The decision, which was first reported by NBC News, is a reversal for the president, who repeatedly said he would not use his authority to pardon his son or commute his sentence.

Summary

President Joe Biden pardoned his son Hunter Biden, reversing his prior stance against using executive clemency.

The pardon covers Hunter’s federal gun conviction and tax evasion guilty plea, sparking political controversy.

Biden cited political attacks and a “miscarriage of justice” as reasons for his decision, emphasizing his son’s recovery from addiction and the targeting of his family.

Critics argue the move undermines the judicial process, while supporters view it as within Biden’s constitutional powers.

This decision shields Hunter from potential prison time as Biden nears the end of his presidency.

  • Slueth@lemmyusa.com
    82·
    13 days ago

    @Yodan@lemm.ee

    I can’t stand this “not a good look” talk when democrats have to basically be squeaky cleak that they can’t even own a peanut farm or swear and yet 10 years into the “grab them by the pussy” guy who makes fun of disabled people, women, calls everyone names including his own party… Nobody bats an eyelash. I don’t care if Joe Biden lied for his son at this point, Donald pardoned and will continue to pardon dozens of family and staff and insurrectionists. It’s ok for Trump to lie about not knowing project 2025 and then immediately hire everyone involved with it days later… But Biden can’t lie once. Got it.

    @slickgoat@lemmy.world

    Trump’s entire stchick is gaming every system to manipulate things in his favour. The Dems always take the higher ground and always get pounded. Every single time - Gore in 2000, particularly.

    If Biden ‘pardons’ his son to ameliorate Hunter’s political persecution, then it’s a step in the right direction to push back. Tame as it is, the Dems better learn to fight fire with napalm before all is lost.

    @Wrench@lemmy.world

    A lot of people here missing the point. We don’t care about this because Hunter was the target of a witch hunt. The actual “crimes” weren’t impactful at all. The Republicans literally spent 8 years dragging him through the mud, digging for anything that he could be charged with, just because who his dad is. And Hunter didn’t even touch politics in the slightest.

    …

    The gun charge is the moral equivalent of crucifying someone for having pirated music on their hard drive. It was a nothing crime, never enforced, and the only reason it was in this case was because they happened to find something they could latch onto.

    …

    That’s why most of us don’t really care. The man is not important. He holds no position of power, nor has he expressed any intent to. He is not important, except as a whipping boy for their propaganda. And a pardon for such preposterous prosecution is fine with me.

    And that’s just a few from this post.

    • Affidavit@lemm.ee
      11·
      12 days ago

      Thanks, but I’m not interested in reading a bunch of cherry-picked comments.

      I made no claim that none of the posts the OP was whining about existed, only implied that they were exaggerating as I didn’t see a single one while reading every single comment up until I reached OPs.

      • Slueth@lemmyusa.com
        2·
        11 days ago

        The term “cherry-picked” isn’t applicable here since it implies I’m leaving out context or other information, but you already had context (the comments doing the opposite of defending), I simply showed you what you claimed to not see.

        • Affidavit@lemm.ee
          1·
          11 days ago

          The term is applicable because unless you provided those comments in the order you viewed comments in this post (which was the claim of my initial comment), you specifically sought out comments with the bias you were looking for, disregarding comments that did not fit the narrative.

          • Slueth@lemmyusa.com
            11·
            11 days ago

            Yes I specifically sought out the comments you didn’t see, what’s so hard to understand about that?

            I responded with the list of comments you claimed you didn’t see, you already saw the other comments, why would I include them?