Hunter Judge Blasts Pres­i­dent For Mak­ing False State­ments In Par­don

The Cal­i­for­nia fed­er­al judge over­see­ing Hunter Biden’s tax charges issued a scathing five-page rul­ing in response to Pres­i­dent Joe Biden’s par­don of his son, say­ing that the pres­i­dent jus­ti­fied his par­don with rea­sons that are false and offen­sive.

Judge Mark C. Scar­si wrote Tues­day of the White House press release explain­ing why the pres­i­dent thought a par­don was war­rant­ed: “The President’s state­ment illus­trates the rea­sons for the Court’s dis­ap­proval, as rep­re­sen­ta­tions con­tained there­in stand in ten­sion with the case record.”

“The Pres­i­dent asserts that Mr. Biden ‘was treat­ed dif­fer­ent­ly’ from oth­ers ‘who were late pay­ing their tax­es because of seri­ous addic­tions,’ imply­ing that Mr. Biden was among those indi­vid­u­als who untime­ly paid tax­es due to addic­tion. But he is not… Mr. Biden admit­ted that he engaged in tax eva­sion after this peri­od of addic­tion.”

“Accord­ing to the Pres­i­dent, ‘[n]o rea­son­able per­son who looks at the facts of [Mr. Biden’s] cas­es can reach any oth­er con­clu­sion than [Mr. Biden] was sin­gled out only because he is [the President’s] son.’ But two fed­er­al judges express­ly reject­ed Mr. Biden’s argu­ments that the Gov­ern­ment pros­e­cut­ed Mr. Biden because of his famil­ial rela­tion to the Pres­i­dent,” he wrote. “And the President’s own Attor­ney Gen­er­al and Depart­ment of Jus­tice per­son­nel over­saw the inves­ti­ga­tion lead­ing to the charges. In the President’s esti­ma­tion, this legion of fed­er­al civ­il ser­vants, the under­signed includ­ed, are unrea­son­able peo­ple.”

He exco­ri­at­ed Hunter for fil­ing a motion demand­ing that the indict­ment be dis­missed because he was par­doned, when no gov­ern­ment agency had even noti­fied the court of it, and Hunter did not include a copy, instead attach­ing only the press release describ­ing the president’s rea­sons for the par­don. “In short, a press release is not a par­don,” he wrote.

CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE

The judge also was sur­prised at the extent of the president’s par­don of his son, which cov­ered all acts through Decem­ber 1, the day it was signed—seemingly giv­ing Hunter a free pass to com­mit crimes lat­er in that day. The judge said the pres­i­dent can­not par­don peo­ple for future acts, but to avoid a con­sti­tu­tion­al issue, he would not inter­pret it that way.

Spe­cial pros­e­cu­tor David Weiss had a sim­i­lar response to Hunter’s demands that the indict­ment be dis­missed, with Weiss under­scor­ing that a long record of evi­dence showed that Hunter was, in fact, prop­er­ly indict­ed by a grand jury, and was not unfair­ly tar­get­ed. He argued for the par­don to be includ­ed in the case file in a way that showed that it was an act of mer­cy, not an era­sure of fact, not­ing that the Biden admin­is­tra­tion did the same thin after Trump par­doned Steve Ban­non.

Pres­i­dent Biden had repeat­ed­ly claimed he would not par­don his son, who was con­vict­ed of gun charges in Delaware and plead­ed guilty to tax charges on the eve of tri­al in Cal­i­for­nia.