isn’t about “rule of law,” anyway. It’s about abuse of the pardon power. And I have never posted anything one way or another about a president’s pardons - Trump, Obama, Bush, or anyone else.

I used the word for those who justified the pardon and didn't denounce it based on conservatives being attacked for their support for trump because they don't care about the rule of law. That wouldn't have been the single justification for your voting for the dem candidate therefore not the cause for the use. I interpreted your comments as justifying it. Again, if wrong I apologized.

Others are wrong. Semantically you are correct. But it has everything to do with the rule of law, the weaponization of the DOJ and they hypocrisy the left has shown in using the power of the pardon.

 

[superrific]

If it is legally within the President's discretion and prerogative to issue a pardon, how is this an abuse of power? Some may find it distasteful, as surely we have found and will find many of Trump's pardons distasteful, but how is it an abuse of power by a President to execute what is legally within his prerogative. Perhaps I'm not understanding what is meant by "abuse" here. Given SCOTUS's presidential immunity ruling, I think we're fixin to find out just how distasteful the exercise of Presidential prerogative can be...

That's exactly what the Supreme Court held: the pardon power is not capable of abuse because it is entrusted to the sole discretion of the president.

That said, "abuse of power" often refers to things that are technically legal but shouldn't be, or for issues that present problems in a way that the normal exercise of power doesn't. So if someone wanted to call this an abuse of power, I wouldn't agree but I wouldn't say it's wrong or nonsense.

 

[Callatoroy]

It’s skillful how you can vomit with a straight face.

If it's tequila I usually wince and close my eyes.

 

[Callatoroy]

I asked you on another thread the name of the prison that you described as having a very successful prisoner work program but you never responded. How about it? Hypocrite or respect?

I never saw your post on another thread. The company in that anecdote is a customer and the prison name would make it fairly easy to identify that customer. So I'm not going to offer that prison name.

 

[superrific]

I don't mean to speak for super but I think that's what he's getting at when he says this is not really about rule of law.

It's not about rule of law because nepotism isn't really a rule of law issue. It wasn't a breach of rule of law for JFK to appoint his brother to AG. There are plenty of other bad things that can be said about nepotism.

The rule of law is implicated by pardons that are designed to impede criminal investigations of illegal conduct by the pardoner or the pardoner's cronies, or to basically make effectively legal what should not be. Often nepotism has this function, which accounts for the discomfort, I think. But here, there's no question of that. Hunter was convicted of conduct that indisputably did not involve Joe Biden or anyone else. It was not covering up anything. Nothing will happen to America whether or not Hunter served a jail sentence.

So that's the danger. The problem with Kushner's Saudi fund isn't that he's the president's son-in-law. It's that he was a presidential advisor, and there's a very strong appearance of quid pro quo -- all the more so given Trump's attempt to hijack American foreign policy for his own benefit. It wouldn't be more or less wrong if it was Kellyanne Conway or Stephen Miller running that Saudi fund. If the fund had any aspect of mutual backscratching, then that threatens the rule of law, whether or not it's Jared or Miller or Trump himself.

 

[lawtig02]

It's not about rule of law because nepotism isn't really a rule of law issue. It wasn't a breach of rule of law for JFK to appoint his brother to AG. There are plenty of other bad things that can be said about nepotism.

The rule of law is implicated by pardons that are designed to impede criminal investigations of illegal conduct by the pardoner or the pardoner's cronies, or to basically make effectively legal what should not be. Often nepotism has this function, which accounts for the discomfort, I think. But here, there's no question of that. Hunter was convicted of conduct that indisputably did not involve Joe Biden or anyone else. It was not covering up anything. Nothing will happen to America whether or not Hunter served a jail sentence.

So that's the danger. The problem with Kushner's Saudi fund isn't that he's the president's son-in-law. It's that he was a presidential advisor, and there's a very strong appearance of quid pro quo -- all the more so given Trump's attempt to hijack American foreign policy for his own benefit. It wouldn't be more or less wrong if it was Kellyanne Conway or Stephen Miller running that Saudi fund. If the fund had any aspect of mutual backscratching, then that threatens the rule of law, whether or not it's Jared or Miller or Trump himself.

I don't disagree with any of that, but my view of the impact of pardons on the rule of law is a little broader. To quote A.V. Dicey's formulation, which I know you're familiar with, "no man is punishable or can be lawfully made to suffer in body or goods except for a distinct breach of law established in the ordinary legal manner before the ordinary Courts of the land."

It's probably my bias showing, but that legal process is, to me, at the very core of our rule of law. Sometimes it gets the answer right, sometimes it doesn't. But as long as the process is followed, we have something we can all trust. Or at least something we should be able to trust. Pardons interfere with that process in my view. I guess you could say they're part of the process, but I see them as something outside the "ordinary legal manner" that have the effect of disrupting the judgments of "the ordinary courts of the land." And that, to me, is extremely problematic as it relates to the rule of law. It's especially problematic when nepotism, or kickbacks, or any other form of corruption is involved, and while many of Trump's pardons were deeply corrupt, Hunter's pardon also at least involves nepotism, which as you note, makes it particularly uncomfortable.

Calheel raised an example earlier today of a pardon facilitating a prisoner exchange. I had not thought about that before, but that hypothetical doesn't give me nearly the same concern. I think it's because there's a greater national good that's being accomplished through the pardon that justifies a departure from the ordinary rule of law, without raising the concern it's being subverted for unjust reasons. Likewise, if Mandela had been imprisoned in the US rather than in South Africa, I would have no qualms about granting him a pardon. So I'm not an absolutist on this. I think pardons could be good and appropriate in certain circumstances. I just hate them in circumstances like these, and I'll hate them even more when Trump uses them to pardon people who are truly despicable, dangerous, and antagonistic to our national interest.

 

[ZenMode]

1. Hunter is less a POS than the median American.
2. Nobody else would have gotten the treatment Hunter has gotten, so it would be like fighting unfair with unfair.
3. Whether or not it's the right thing to do, why get pissed off about that of all things? It's so tiny and insignificant.

I've known a decent number of people and none was a bigger POS than Hunter. Dude is absolutely useless. Druggie. Ditched his daughter. Bilked multiple governments out of millions of dollars selling access to his daddy. Money launderer, just to name a few.

 

[finesse]

Just read this on another board. If this is true, I'm even less offended by the pardon.



The tortured history of the cases speaks volumes about why these cases were politically motivated and unprecedented in their prosecution:

Hunter Biden was investigated for five years by the Justice Department. After those five years of investigations, the Trump-appointed U.S. attorney in Delaware, David Weiss, agreed with Biden’s lawyers to a nonprosecution agreement. Weiss then backpedaled and ended up insisting that Biden instead plead guilty to two tax misdemeanors (for failure to file) and that he enter into pretrial diversion for one gun charge. Biden agreed in June 2023 to these new terms and the two sides submitted his written diversion agreement to the court.

One very important part of Hunter Biden’s deal was a mutually agreed upon immunity provision. On the date of Biden’s plea hearing, the federal judge in Delaware questioned the scope of the immunity provision in the agreement. But she never killed the deal; she asked the parties for clarification of the immunity.

At this time, Trump and his team went after Weiss full bore. Weiss was publicly attacked and criticized. At one point, Trump posted on social media: “Weiss is a COWARD, a smaller version of Bill Barr, who never had the courage to do what everyone knows should have been done.” Instead of clarifying the deal that he himself had negotiated and already approved and despite there not being any new evidence to merit any changes, Weiss reneged on the agreement and insisted that Hunter accept new terms. He also got Attorney General Merrick Garland to grant him special counsel status.

