Pardon Me

I was thinking of just turning over the page to President’s Biden’s statement on pardoning his son Hunter because I thought it was so eloquent.  But as time has passed and others, most notably MAGOP officials though not exclusively, have chimed in, I thought I would, as well, after.

 
 
Before commenting, I came across several posts on social media that did a good job expressing my thoughts, though more pithily.
​
“At this point I guess Biden has zero fu**s left to give.”
-- Brian J. Karem (White House correspondent)

We’re not accepting complaints about the Hunter Biden pardon unless you also complained about the Steve Bannon, Michael Flynn, Roger Stone, and Paul Manafort pardons.
-- David Corn (journalist for Mother Jones)

“Literally, if you're a self-imagined journalist who did ABSOLUTELY NO coverage of Trump's pardons during the election, you should crawl into a dark room in shame for caring about this. There is nothing sleazier.
-- Marcy Wheeler (national security expert journalist), in response to press criticism.


If you were Joe Biden watching Trump appoint his son-in-law's pardoned extortionist daddy as ambassador, then you'd pardon Hunter Biden too.
-- Grant Stern (executive editor of Occupy Democrats)
 
Okay, just one more.  It’s not pithy, but worth including.  That’s because it’s a tweet from former Attorney General Eric Holder.

Hunter
 
Here’s the reality. No USAtty would have charged this case given the underlying facts. After a 5 year investigation the facts as discovered only made that clear.
 
Had his name been Joe Smith the resolution would have been - fundamentally and more fairly - a declination.
 
Pardon warranted.
 
Ask yourself a vastly more important question. Do you really think Kash Patel is qualified to lead the world’s preeminent law enforcement investigative organization? Obvious answer: hell no.
 ​

​What’s stood out to me from the criticisms of the pardon are that it’s hurts the public’s perception of the rule of law, and that it’s hypocritical of President Biden after saying he wouldn’t pardon his son.  That, and one other thing:  the extensive coverage of the pardon.
 
To start with, when some of wrung their hands in distress over the rule of law, I don’t think the impact of this pardon on how the public sees the rule of law borders on zero.  After all, the public has lived through Trump trying to overthrow the government and being able to use the rule of law to force so many delays that he hasn’t had to face a single court trial on it, despite two federal indictments, both of which have now been dismissed.  Further, the public has seen the Supreme Court rule that a president can commit almost any crime (!) while in the White House and have immunity for it.  Moreover, the public has also seen Trump convicted of 35 felonies, been found liable of rape, and been found guilty of business fraud – and then shrugged and elected him president.  So, when it comes to the presidency their perception of “the rule of rule” has already been bent out of shape so much that a president using his Constitutional right to pardon his own son for reasons (whether or not one agrees with the reasons) that most legal experts say are justifiable pretty much doesn’t even register on the “Rule of Law-o-meter.”
 
On top of which, the public has also seen Trump, when previously in the White House, pardon four men -- Steve Bannon, Michael Flynn, Roger Stone, and Paul Manafort -- under threat of indictment for their involvement in trying to overthrow the government.  So, I suspect that pardoning one’s son convicted of basically tax evasion (which he paid back) and filling out a form illegally not only doesn’t rise to that level, but doesn’t rise to any level when impacting how the public sees the rule of law.
 
And beyond even that, the public saw Trump say repeatedly as a campaign issue that he may pardon everyone in prison who was convicted from their part in the January 6 Insurrection.  So, thinking that Joe Biden pardoning his son for crimes that most legal experts say almost all others would never have even been charged in the first place will be something that the public sees as warping their view of the rule of law…is ludicrous and ignores the world of Trump we live in.
 
As for whether or not President Biden was hypocritical for pardoning his son after saying he wouldn’t, I don’t think there’s anything remotely hypocritical about it.  Conditions changed, and so opinions change.  It’s how life works and should work. And the conditions that changed are critically important:  because we now have an incoming president who has stated clearly and repeatedly that “I will be your retribution.”  That when in office, he plans to use the courts for revenge to go after his enemies.  And has named as his nominee to head the FBI someone who has been just as clear about politicizing the agency and using it to go after those who opposed the party and against whom he holds grudges.  And further, Trump just named his daughter’s father-in-law, who is a convicted felon that he pardoned, to be the Ambassador to France!  So, when those conditions changed, some which put his son at risk of further retribution, and some which took the power of the pardon to reprehensible and uncaring levels, a president pardoning his son after having his life dragged publicly through more mud and for longer than likely anyone ever convicted for the same charges does pass the smell test.
 
And if ultimately someone does want to believe that the pardon is hypocritical (and as I said, I don't believe it is in the slightest), if that’s the absolute worst charge that can be made about the pardon compared to the unending stream of gross hypocrisies that Trump has foisted onto the American public, changing positions from the minimum wage, health care (supporting a single-payer plan in 1999), vaccines and abortion, or changing positions when someone has offered him money – whether on cyber-currency, criticism Bud Light or wanting to ban TikTok or a range of other issues – not to mention the 30,000+ lies that the Washington Post reported when he was in office, it’s an empty case devoid of substance.
 
