Pardoning Hunter Is Pardoning Joe

By Russ Walker

The blanket pardon granted to Hunter Biden has sparked widespread discussion over the past 24 hours. While the act of pardoning Hunter may not surprise many, several aspects of this decision deserve closer scrutiny and raise ethical questions. Here’s what you need to know:

1. The broad 10-year scope of the pardon is striking and unprecedented.

2. President Biden's repeated denials of any intent to pardon Hunter make this reversal particularly noteworthy.

3. Media and political pundits appeared to accept Biden’s earlier denials at face value, despite historical skepticism about political assurances.

4. The "lawfare" narrative advanced by Biden supporters is perplexing. Hunter was charged by Biden’s own Department of Justice and convicted by a jury, yet this defense contradicts the ongoing lawfare directed at January 6 participants, political opponents, and pro-life demonstrators over the past 4-years.

5. Most critically, President Joe Biden’s implication in alleged bribery and pay-to-play schemes means this pardon may protect not just Hunter, but also Joe Biden himself. By pardoning Hunter, President Biden may effectively shield himself from further scrutiny or legal repercussions.

---

Pardoning Family Members: Historical Rarity

Historically, pardoning immediate family members is exceedingly rare. The only comparable instance is Bill Clinton, who controversially pardoned his half-brother Roger Clinton for drug-related charges during his final days in office. Clinton also commuted the sentence of his brother-in-law Hugh Rodham, though this fell short of a full pardon.

---

Blanket Pardons: Historical Perspective

Blanket pardons—where entire groups or categories of offenses are pardoned—are rare but not without precedent. Notable examples include:

• George Washington (1795): Pardoned participants in the Whiskey Rebellion to promote unity after an insurrection against federal taxes.

• Andrew Johnson (1868): Pardoned most former Confederates after the Civil War, excluding high-ranking officials and the wealthiest participants.

• Gerald Ford (1974): Pardoned Richard Nixon for any crimes related to Watergate, intending to help the nation move forward.

Such actions often arise during national crises but remain highly contentious due to their perceived implications. The broad scope of Hunter’s pardon is unheard of and potentially serves as a shield to the entire Biden family.

---

Comparing Pardons and Clemency

The criticism surrounding potential pardons for January 6 participants highlights the selective outrage regarding pardons and clemency. Consider Bill Clinton’s 1999 clemency for 16 members of the FALN and Macheteros terrorist groups, which was widely criticized for several reasons:

1. None of the recipients requested clemency.

2. They refused to admit wrongdoing or renounce violence.

3. They expressed no contrition, sometimes openly defending their actions.

4. Some violated prison rules, including attempting escapes and possessing weapons.

When debating hypothetical Trump pardons, these historical precedents demand reflection and context. The self-centered nature of the Hunter pardon adds additional questions about the proper use of pardons.

---

Presidential Pardons and Commutations (Last 55 Years)

Here’s a summary of presidential clemency actions, from Lyndon B. Johnson to Joe Biden:

1. Joe Biden (2021–Present): Pardons: 149; Commutations: 1

2. Donald Trump (2017–2021): Pardons: 143; Commutations: 11

3. Barack Obama (2009–2017): Pardons: 212; Commutations: 1,715

4. George W. Bush (2001–2009): Pardons: 200; Commutations: 11

5. Bill Clinton (1993–2001): Pardons: 396; Commutations: 61

6. George H. W. Bush (1989–1993): Pardons: 77; Commutations: 3

7. Ronald Reagan (1981–1989): Pardons: 406; Commutations: 58

8. Jimmy Carter (1977–1981): Pardons: 566; Commutations: 157

9. Gerald Ford (1974–1977): Pardons: 3,000+ (notably for Vietnam draft evaders); Commutations: 1

10. Richard Nixon (1969–1974): Pardons: 926; Commutations: 0

11. Lyndon B. Johnson (1963–1969): Pardons: 1,033; Commutations: 0

These numbers reveal varied use of clemency power, with Ford’s Vietnam-era pardons and Obama’s extensive commutations standing out for their scope.

---

Key Difference Between Controversial Historic Pardons and Clemency And The Hunter Pardon

Gerald Ford’s Pardon of Richard Nixon (1974)

• Similarity: Like the Hunter Biden pardon, Ford’s action involved a personal connection (his predecessor) and was seen as an attempt to shield from legal accountability.

• Difference: Ford’s pardon was intended to move the country past the Watergate scandal, whereas the Hunter Biden pardon appears more directly tied to protecting a sitting president from potential fallout related to his son’s activities.

Bill Clinton’s Pardons of Family and Associates (2001)

• Roger Clinton: Bill Clinton pardoned his half-brother for drug-related charges.

• Hugh Rodham: While Clinton commuted his brother-in-law’s sentence, it was not a full pardon.

• Marc Rich: Clinton pardoned the financier accused of tax evasion, money laundering, and other crimes. This pardon raised significant concerns of impropriety due to large donations to the Clinton Library by Rich’s ex-wife.

• Similarity: These actions involved personal relationships and allegations of self-interest or political favor.

• Difference: None of Clinton’s pardons had implications of shielding himself from potential legal repercussions.

The Whiskey Rebellion Pardons (George Washington, 1795)

• Similarity: This was a broad pardon for individuals convicted of rebellion against federal law, raising questions about precedent and justice.

• Difference: Washington’s pardon sought national unity, not personal or familial protection.

Andrew Johnson’s Confederate Pardons (1868)

• Similarity: These pardons broadly absolved individuals implicated in treason, demonstrating the controversial use of clemency to serve a political or strategic purpose.

• Difference: Johnson’s actions were intended to facilitate Reconstruction, not to protect personal interests.

The FALN Clemency (Bill Clinton, 1999)

• Similarity: Controversial clemency was granted to 16 Puerto Rican nationalists accused of terrorism, with critics arguing it was politically motivated.

• Difference: These pardons did not involve personal connections or shield Clinton from direct legal implications.

The Hunter Biden pardon stands out because:

1. Immediate Family Connection: Pardoning a direct family member inherently raises concerns of conflict of interest.

2. Political Implications: The pardon could shield President Biden from further scrutiny, given allegations of his involvement in Hunter’s activities.

3. Scope and Timing: A blanket pardon covering a 10-year period is exceptionally broad and may preempt future investigations or charges.

4. Public Trust: The president had previously denied any intent to issue a pardon, creating a sharp credibility gap.

---

Final Thoughts

Presidential pardons are among the most scrutinized executive actions, often reflecting a leader’s priorities, political calculations, and approach to justice. While some pardons aim to foster national healing, others risk undermining accountability. In Hunter Biden’s case, the pardon raises profound questions about its implications for the sitting president and the fairness of the justice system. Historical context provides a vital lens to evaluate this controversial decision, the precedent it sets and the ethics of the act.

Note: The opinions expressed herein are those of Russ Walker alone and do not represent those of Breaking Battlegrounds’ hosts or staff.