Hunter Biden’s lawyers have argued that Weiss’ appointment as special counsel was problematic, as he was unlawfully appointed. Special counsel is supposed to be appointed from outside of the U.S. government and, obviously, Weiss was, and remains, the U.S. attorney for the District of Delaware. He should not have been allowed to serve as special counsel in Hunter Biden’s cases. When Hunter Biden moved to dismiss his cases on this basis, his motion was denied.

Nevertheless, Weiss, in a surprising about-face, then indicted Hunter Biden on three felony gun counts in Delaware and nine tax counts in California. It’s worth exposing the legal hypocrisy in these charges to underscore just how unprecedented these prosecutions were:

Hunter Biden possessed a firearm for a total of 11 days. At no point during those 11 days was the firearm loaded or used, and, without his knowledge, a third party took the gun from him and disposed of it in a garbage can. Prior to Weiss' indicting Biden, prosecutors did not believe the evidence even supported a prosecution. And his substance abuse problem at the time merited, at the most, a diversion program. In fact, Biden’s lawyers have argued that in the history of this district in Delaware, no individual has ever been charged under the same facts as Hunter Biden has.

There were zero aggravating circumstances that would have justified the DOJ pursuing any gun charge against Hunter Biden. As Hunter’s lawyers noted: “Since 2023, the only defendant charged with these [gun] offenses in the District of Delaware has been Hunter Biden. In that time, no other case has been charged in Delaware under these statutes.”

Biden was also charged with nine tax counts in California, despite having fully paid his past-due taxes, including interest and penalties in 2021, more than two years before any criminal charges were filed. To move on from the multiple years of investigations and harassment, Biden initially agreed, with Weiss’ full acceptance, to plead to just two misdemeanors for failure to file his tax returns/to pay his taxes for 2017 and 2018. But, once Weiss caved to the political pressure by Trump and his Republican supporters including members of Congress, Weiss failed to honor the original plea agreement and instead filed nine counts (including three felonies).

But perhaps the most obvious evidence that Hunter Biden was a selective criminal prosecution is that other individuals were able to resolve their cases with administrative or civil penalties or judgments. They weren’t prosecuted. But, then again, their last name wasn’t “Biden.”

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opi ... rcna182437

 

[PandemicBlue]

Everybody knew he would just like everybody knows why Hunter was paid all those millions, just like everybody knows why a family who has no businesses or sells any goods or even has a website needs 20 shell companies, just like everybody knows the laptop was real, just like everybody knows where the 10% for the big guy went.

If you were willing to ignore all of this corruption and vote for Biden again had he run, not even factoring in the damage done to the country by his incompetent administration (or maybe very competent if you know what the goals were), then don't say a thing about the people whom you hate for supporting Trump. You are just the opposite side of the coin you claim to hate.

 

[ZenMode]

Just read this on another board. If this is true, I'm even less offended by the pardon.



The tortured history of the cases speaks volumes about why these cases were politically motivated and unprecedented in their prosecution:

Hunter Biden was investigated for five years by the Justice Department. After those five years of investigations, the Trump-appointed U.S. attorney in Delaware, David Weiss, agreed with Biden’s lawyers to a nonprosecution agreement. Weiss then backpedaled and ended up insisting that Biden instead plead guilty to two tax misdemeanors (for failure to file) and that he enter into pretrial diversion for one gun charge. Biden agreed in June 2023 to these new terms and the two sides submitted his written diversion agreement to the court.

One very important part of Hunter Biden’s deal was a mutually agreed upon immunity provision. On the date of Biden’s plea hearing, the federal judge in Delaware questioned the scope of the immunity provision in the agreement. But she never killed the deal; she asked the parties for clarification of the immunity.

At this time, Trump and his team went after Weiss full bore. Weiss was publicly attacked and criticized. At one point, Trump posted on social media: “Weiss is a COWARD, a smaller version of Bill Barr, who never had the courage to do what everyone knows should have been done.” Instead of clarifying the deal that he himself had negotiated and already approved and despite there not being any new evidence to merit any changes, Weiss reneged on the agreement and insisted that Hunter accept new terms. He also got Attorney General Merrick Garland to grant him special counsel status.

