In a surprising move, U.S. President Joe Biden has pardoned his son, Hunter Biden, despite previously asserting that he would not interfere in the Justice Department’s affairs. Hunter Biden was facing convictions for firearms violations and various tax-related offenses, with sentencing imminent in both cases.
In his statement, President Biden described the legal actions against his son as “unjust” and called the situation a “miscarriage of justice.” He argued that the charges were politically motivated, suggesting Hunter Biden had been targeted due to his family ties. Biden emphasized that the legal process had been influenced by politics, which ultimately led him to grant the pardon.
Hunter Biden’s legal troubles had cast a shadow over his father’s political career. Initially, Joe Biden planned to run for re-election but withdrew from the race following a lackluster performance in a televised debate against Donald Trump. The Democratic Party shifted its focus to Vice President Kamala Harris, who ultimately lost the presidential race to Trump in a decisive defeat.
The investigations into Hunter Biden revealed a lavish lifestyle funded by millions of dollars allegedly earned between 2016 and 2020. Prosecutors claimed these funds were used for luxury expenses rather than paying taxes. Court documents detailed his involvement in questionable overseas business dealings and payments from a “personal friend.” Among the revelations were substantial expenditures on adult entertainment, private clubs, and other controversial activities.
In the firearms case, Hunter Biden was accused of lying about his drug dependency when purchasing a firearm in October 2018. While he denied the allegations, a jury found him guilty. His sentencing was scheduled for December 4.
President Biden’s pardon came just weeks before the end of his term, with the transition of power to President-elect Donald Trump set for January 20. The decision has sparked significant political debate, with critics questioning the motivations behind the pardon and its implications for the rule of law.
