President Joe Biden issued a pardon during the Thanksgiving weekend, as his son prepared to face sentencing hearings later this month in Delaware and California. The hearings could have resulted in significant prison terms.
On Sunday, President Joe Biden came as close as could be imagined to sounding like his eternal nemesis, President-elect Donald trump. He began:
“Today, I signed a pardon for my son Hunter. From the day I took office, I said I would not interfere with the Justice Department’s decision-making, and I kept my word even as I have watched my son being selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted.
“Without aggravating factors like use in a crime, multiple purchases, or buying a weapon as a straw purchaser, people are almost never brought to trial on felony charges solely for how they filled out a gun form. Those who were late paying their taxes because of serious addictions, but paid them back subsequently with interest and penalties, are typically given non-criminal resolutions. It is clear that Hunter was treated differently.”
Here is where Joe started channeling Donald at full force, everybody is against him, it’s all the doing of his political enemies, you know the drill:
“The charges in his cases came about only after several of my political opponents in Congress instigated them to attack me and oppose my election. Then, a carefully negotiated plea deal, agreed to by the Department of Justice, unraveled in the courtroom – with a number of my political opponents in Congress taking credit for bringing political pressure on the process. Had the plea deal held, it would have been a fair, reasonable resolution of Hunter’s case.
“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. There has been an effort to break Hunter – who has been five and a half years sober, even in the face of unrelenting attacks and selective prosecution. In trying to break Hunter, they’ve tried to break me – and there’s no reason to believe it will stop here. Enough is enough.”
President Biden’s pardon of his son was notably sweeping, encompassing offenses “which he has committed or may have committed or taken part in” since the start of 2014. That year marked Hunter Biden’s appointment to the board of Burisma, a Ukrainian gas company that has been central to scrutiny surrounding his business activities.
THE “CONSPIRACY THEORY”
The Biden–Ukraine conspiracy theory asserts that Joe Biden, during his tenure as vice president, improperly withheld a loan guarantee and accepted a bribe to pressure Ukraine into dismissing its prosecutor general, Viktor Shokin. These allegations contend that the move was intended to halt a corruption investigation into Burisma, a Ukrainian gas company, and to shield Hunter Biden, who served on Burisma’s board. Originating as part of Donald Trump’s efforts during the Trump–Ukraine scandal—which led to his first impeachment—these claims undermined Joe Biden’s reputation and electoral prospects during the 2020 presidential campaign and later as part of attempts to impeach him.
In June 2020, a confidential informant identified as Alexander Smirnov provided the FBI with a striking allegation: Mykola Zlochevsky, the owner of the Ukrainian energy firm Burisma, claimed he was coerced into paying $5 million bribes to both Hunter Biden and “another Biden” in exchange for ensuring the dismissal of Ukraine’s then-Prosecutor General, Viktor Shokin.
The FBI documented Smirnov’s assertions and described the details of the claim. According to the claim, Zlochevsky allegedly disclosed the existence of 17 audio recordings related to the Bidens, two of which purportedly featured Joe Biden, while the remaining 15 involved Hunter Biden. The recordings, Smirnov said, were evidence that Zlochevsky felt pressured to make the payments to secure Shokin’s removal.
Smirnov also relayed Zlochevsky’s reasoning for hiring Hunter Biden, stating that the move was intended to “protect us, through his dad, from all kinds of problems.” These claims, while unverified, have fueled ongoing scrutiny and debate surrounding Hunter Biden’s business dealings and their potential implications for his father, President Joe Biden.
In October 2020, a political storm erupted over the contents of a laptop purportedly belonging to Hunter Biden. John Paul Mac Isaac, the owner of a Delaware computer repair shop, claimed the laptop had been dropped off by a man who identified himself as Hunter Biden. Mac Isaac, who is legally blind, later admitted he could not be certain of the man’s identity.
The New York Post broke the story just three weeks before the 2020 presidential election, publishing emails from the laptop that it alleged pointed to corruption involving Joe Biden. The story, according to the Post, was based on material provided by Rudy Giuliani, then the personal attorney of President Donald Trump, after Mac Isaac turned over the laptop’s hard drive.
Social media platforms blocked links to the Post’s story and several major news outlets declined to cover it amid concerns over the laptop’s origins and suspicions that it could be part of a Russian disinformation campaign. Forensic analysis later verified some of the emails from the laptop, including one of the two that were central to the Post’s initial reporting.
By May 2023, however, no evidence had emerged to substantiate claims that the laptop was part of a Russian disinformation effort. The episode remains a flashpoint in debates over media ethics, election interference, and the Biden family’s business dealings.
According to a USA Today report, while it is accurate that Joe Biden, then serving as Vice President, used the leverage of $1 billion in U.S. aid to push for the dismissal of Ukraine’s top prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, in March 2016, the context is critical. Biden’s actions were not aimed at protecting the Ukrainian energy firm Burisma, where his son Hunter Biden served on the board, but rather stemmed from widespread international frustration with Shokin’s failure to tackle corruption among Ukraine’s political elite.
The Obama administration, along with European allies and international organizations such as the International Monetary Fund, had long criticized Shokin for his ineffectiveness in pursuing corruption cases. These critics argued that Shokin’s reluctance to investigate high-level graft hindered Ukraine’s efforts to reform and improve governance following its 2014 revolution.
The move to pressure Ukraine into removing Shokin was thus positioned as part of a broader US foreign policy strategy, rather than a personal or political intervention by Biden.
