736
submitted 2 weeks ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] auzy@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

It might come as a shock, but the president actually tends to pardon a lot of people at the end of their presidency, including people they don't know

The Republicans literally spent their entire time wasting money on an ethics committee for Hunter Biden because they couldn't find anything on biden

Id argue that when the government is spending millions to investigate a guy who isn't even part of the government, it's a political prosecution

He never even worked for the government

Unlike the trump family who are all being given positions of power and are openly abusing them

Irrespective, because of the Republican bs, Hunter is going to never be able to just do his time and live his life

Don't forget that trump is also putting his own people in charge of positions of law too and he isn't signing any ethics documents or selecting them ethically.

Even with a pardon, trump is a spiteful shit and i guarantee he'll be attacking all of his political enemies

[-] tb_@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Id argue that when the government is spending millions to investigate a guy who isn't even part of the government, it's a political prosecution

I may not like it, but also kinda fair.

[-] Furbag@lemmy.world -5 points 2 weeks ago

I don't really care. The law is the law. The investigations were quite clearly politically motivated, trying to get to Joe by going after Hunter, but the trial was nothing but fair and the judiciary did not make a mistake in the trial or the sentencing. You cannot claim to be a supporter of the rule of law only when it's convenient for you. This pardon undermines just about every bit of credibility the Democratic party had left. It's not Biden breaking the rules or using his power for the good of the nation or the people, it's a selfish abuse for the sake of keeping his son from being held accountable for the things he actually did.

I would not be surprised if Joe Biden supported some of the very same legislation that would have put his son behind bars back when he was still a senator. Dude was well known for being a "tough on crime" type of politician.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago

The judge straight up rejected the plea deal Hunter and the prosecutor agreed to. They absolutely bowed to political pressure.

[-] auzy@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago

You've got the Republicans who stole his laptop and illegally distributing his dick pics publicly, during the congressional hearings it's ducking ridiculous. It's basically revenge porn

I think you forgot about all the shit the Republicans did here.

If they did half the stuff they did as civilians, they'd be facing criminal charges in most countries. It's actually far worse than you remember. And you've been talking shit about Biden for months looking at your History

[-] Furbag@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago

And you’ve been talking shit about Biden for months looking at your History

Biden hasn't been relevant since like July. How far back in my comment history did you have to read to find a single post where I'm critical of Biden?

You sure seem to have a lot of free time on your hands.

[-] auzy@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

You're literally talking shit about 5 posts ago / 3 weeks ago

So on the first page of your comments

Ie, didn't really browse at all, but I expected it, which is why I looked

[-] Furbag@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

Quote the post, then. I suspect you have a reading comprehension problem if you think any of my posts that are even tangentially related to Biden in the last three weeks have been negative.

[-] HasturInYellow@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Have you ever smoked a joint? Have you been to a gun range? If so, you committed practically the same felony hunter did.

Literally fuck off. This whole thing was an obvious political ploy and you justifying it and defending it is pathetic. Rules exist to benefit society, when those same rules are used to damage society, must we still obey them? Your whole point is a joke.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

Not practically, literally. They prosecuted a guy for marijuana under this law, and the only reason they couldn't get him is they didn't get evidence of "continued drug use". That's why that was so important in Hunter's trial.

[-] Furbag@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

Have you ever smoked a joint? Have you been to a gun range? If so, you committed practically the same felony hunter did.

I've never done either of these things, but if I did, I sure wouldn't lie about not having ever done it on a government form.

To be clear, I do not think that the law is fair or just, nor do I think that it's application to Hunter in such a high profile case was warranted, but two wrongs don't make a right. Republicans applying political pressure to Hunter Biden does not give Joe Biden carte blanche to be a hypocrite without some strong condemnations from people like myself.

The one thing I've learned from this thread is that nobody believes in objective justice. Trump supporters will say Trump's felony convictions were politically motivated, Biden's supporters will say Hunter's felony convictions were politically motivated, and everybody is perfectly happy to discount witness testimony or a jury's verdict so long as it suits their own subjective sense of justice, that as long as "their team" is winning, it's right and just and fair.

[-] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Hardly. Both sides can say the the prosecution was politically-motivated, but that's where the similarity ends. One side has a long history of just saying things that sound good to them, and when called on it, falling silent and disengaging from discussion. The other side has evidence, or at least a strong argument that they are able to articulate. It's not objective justice to ignore that.

this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2024
736 points (97.9% liked)

News

23616 readers
3531 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS