Joe Biden’s unwavering public facade was merely that – a facade. In the quiet corridors of power, those in his inner circle speculated that he would use the presidential privilege to halt the federal prosecutions being levied against his son. The unexpected issuance of a comprehensive pardon for Hunter Biden on a tranquil Sunday evening was akin to a blaze igniting Washington’s political landscape. The echo chamber bristled with critical whispers concerning the impact on the President’s legacy, the potential further injury to the Justice Department’s suffering credibility, and the acceptance – or lack thereof – from President-elect Donald Trump, a convicted felon.
The clamor infiltrated every corner of Washington, assuming a pressing immediacy. And yet, few found it surprising. Examining Biden’s decision to wield a rarely contested constitutional power reveals the logic behind it. Despite previously vowing to abstain from using this power to protect his son, Biden’s latest move is a clear display of reversing his initial stance; a classic flip-flop.
This stance flies in the face of a basic democratic principle – the law applies equally to everyone, regardless of proximity to the Oval Office. It’s nonetheless a principle long championed by the Democratic Party no less. As the President concludes his term, this move is likely to cast a long and pervasive shadow, detracting from vital tasks such as legacy building after a half-century-long career.
In the eyes of the law professionals, any other person accused of Hunter’s charges would likely have encountered a swift plea bargain negotiation. The case assumed an unusual guise following the decision of the Delaware U.S. Attorney securing special counsel status for Hunter’s case.
Following a conviction, Hunter Biden was poised for sentencing, with an additional upcoming sentence following his plea. If served the maximum penalties – albeit an unlikely scenario – he would have to endure up to 42 years behind bars. Thus, sitting idle and doing nothing was never truly on the table for Biden.
While sure to invite rebukes from some quarters, the election results indicate that voters judged Biden’s actions tolerable when they decided to reelect Trump. In the light of such recent history, consider a reshuffle where Hunter Biden’s mid-December sentencing resulted in a hefty prison sentence for a rarely prosecuted misdeed.
If Joe Biden, in the waning days of his presidency, had denied his son the lifeline that is a presidential pardon, the public response might well have been overwhelmingly negative. The Biden brand has always placed the family at the core of its values.
Despite the political risks, Biden’s decision to pardon his son is far from shocking. Why would Biden renounce the possibility of pardoning his own son, particularly when such actions are not unprecedented? It implies that the pardon privilege, absolute and solely controlled by the President, is negotiable depending on the party in power.
No congressional sign-off is required, nor does any member of his administration possess the authority to deter him. Even against the advice of his aides and allies who argued the contrary, a pardon was always a viable option.
In the long run, the decision regarding Hunter Biden’s pardon will become a highlighted chapter in Biden’s presidential overview. It’s a deliberate act of nepotism, a move that defies his own party doctrines and betrays his promise to uphold the democratic principle that all are equal before the law.
The receding weeks of Biden’s term are looking to be dominated not by his accomplishments or future plans, but by this controversy. Pardoning his son seems to be a strategic move to prevent a staining of the familial image, an inherent part of the Biden brand.
Despite the potential destructive backlash from the public and his party, Biden chose to defy the democratic principles that he once shouted from his pulpit. His actions have set a pernicious precedent that could haunt the integrity of the Oval Office for years to come.
Does this act signify a divide between personal and political life, or does it blur these distinctions further? Regardless, Biden’s choice in favor of familial loyalty over impartial law enforcement is poised to become a contentious point in political debates.
As Biden’s presidency fades into the annals of history, one thing is certain: the chapter about Hunter Biden’s pardon will inevitably be the reference point for future discussions on Biden’s presidential legacy.