Posted on 12/08/2024 1:17:36 PM PST by CFW
On a dreary Sunday, as severe storms crippled vast portions of the Great Lakes and families planned to return home after a long Thanksgiving weekend, Joe Biden sprung the second surprise of his presidency. He issued a presidential pardon for his son Hunter's activities dating back to January 1, 2014. The pardon was overbroad and covered activities that were not even the subject of a DOJ trial of Hunter, such as lying about filling out a form to obtain a gun and failing to pay taxes on time.
[snip]
The presidential pardon, however, shook Biden's loyal supporters. They said Biden had said he wouldn't do it, and yet he did—so he lied. Others said Biden shouldn't have issued a pardon for an individual who was known to associate himself with prostitutes and indulge in sex parties, drugs, and alcohol. Some, like Rep. Greg Stanton (D-Arizona), criticized Biden for thumbing his nose at the justice system. "I respect President Biden, but I think he got this one wrong. This wasn't a politically motivated prosecution. Hunter committed felonies and was convicted by a jury of his peers."
[snip]
Hunter's corrupt activities only increased during the Trump administration Even under President Trump, the National Security Council was concerned about Ukraine's corrupt ways. The NSC provided talking points to Trump to mention corruption in his congratulatory call with President Zelenskyy, who was elected in May 2019. Trump did not use those talking points, but in a more consequential call in July, he asked Zelenskyy for help investigating Hunter. A partisan House impeached Trump for using his presidential power to influence a future election.
(Excerpt) Read more at tippinsights.com ...
It's well worth the read to refresh your memory on the details. This is what you call "journalism" or an "investigation media report".
Yeah, that's what did it.
Joe and Hunter were partners in crime. Half of his ill-gotten millions went right into Joe’s pocket, because he got it by using the power of Joe’s office as Vice President. This is one criminal pardoning another.
I don’t think it destroys his ‘legacy’….it was always going to be that of a dumb, senile, corrupt pervert.
The first impeachment hoax was a joke. After Mueller crapped out, a few days later the deep state launched the Ukraine call scam. Pecker puss Pelosi cheapened impeachment with such a flimsy non crime. She set the low standard for lawfare. No one should go wobbly as Trump exacts retribution.
The democrat’s in your face that they are above the law
Yes.
There were several occasions to impeach Biden on somewhat more sound cases.
But, Biden was smart, he selected Kamala as his impeachment insurance!
The feeling I had is not right. I need to repent; seriously, I need to repent.
Toilet brush cabbage patch skank?
You cannot destroy what does not exist & never has.
I wouldn’t say that Biden’s legacy was destroyed only because of the Hunter Biden pardon. Some Democrats, notably Nancy Pelosi, seem to suggest if Biden hadn’t tried to run for reelection in the first place, the field of Democrat candidates would have been enough to create a competitive field for the primary that leads to a nominee that would have defeated Trump in the general election. Some Democrats believe the Biden’s legacy was already destroyed because Trump was reelected President.
Looks like Jill’s trying to make up for it:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14171471/trump-intimate-jill-biden-notre-dame-viral.html
Biden’s legacy as the most corrupt and compromised president in American history is safe. He can’t do anything to alter that fact. He was corrupt as a senator but as vice president under Obama he turbo charged his corruption, especially in Ukraine. Of course president Trump is right. He is always right.
BTTT
Unfortunately, “proof” of wrongdoing by the left is never acknowledged.
The memes of Jill and Trump have been pretty funny.
https://twitchy.com/warren-squire/2024/12/08/trump-jill-biden-smiling-pic-n2404832
Ha! Thanks.
Would a pardon of Adam Schiff and Liz Cheney be constitutional?
I know that people say that the pardon power is unlimited, but there is the exception for the case of impeachment. Impeachment is a Congressional act regarding the President, so pardoning an act of Congress would violate separation of powers.
Furthermore, pardons are limited to "offenses against the United States," in other words, for breaking federal law. Members of Congress are held to a higher Constitutional standard.
Article I Section 6 Clause 2 says:
They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.
Adam Schiff's behavior on the House Judiciary Committee (submitting a memo full of lies to counter the Devon Nunes memo) and his involvement on the January 6th Select Committee are covered by the "speech and debate" clause of the Constitution. Liz Cheney's work on the same January 6th Select Committee are likewise covered by the "speech and debate" clause. A pardon would be "questioning" their official Congressional behavior.
It seems to me that a Presidential pardon of Schiff and Cheney would violate the "speech and debate" clause of the Constitution and is therefore unconstitutional.
A pardon can overturn a violation of federal law, but it cannot overrule the Constitution, which is supreme Law of the Land.
-PJ
His legacy was in the toilet two years ago. What his pardon proved is that he knows that Hunter has the goods on him...”The Big Guy”...who,depending on the circumstances,either gets 10% or 50% of the take.
The headline assumes Biden had a positive legacy to destroy. He was widely regarded as a failure president before the pardons.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.