Hunter Biden’s lawyers have argued that Weiss’ appointment as special counsel was problematic, as he was unlawfully appointed. Special counsel is supposed to be appointed from outside of the U.S. government and, obviously, Weiss was, and remains, the U.S. attorney for the District of Delaware. He should not have been allowed to serve as special counsel in Hunter Biden’s cases. When Hunter Biden moved to dismiss his cases on this basis, his motion was denied.

Nevertheless, Weiss, in a surprising about-face, then indicted Hunter Biden on three felony gun counts in Delaware and nine tax counts in California. It’s worth exposing the legal hypocrisy in these charges to underscore just how unprecedented these prosecutions were:

Hunter Biden possessed a firearm for a total of 11 days. At no point during those 11 days was the firearm loaded or used, and, without his knowledge, a third party took the gun from him and disposed of it in a garbage can. Prior to Weiss' indicting Biden, prosecutors did not believe the evidence even supported a prosecution. And his substance abuse problem at the time merited, at the most, a diversion program. In fact, Biden’s lawyers have argued that in the history of this district in Delaware, no individual has ever been charged under the same facts as Hunter Biden has.

There were zero aggravating circumstances that would have justified the DOJ pursuing any gun charge against Hunter Biden. As Hunter’s lawyers noted: “Since 2023, the only defendant charged with these [gun] offenses in the District of Delaware has been Hunter Biden. In that time, no other case has been charged in Delaware under these statutes.”

Biden was also charged with nine tax counts in California, despite having fully paid his past-due taxes, including interest and penalties in 2021, more than two years before any criminal charges were filed. To move on from the multiple years of investigations and harassment, Biden initially agreed, with Weiss’ full acceptance, to plead to just two misdemeanors for failure to file his tax returns/to pay his taxes for 2017 and 2018. But, once Weiss caved to the political pressure by Trump and his Republican supporters including members of Congress, Weiss failed to honor the original plea agreement and instead filed nine counts (including three felonies).

But perhaps the most obvious evidence that Hunter Biden was a selective criminal prosecution is that other individuals were able to resolve their cases with administrative or civil penalties or judgments. They weren’t prosecuted. But, then again, their last name wasn’t “Biden.”

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opi ... rcna182437

Yep. They went after him for, I believe, the gun charges and eventually the tax charges, but tried to give him immunity for the money laundering and financial links to foreign countries, because he didn't register correctly...oh and possibly to prevent investigating any links to his daddy, the Big Guy, who was getting 10% of what he bilked from foreign countries.

 

[finesse]

Yep. They went after him for, I believe, the gun charges and eventually the tax charges, but tried to give him immunity for the financial links to foreign countries, because he didn't register correctly...oh and possibly to prevent investigating any links to the Big Guy who was getting 10% of what he bilked from foreign countries.

On a board where one side is arguing whether or not Trump is a felon because he hasn't been sentenced, why don't we just stick to the charges?

 

[superrific]

I've known a decent number of people and none was a bigger POS than Hunter. Dude is absolutely useless. Druggie. Ditched his daughter. Bilked multiple governments out of millions of dollars selling access to his daddy. Money launderer, just to name a few.

If you want to know why people think MAGAs are rubes, here it is.

Right-wing media has been actively trying to lose credibility, but you keep believing all the shit they shovel. Let's see:

Fox News: paid a settlement of $787M for defamation because they lied on the air:
Tucker Carlson: slumming around on X because nobody will hire him after he admitted to lying on the air
Rudy is bankrupt
Alex Jones is bankrupt
Several Trump/GOP lawyers have been disbarred or otherwise sanctioned, for a range of offenses including lying to the court
Several GOP lawyers in Arizona have been sanctioned for filing bullshit. Same in Michigan and Wisconsin IIRC.
Dinesh D'Souza admitted that "2000 mules" was made up bullshit

And yet you still believe them when they present allegations without evidence. Why should anyone ever take you seriously? There's an old saying, "he could sell ice to Eskimos." Yeah, you're the Eskimo in that scenario.

