Biden Pardoned His Son...Yet Why Are So Many Clutching Their Pearls?

If it's "okay" for Trump to pardon Manafort, close advisor Bannon & his son-in-law's father Kushner -all fraudsters, cheats and swindlers - Why is "not okay" for a president to pardon his son?

Dec 05, 2024

Paul Manafort a lobbyist and Trump’s former campaign advisor, was charged with various financial crimes including tax evasion, bank fraud, and money laundering. There were 18 criminal charges including 5 falsifications of income tax returns, 4 failures to file foreign bank account reports, 4 counts of bank fraud, and 5 counts of bank fraud conspiracy.

According to a 2019 publication by the American Bar Association:

Manafort had accepted a plea deal in the case in September 2018, admitting to money laundering, tax fraud and illegal foreign lobbying connected to his years working for Ukrainian politicians. Manafort also admitted lying to investigators and under oath before a grand jury about his contact with a Russian associate during the 2016 campaign, breaking the plea agreement.

Notably, his total sentence was 73 months, with 30 months to be served concurrently - only to serve 47 months. Trump pardoned him after he served about nine months in jail, and Manafort never faced state charges due to overlap of crimes referred to as double-jeopardy.

Next on the “pardon list” is Trump’s daughter Ivanka’s father-in-law.

Charles Kushner is the father-in-law of Trump’s eldest daughter Ivanka. If we all recall, her husband Jared Kushner served as a “senior advisor” in the 2016 administration of Trump. And if we thought that Jared’s 2 billion dollar deal with the Saudi’s on some obscure “investment fund” raised eyebrows, the apple didn’t roll far from the tree. His father, a seedy real estate billionaire, served two years in prison for tax evasion and retaliating against a federal witness — his own brother-in-law.

As the story goes, it’s not enough to be a rich tycoon - there needs to be sordid intrigue. Like any obscenely wealthy person these days, the senior Kushner made illegal campaign contributions, engaged in tax evasion and “selective” witness tampering - because everyone knows the mega-wealthy believe they are above the law. And like everyone else who flouts the law, he was subsequently prosecuted - but by none other than U.S. Attorney, Chris Christie. Christie if one recalls, did debate prep with Trump in the last go-round for president. But ill-will still remains in the family towards Christie despite the dastardly deeds of the senior Kushner landing him in prison. Those “deeds” bought Charles Kushner a bit more than 16 months of a two-year sentence in federal prison and a halfway program. Notably, he was released in 2006 - a decade before Trump took the oath of office.

But Trump like any charitable “father-figure,” would not only pardon Ivanka’s father-in-law, he recently elevated him to the position of US Ambassador to France. All of this giving credence to the old adage - “true crime pays.” Despite Charles Kushner’s absolution, according to Chris Christie, Charles Kushner’s case was “one of the most loathsome, disgusting crimes” he prosecuted, now almost two decades ago.

Christie Reveals…

In his new memoir, Christie reveals many details of his prosecution of Kushner, and relations with Trump. How the senior Kushner was charged with entrapping his own brother-in-law with a prostitution scheme, filming it, and then sending the tape to his own sister. The purpose: to stop his brother-in-law from being a witness against him in Kushner’s fraud and corruption scheme. As is often said, with relatives like that, who needs enemies…

And of course there is Steve Bannon…

Federal prosecutors had charged him and three others with defrauding donors of more than a million dollars - a fundraising campaign in support of Trump’s border wall.

Yet, in the final hours of Trump’s first presidency, Bannon got a pardon, as did numerous other criminals and schemers. Even though Trump and Bannon had shared differences, Trump wished to pardon his former aide - after Bannon showed his “loyalty” - engaging in a “quid pro quo” - publicly fanning the flames of Trump’s election conspiracy, that the 2020 election was stolen.

Uncanny Similarities

What is now uncanny: the similarities between Bannon’s claims and that of Hunter Biden, when it comes to presidential pardons.

President Joe Biden’s pardon of his son Hunter means that Hunter’s two criminal cases won’t go forward to sentencing. But special counsel David Weiss has fought the defense effort to get the gun and tax indictments officially dismissed in Delaware and California.
In support of his opposition, Weiss cited the government’s previous objection to dismissing Steve Bannon’s indictment when Donald Trump pardoned Bannon in his first term. Weiss noted that the prosecution in Bannon’s case didn’t dispute that the pardon ended the matter but still maintained that dismissing the indictment was unnecessary;

As Hunter Biden’s counsel emphasized in reply to Weiss’ opposition, the judge in Bannon’s case dismissed his indictment over the government’s objection.

