Staff Reports
Hunter Biden’s recent legal saga has taken a twist that could be described as more theatrical than a daytime soap opera. The backdrop? A full pardon issued by President Joe Biden for his son, which covers everything from tax evasion to probable juvenile shenanigans dating back a decade. With the stroke of a pen, it seems the Bidens are treating the family’s legal troubles like an inconvenient trip to the DMV—just get it resolved and move on.
In a classic display of paternal defense, President Biden asserted that no “reasonable person” scrutinizing the facts could conclude anything other than his son was singled out for prosecution solely due to his lineage. A noble sentiment, assuming one could unearth a reasonable person from the legal swamp surrounding the Biden family. Just to add some flavor to the spectacle, the pardon reportedly protects Hunter from any repercussions relating to his infamous stint on the board of Burisma, kind of like making sure everyone knows you weren’t playing Monopoly but still want to collect those $200 every time you pass go.
🚨The judge overseeing Hunter's California case lashed out at President Biden in a scathing five-page ruling, saying the White House press release justifying his pardon was full of offensive and false statements, including that Hunter's tax evasion was the result of addiction. pic.twitter.com/aUERbYHeYC
— Luke Rosiak (@lukerosiak) December 4, 2024
Enter U.S. District Judge Mark Scarsi, who isn’t one to fall for the “my daddy’s the president” ploy. He made it clear that claiming Hunter’s prosecution was a witch hunt is about as credible as saying the tooth fairy runs an offshore account. Multiple judges have weighed in before him, all resoundingly finding that the prosecution was not motivated by vindictiveness but was, in fact, rooted in lawful process—even if Hunter’s legal team seems to treat the courtroom like a revolving door. Attempts to dismiss the tax case? Eight tries, all of them failed; that’s roughly eight more chances than most would get following a traffic citation.
Further highlighting the irony, the judge pointed out that the investigation leading to the actual charges was overseen by none other than the president’s own Attorney General. In essence, President Biden might as well have accused his own team of being unreasonable—a group of people presumably hired for their intellect and expertise suddenly branded as “unreasonable” by the man who pays their salary. It’s akin to a managing editor denouncing the validity of their reporters’ reporting.
Scarsi went so far as to criticize the pomp and circumstance surrounding the announcement of Hunter’s pardon. While the Constitution endows the president with pardon power, it doesn’t allow rewriting one’s own scandalous history. The judge seemed to suggest that a cavalier attitude toward justice and accountability is just one of the many luxuries of being a Biden. The strange twist is that while the courtroom issues are on pause, Hunter’s sentencing originally scheduled for December has now been put on hold—who needs consequences when you’re on the family express line?
Meanwhile, Special Counsel David Weiss emphasized the non-political nature of Hunter’s prosecution, underscoring that a plethora of judges from various administrations have rejected the claims of unfair treatment. It appears that for every argument from the Biden camp, there exists a mountain of judicial scrutiny. So, while the Bidens may believe they’re relevant figures battling the powers that be, it is likely that the courts see them merely as incidents of tax returns gone rogue. In the end, it seems the Bidens might be seeking absolution from their improprieties, but the law remains steadfast, hell-bent on reminding them that family ties don’t absolve one from accountability.