 

[mynameisbond]

One last comment on this, and then I'll try to drop it, as I don't want to spam the board with my opinion on this. Of all the little details I've seen about Biden's decision, this one bugs me the most, I think --

"The decision came after the president and first lady spent the Thanksgiving holiday with Hunter, his wife Melissa and their son Beau along with Biden’s daughter Ashley. Biden’s other grandchildren, including Hunter’s daughters, did not join the family in Nantucket this year."

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/biden-trump-tariffs-cabinet-transition-12-2-24/index.html

I'm sure there are a whole hell of a lot of criminals who would love to have the chance to bend the president's ear asking for a pardon over a long Thanksgiving weekend in Nantucket. Maybe Biden decided to issue this pardon months ago. Maybe they never even discussed it over Thanksgiving. But this is the kind of shit that reeks of nepotism and self-dealing. That's the stock-in-trade of the Pubs. It should not be the Dems' as well. We can and should meet them on every field of battle, but we can't descend to their level on things like this.

It's hard to descend to their level. They keep lowering the bar.

 

[superrific]

Everybody knew he would just like everybody knows why Hunter was paid all those millions, just like everybody knows why a family who has no businesses or sells any goods or even has a website needs 20 shell companies, just like everybody knows the laptop was real, just like everybody knows where the 10% for the big guy went.

I know you might find this hard to believe, but right-wing media is lying to you. And you gobble it up.

 

[CFordUNC]

Everybody knew he would just like everybody knows why Hunter was paid all those millions, just like everybody knows why a family who has no businesses or sells any goods or even has a website needs 20 shell companies, just like everybody knows the laptop was real, just like everybody knows where the 10% for the big guy went.

If you were willing to ignore all of this corruption and vote for Biden again had he run, not even factoring in the damage done to the country by his incompetent administration (or maybe very competent if you know what the goals were), then don't say a thing about the people whom you hate for supporting Trump. You are just the opposite side of the coin you claim to hate.

I’m asking you this in full, complete, earnest sincerity because I would welcome hearing the perspective of someone who sees the world differently from me.

Completely ignore the fact that you do not like Joe Biden, and completely ignore the fact that you do not like the Democratic Party, either ideologically or for whatever other reasons you may have. Completely ignore all of that, and try to answer objectively.

Why do you say that the country under the last four years of the Biden administration has been so bad or incompetent? I’m genuinely trying to understand this perspective because almost every single Trump supporter on this board says some variation of it. The United States has experienced the most robust economic recovery of any country in the world coming out of the pandemic. We completely won the battle against inflation, better than any other country in the world, and it is now back down to the 2% Fed target. The stock market has reached all-time highs. Even despite the inflationary environment, on the whole most people have had more purchasing power due to wage growth that outpaced inflation. Rates of violent crime are at decades lows. We have had fewer illegal border crossings this year than there have been since 2019, the height of the first Trump administration. We have economically and military crippled our primary geopolitical foe without shedding a single drop of American blood. We’ve had no American boots on the ground in an active foreign conflict for the first time in decades. We have seen over $1 trillion in private sector investment into American infrastructure. We’ve been unprecedented investment in to our rural areas, particularly as it relates to restoring manufacturing jobs, making broadband Internet access more widespread and thus making accessible and leveling the economic playing field.

Aside from the fact that someone whom you personally do not like has been in the White House over the last four years, what has been so bad about the last four years? And can you honestly say that had Donald Trump presided over the exact same scenario over these last four years, that you would have it “incompetent” too?

Just trying to understand your valued perspective as someone with a different viewpoint than the majority of this board.