Biden argues in the Delaware case:

The Special Counsel paradoxically claims that Mr. Biden’s notice is “without any legal support” in suggesting that his pardon means that the Court should dismiss the Indictment, at the same time the Special Counsel acknowledges that “‘the majority of courts, when faced with such a decision, have chosen to dismiss an indictment.’” DE274 at 2, 4 (quoting United States v. Bannon, No. 20 Cr. 412 (AT), DE117). The Special Counsel’s admission that this is the practice of the “majority of courts” certainly provides legal support to Mr. Biden’s claim that dismissal is warranted. Further undermining the Special Counsel’s claim is his reliance upon an argument that he acknowledges has already been rejected. The Special Counsel repeats the very argument that the government made in Bannon, that the Court should administratively terminate the case, rather than dismiss the Indictment. But the Special Counsel acknowledges that the Bannon court rejected that argument and dismissed the indictment as to him. This Court should reject that same argument and dismiss the Indictment as well. As in Bannon, the pardon here comes before sentencing and before any judgment in the case based on the Indictment (as opposed to pardons being issued post judgment, often years later). The appropriate course, in this procedural context, is to dismiss the Indictment.

Bottom line: If it’s good enough for Bannon to get his indictment dismissed, shouldn’t it be good enough for Hunter?

According to a report in Law and Crime,

The special counsel appointed to prosecute Hunter Biden for felony tax crimes in California is refusing a request from Hunter Biden’s attorney to have the case against the president’s son dismissed despite President Joe Biden issuing a blanket pardon for any federal crimes his son may have committed over the last decade. Hunter Biden’s attorney’s moved for dismissal of the charges Sunday evening.

With the obvious precedent of dismissal of charges after a presidential pardon is already set in stone such as in the Bannon case, it is quixotic that in the Hunter Biden case, Special Counsel David Weiss has fought against Hunter’s effort to have the gun and tax indictments officially dismissed against him in Delaware and California. Knowingly aware of this recent precedent, Weiss’ actions can only be viewed as politically motivated. After all, he was appointed by Trump, although elevated to Special Counsel by Biden’s own idiotic and fumbling Attorney General, Merrick Garland.

Judges Have to Figure This All Out

All this post-pardon litigation means the judges in California and Delaware have to figure out how to formally terminate Hunter’s cases, even if they are legally moot as a result of the pardon. To date, the California judge hasn’t dismissed the case but appears poised to do so, but this last Tuesday, the Delaware judge entered an order which was docketed, stating all proceedings are terminated as a result of the presidential pardon. That “Order” reads in part:

Having reviewed the parties’ submissions ... and in the absence of binding precedent, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that pursuant to the Executive Grant of Clemency signed by President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. on December 1, 2024, Defendant Robert Hunter Biden has been pardoned for, inter alia, the offenses for which a jury rendered a verdict in this case ... As such, all proceedings in this case are hereby terminated.

Recent word has emerged that the Delaware gun case has been dismissed by the Delaware judge. California is still pending. So will Hunter Biden now enjoy the same congressional respect the obstreperous swindler Steve Bannon after he was pardoned by Trump, and his indictment dismissed?

After all Bannon‘s two co-conspirators actually went to jail, and only swindled thousands of dollars from unsuspecting Trump supporters who donated to build their nonexistent “Wall.” And we must not forget, Trump has pledged legal retribution for his election loss in 2020 - and the Biden family is smack in his crosshairs. Not to minimize that Trump promises to honor the January 6 Capitol rioters who smashed and ransacked the seat of government at his behest - calling them “patriots” - Trump promising to pardon them all…

You be the judge..

Two associates of former Donald Trump adviser Steve Bannon were sentenced to more than seven years in prison collectively in connection with defrauding donors of hundreds of thousands of dollars in their border wall scheme, according to a news release from the US Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York. Comparatively, Hunter lied on a “check-the-box” gun form about his drug addition, and repaid the IRS: income tax money with interest and penalties for his misreporting.

Doing an About Face…

Despite Trump’s continued hostility toward Biden, and his recent change of course in pardoning his son - Ask yourself, What would the prudent parent do? Let your son get mired in litigation that could be protracted and emotional torment him for years - because a former president was angry that his parent won an election? Let’s be real. Any normal thinking human would pardon their child in a case such as this. As the elephant in the room, is Trump’s continued promises of retribution which would continue on indefinitely - if Trump lives so long. What Joe Biden did makes sense. No one who faces ongoing threats and derogation by someone with clout and power, would be idiotic enough to not change course, amid rabid hostility and threats of ongoing litigation.

The Big Question Remains…

Once again I ask, Will Hunter enjoy the same dismissal of charges by the Courts and respect by those in Congress after being pardoned by his own dad? That remains to be seen. If logic and precedent prevails, it will soon be happy trails for Joe and Hunter from here on in. If it doesn’t - it means once again, Trump has won out.

Don’t forget to Restack & Subscribe!

The Legal Edition® - Legal, Business & Policy News

Discussion about this post