I Beg Your Pardon

What does the First Son's sweeping get-out-of-jail card mean for the next administration?

If the Framers of the Constitution had had the ability to send out a group text to future Americans, I’m pretty sure it would have read, “Hey, just a reminder. We’ve seen what happens when you give elected officials too much freedom and control. You might want to keep an eye on that.” After all, escaping tyranny was essentially the point of declaring independence from Great Britain in the first place. Our wise Designing Dads knew first-hand that ‘the essence of government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse.’ - James Madison, aka the ‘Father of the Constitution’

They did a bang-up job with the Bill of Rights, and with the limits on congressional power, and with the whole checks and balances thing. But one has to wonder why they’d go muck it all up with the now-infamous Pardon Clause, which basically grants the president the ability to absolve pretty much anyone of pretty much anything without so much as a single second opinion or legislative thumbs-up.

Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 of the US Constitution specifically states, “[The President] shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."

Founding Father 1: “These great and sovereign United States of America shall be designed so that no one person, agency, or entity has absolute, unchecked power!”
Founding Father 2: “Aye-aye!”
Founding Father 3: “I mean… sure… except maybe the President? Can we throw that guy some sort of crumpet? He’s the one they’re going to try to assassinate and everything.”
Founding Fathers 1 & 2: “Seems fair.”

Ostensibly the idea behind the presidential pardon was to “balance justice with mercy,” and the FFs must have believed the potential benefits of this particular power outweighed the (fairly obvious) risks. In their collective retrospective defense, one can likely and safely assume they never dreamed their magical offense-erasing wand would be waved to absolve a crack-smoking, sex-addicted, status-abusing, tax-evading, influence-peddling, illegal gun-slinging SOP [son-of-a-president] who was stupid enough to painstakingly document his every dirty, depraved, criminal, crack-fueled deed.

So with the stroke of an executive pen, Hunter is off the hook. Not just for crimes he’s already been found guilty and convicted of, but for any illicit doings he may possibly have engaged in (I mean he probably didn’t nobody really knows but just in case) during a sweeping eleven year period randomly going back to the precise time his shady business dealings in Ukraine started. (Although it’s indeed interesting to note that the US Government’s own bipartisan [AOC is a member!] Committee on Oversight and Accountability has an entire page dedicated to the equally detailed and damning Biden Family Influence Peddling Timeline but seriously, nothing to see here.)

When Jon Stewart is (hilariously) skewering the move, you know it’s crossed a major party line. Please savor Stewart’s on-camera near red-pilling. It’s literally the best thing on the Internet right now.

denzfat

A post shared by @denzfat

Certainly by now, you’ve seen the backlash from both sides. Republicans are chomping at the bit to see Trump retake the White House for the singular purpose of pardoning the J6 detainees. Democrats are desperately trying to defend the actions of a clearly family-centric president who had no choice but to protect his poor, prodigal man-son from “selective, unfair prosecution.” Content creators are churning out priceless “No One is Above the Law” montages (seriously, do some people still not realize the internet is forever? I’m talking to you Karine Jean-Pierre). Time magazine wrote a side-splitting piece titled The Six Reasons Why Joe Biden Pardoned Hunter Biden, with the six reasons being Trump, Trump, Trump, fatherly duty, because he can, and Trump. And poor WaPo reporters must be running out of ways to say “Democrats strongly opposed XYZ. Now they back it. But it’s actually a good thing and we’re here to tell you why.”

Finally, there are the wishful whispers of an epic backfire, with conservatives fantasizing that the crack-guzzling genius will be forced to testify against his felonious father since—with no criminal charges at stake—the pardon removes his ability to plead the Fifth. House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer says it could happen. (Seeing as a cat named Stubbs served as the Mayor of Talkeetna, Alaska for nearly two decades, I’d put it in the realm of possible without feeling overly optimistic.)

With Republicans as a whole riding an unapologetic high at the moment, many feel the waning president’s pardoning of his junkie son is the best thing to happen since Trump tapped Kash Patel to direct the FBI wait was that really just two days ago? Attorney-cum-comic Jeff Childers called it “the political equivalent of [Biden giving Trump] a diamond tennis bracelet for Christmas.” Politico insists the unprecedented clemency gives Trump “new rationale for even more expansive pardons than those he issued in his first term.” And X users are gleefully compiling the best, most mortifying and grotesquely fawning clips of virtue signaling liberals praising Biden’s character and his respect for the rule of law in this country for swearing on stacks of metaphorical bibles that he would never, ever pardon his son *whoops. There are scores to choose from, but this one is my personal favorite.

In the immediate wake of the Trump win, I promised to try my damndest not to gloat. I’ve been fairly successful thus far. But it’s hard—really hard—not to savor the desperate backpedaling and defiant heel-digging on display as the democratic party continues to implode on itself.

Me on the outside.

What do you think about the fatherly forgiveness we witnessed this week? Acceptable? Forgivable? Predictable? Laughable? LMK in the comments. :)

If you’re giving YDS as a holiday gift, I’ll happily mail you signed bookplates. :)