Among the more interesting things about Joe Biden’s “unexpected” decision to pardon his son Hunter for his gun felony and federal tax offenses is this: Hunter has the option to decline the pardon. I was aware of this previously, but the legal significance of it had not occurred to me.
The acceptance of a pardon carries with it the implication that the one being pardoned is in fact guilty of the offenses with which he was charged. If that pardon is declined, prosecution for the relevant offenses may and probably will continue. The accused’s legal jeopardy is unaltered. So why would he elect to decline the pardon?
The answer is straightforward: for the chance to establish his innocence at trial. If he wants that opportunity, he must decline the pardon, which would obviate a formal trial and verdict. So to accept the pardon, the accused must be comfortable with the imputation of guilt.
There’s no question that Hunter Biden is guilty of the offenses with which he’s charged. Perhaps admitting that guilt doesn’t matter to him, so long as he remains out of prison and free to pursue his various pleasures. At his age, he hasn’t got much in the way of career prospects. Once the disgraced Biden family is completely removed from the corridors of power, he’ll be unlikely to sell any more of his “paintings,” so remaining unconfined is all he has to look forward to.
However, the social and political significance of the pardon will be great. The media have made a great deal of noise over the election of a “convicted felon” to the presidency. Being boughten allies of the Democrats, they’re unlikely to say much in that regard about Hunter. For one thing, some of the dirt would adhere to Barack Hussein Obama, and the Obamas retain enough influence to take revenge for it.
So a fresh opportunity has arisen for us in the Right. Let’s ask some pointed questions, loudly and publicly:
- Why have the media not commented on the significance of the pardon?
- What are the implications for the rest of the Biden family?
- Does this merit a re-examination of the evidence of Joe Biden as a major collaborator in an influence-peddling scheme which netted millions of dollars?
In all probability, the legacy media will do its damnedest to ignore such questions. But the independent media won’t. To harp on them, and to keep them in circulation, may be the best near-term chance America has to head off another voracious crime family before it can rise — or be raised — to the power the Bidens have exploited for half a century.
Do not be told to “move on.”
1 comment
As has been pointed out by those smarter than I, once Hunter admits to his guilt by accepting that pardon, he no longer has any Fifth Amendment protection for those crimes, as he would face no criminal jeopardy for self-incrimination, and he has opened himself up to Congressional investigators. Refusal to answer at that point qualifies as a separate felonious act not covered by the pardon ( https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1505 ), and enables the questioner to drag out every single text and e-mail and asking “what was meant by this?” and “who was the person sitting next to you in your father’s living room in this text?” and “what kind of threats did you think you would able to carry out without your father’s help?”. Lying to either Congress or federal investigators is a separate felony (and 18USC1001 doesn’t even require that the person be under oath at the time of the lie).
Buy popcorn. And ammo.