Mind-Boggling Backfire: By Pardoning Hunter, Joe Biden Might Be Going to Jail

Conservatives remain outraged following President Joe Biden’s pardon of his son, Hunter Biden, for gun and tax charges. This decision came after Biden had explicitly stated he wouldn’t use presidential authority to intervene in such matters.

For those who believed that promise, it may seem as far-fetched as Santa Claus or the claim that “gullible” isn’t in the dictionary. Yet, it wasn’t just the act itself but the way it was executed that struck a nerve. Biden announced the pardon at the end of Thanksgiving weekend and promptly left for Angola, leaving critics reeling.

“No reasonable person who looks at the facts of Hunter’s cases can reach any other conclusion than Hunter was singled out only because he is my son – and that is wrong,” Biden stated, just two sentences after praising “a carefully negotiated plea deal” that, in his words, unraveled due to “pressure from his political opponents in Congress.” However, the actual collapse occurred because the judge found the deal unusually lenient and potentially unconstitutional.

Biden added, “For my entire career I have followed a simple principle: just tell the American people the truth. They’ll be fair-minded. Here’s the truth: I believe in the justice system, but as I have wrestled with this, I also believe raw politics has infected this process and it led to a miscarriage of justice — and once I made this decision this weekend, there was no sense in delaying it further.”

This statement, however, contradicts Biden’s earlier pledge to abstain from pardoning his son. What’s done is done, though, and it raises a significant question: Could this pardon put Joe Biden in legal jeopardy?

At first glance, the idea may seem absurd, but examining the breadth of the pardon reveals its implications. Covering offenses dating back to 2014, the pardon shields Hunter from prosecution for activities linked to his foreign business dealings, including potential violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

As the public recalls, Joe Biden has often been mentioned in connection to these matters, not as a central figure but as someone uncomfortably close to the controversy. His involvement becomes even murkier when considering Hunter’s role at Burisma and Joe’s admission that he pushed for the firing of a Ukrainian prosecutor reportedly investigating corruption at the company.

While Biden’s defenders argue the prosecutor was corrupt — a likely assertion given the systemic corruption in Ukrainian politics — Hunter’s immunity now means he could be compelled to testify about these dealings.

As attorney Mike Davis from the Article III Project explains, “With the Fifth Amendment, your right to stay silent against self-incrimination only applies if you have something you can incriminate yourself for.” A pardon effectively removes that protection, forcing Hunter to provide truthful testimony or risk breaking the law.

Though such immunity hasn’t been tested in the context of a presidential pardon, its application here could compel Hunter to reveal details that might implicate Joe Biden. News outlets like Newsweek and Reuters have pointed out that the pardon could limit Hunter’s ability to invoke the Fifth Amendment, placing him in “uncharted territory.”

Notably, the pardon does not cover state charges. Hunter’s foreign income and incidents like the disposal of a firearm could still attract state-level scrutiny. Moreover, even under oath, the phrase “I have no recollection of that” can carry significant weight, especially given Hunter’s documented struggles with substance abuse during much of the period covered by the pardon.

If any of the Biden family’s activities fall within the scope of state investigations or Hunter’s testimony links Joe Biden directly to controversial dealings, the consequences could be severe. However, it’s also plausible that prosecutors will treat Joe Biden as a “sympathetic, well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory,” as special counsel Robert Hur reportedly did regarding Biden’s retention of classified documents.

At a minimum, compelling Hunter to testify could shatter the carefully crafted narrative of Joe Biden as a devoted but overindulgent father. This would mark the unraveling of a carefully managed image, revealing deeper truths about the Biden administration’s handling of ethics and accountability.

Hunter’s testimony might ultimately serve as a stark illustration of the disconnect between public perception and reality. Whether or not it leads to legal consequences for Joe Biden, it could dismantle the “snow-white innocence” narrative surrounding the outgoing first family, bringing an era of political illusion to a dramatic end.