Which leaves the matter of press coverage.  President Biden pardoned his son for being convicted of crimes (and yes, they were crimes) that almost all legal experts say others are almost never charged.  That he was hounded and charged solely because he was the son of President Biden, and MAGOPs wanted to impeach him but couldn’t find grounds after years of investigation.  So, they went after his son.  And the press has made this an on-going story.  In fact, right before posting this article this morning (two days after the pardon), MSNBC spent 20 minutes on their morning show still dealing with criticism.  And seemingly will continue doing so.  Despite having let it largely fall through their reportorial cracks when Trump pardoned Steve Bannon, Michael Flynn, Roger Stone, and Paul Manafort – people who were involved in trying to overthrow the government and democracy.  And pardoned donors, Blackwater war criminals, corrupt MAGOP politicians, participants in the Russia probe scandal and more.  Many of which actually impacted “the rule of law” in the United States.  And despite having just said he would appoint an extended family member, who he had pardoned, to be U.S. Ambassador to France.  (Which has received a ho-hum, oh-my, well, that's Trump response.)  But…Hunter Biden!  Who most legal analysts have said wouldn't have been charged if his last name wasn't Biden.

Or as Marcy Wheeler explained the situation yesterday morning:  “Literally, if you're a self-imagined journalist who did ABSOLUTELY NO coverage of Trump's pardons during the election, you should crawl into a dark room in shame for caring about this. There is nothing sleazier."

Yes, there have been reporters, legal analysts and commentators who’ve complained that pardoning his son is a gift to Trump, who will use it to justify whatever horrific pardons he makes in the future.  To me (and plenty enough others I've seen, as noted above), this is an almost stunning belief devoid of meaning or grasp of the real world.  To think Trump wouldn’t make the pardons otherwise, to think Trump wouldn’t find some issue to try to explain away his pardons, to think Trump even cares about ever justifying his actions making a pardon or for doing anything ignores everything we all have seen of Trump over the past eight years – or through our lifetime observing Trump. 
 
(On Jon Stewart's Monday hosting of The Daily Show last night, after giving lip service for 90 seconds to Kash Patel being Trump's nominee to run the FBI, showing news clips of Patel being called "the most dangerous nominee for democracy" and about him saying he wanted to jail judges, bureaucrats and judges -- a topic I therefore thought was about to be the theme of his segment ("the most dangerous nominee for democracy" seemed a pretty notable one, after all...) -- Stewart then brushed that aside and devoted the remainder of his 18 minutes to slamming President Biden for pardoning his son and ceding the moral high ground.  This is the same Jon Stewart, by the way, who only weeks ago slammed Democrats for them so-genteelly playing by the standard rules of politics, always taking the moral high ground, as it were, while Trump and the MAGOP found ways around that, bulldozing it into dust.  But now, oh-dear, President Biden pardoned his son!  As if the sociopathic, amoral Trump cares one tiny speck of dust about having the moral high ground "ceded" to him before he'll consider doing anything that undermines democracy. Let alone that it would take a lifetime to have the moral high ground ceded to him.  NOTE: Trump wouldn't know the moral high ground unless it was pointed out to him by a battalion shining klieg lights on it, and it was then reported on Fox -- at which point he'd bulldoze the thing.)

The bottom line:
 
There were no costs to past Trump pardons of those involved in the Insurrection to overthrow the government, or of war criminals, or of those involved in investigations of his own scandals, or more.  To try to put President Biden in the same category for pardoning his son for charges that would never have been brought if his last name wasn’t Biden and to protect his son against future retribution by those publicly out for vengeance and think there will be a cost to President Biden and the rule of law for it is twisting known reality until it’s unrecognizable.
 
And most people who are not the MAGOP base will fully understand the difference between a father pardoning his son wrongly targeted, and Trump pardoning white supremacist terrorists and those in prison for trying to overthrow the government.

Do I wish President Biden hadn't pardoned his son?  What I wish is that the MAGOP hadn't hounded and investigated Hunter Biden in Congress for two years, trying to get his father (and finding nothing), putting Joe Biden in the position where decency required appointing a special prosecutor who, in turn, likely felt obligated to charge him when he wouldn't likely have charged anyone else under the same conditions -- and that Trump and his FBI Director-nominee haven't relentlessly made clear they were about retribution and revenge, as MAGOP officials continue riling their base by talking about the non-existent "Biden Crime Family," making a pardon seem an understandable response.  At which point it should have been covered as a valid issue for a few hours before getting back to focusing on actual, literal threats to democracy.
 
And in the end, as Briam Karem so eloquently put it -- “At this point I guess Biden has zero fu**s left to give.”