On December 1, President Biden pardoned his son Hunter for offenses already committed and for crimes not yet specified. On January 20, he pardoned five other family members–also for unspecified crimes. Biden said they did nothing wrong.
Biden issued pardons for his brothers James Biden and Francis Biden, sister Valerie Biden Owens, sister-in-law Sara Jones Biden and brother-in-law John Owens.
Mark Levin often refers to the “Biden Crime Family”. If that moniker is inappropriate, why were half a dozen Biden family members pardoned for doing nothing wrong?
Actual Pardons versus Prospective Pardons
President Trump was excoriated in 2020 for considering similar pre-emptive pardons for his children and son-in-law.
On Dec. 1, 2020, The New York Times ran the headline “Trump Has Discussed With Advisers Pardons for His 3 Eldest Children and Giuliani,” alleging that the then-president was mulling “pre-emptive pardons” to Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump, Ivanka Trump as well as his son-in-law Jared Kushner. The report even alleged that Trump was considering issuing pardons “for crimes they have not yet committed — essentially a prospective get-out-of-jail-free card.”
Anything President Trump did, good or bad, has never been well received by one channel media. Rachel Maddow had a field day criticizing this unprecedented type of pardon:
“The idea of a kind of prospective pardon, this sort of permanent federal Get Out of Jail Free card, that seems to be what we’re talking about in the case of this, right?” Maddow’s MSNBC colleague
Chris Hayes said. “With Giuliani and his three eldest children, who, as far we know, have not been convicted of a crime. Maybe they’ve committed a lot and they don’t want to face action. I don’t know. It’s weird. I wouldn’t ask for a pardon. I don’t think I deserve one because I don’t think I’ve done anything criminal. But like, where does that come from? That concept you can just kind of wave your magic pardon wand?”
The rest of one-channel media responded similarly to Trump’s potential pre-emptive pardons: https://grabien.com/file?id=2764478
- Joy Reid and Adam Schiff lamented: only someone as devious as President Trump could have thought up something like this.
- Brian Williams and Andrew Weisman (former special prosecutor for Robert Mueller) implied pardoning Trump’s children would be an admission of guilt. Adam Schiff echoed this sentiment as well.
- An MSNBC guest pontificated: “we should acknowledge the audacity of a president who is so clearly concerned about his own criminal culpability and that of his family”
Then President-elect Biden criticized pre-emptive pardons as well:
In a December 2020 interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper, Biden warned against then-outgoing President Trump issuing preemptive pardons to his adult children, his attorney Rudy Giuliani and possibly even one for himself before the Democrat’s Department of Justice took over.
“It concerns me in terms of what kind of precedent it sets and how the rest of the world looks (at) us as a nation of laws and justice,” Biden told Tapper during the joint interview with then-Vice President-elect Kamala Harris.
President Trump deferred to critics and did not actually issue these pardons. Yet, four years later it is deja-vu all over again, this time with President Biden. The criticism of President Biden’s actual pardons in 2024 has been muted, unlike the hysteria regarding Trump’s potential pardons in 2020. Per the NY Times (all the news fit to print?) President Biden had no choice:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/20/us/politics/biden-pardons-family.html
President Biden pardoned five members of his family in his last minutes in office, saying in a statement that he did so not because they did anything wrong but because he feared political attacks from incoming President Donald J. Trump.
The old logic no longer applies when the personalities change. How convenient.
ABC News now worries Biden’s actions will “embolden” Trump. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/president-biden-pardons-family-members-final-minutes-presidency/story?id=117893348
This could set a dangerous precedent and it could embolden Donald Trump and the people who come after him.
Biden crossed the red line but let’s focus on Trump? Go figure.
Can one-channel media possibly mix in criticism of Biden for breaking the glass that probably should not have been broken? Their double standards could not be more clearly demonstrated.
In 2020, President-elect Biden promised better: “Now, in terms of the pardons, you’re not going to see, in our administration, that kind of approach.” Could someone possibly talk of promises broken? Who was emboldened here: Trump or Biden? In 2024, President Biden said in his own defense:
I believe in the rule of law, and I am optimistic that the strength of our legal institutions will ultimately prevail over politics.
Yet, he thwarted the justice system by intruding into its domain. Our legal institutions can no longer demonstrate their ability to prevail over politics in this instance.
President Trump would have been defended by advocates if he had indeed pardoned family members in 2020, but President Biden, not President Trump, upset the apple cart and broke with precedent.
Five days before Biden’s family pardon, Pam Bondi, Trump’s Attorney General nominee, assured senators the Justice Department will and must remain independent. She said “politics will not play a part, ” as she promised the department would not target President Trump’s political opponents. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/pam-bondi-hot-seat-confirmation-hearing-politics-desk-rcna187891.
Can Senators please ask if politics played a part in Biden’s pardons? Was he protecting his own interests by pardoning family members who could implicate him? Was he playing politics? Did his administration target political opponents? Biden’s end-around “legal institutions” makes Bondi’s promise moot.
Dueling Pardons
In January, we had the interesting juxtaposition of both the outgoing and incoming presidents issuing pardons regarding January 6, 2021:
- President Biden pardoned members and staff of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol: Chair Bennie Thompson, Vice Chair Liz Cheney, Zoe Lofgren, Adam Schiff, Pete Aguilar, Stephanie Murphy, Jamie Raskin, Elaine Luria and Adam Kinzinger.
- President Trump pardoned 1,500 arrested or prosecuted for January 6, 2021: j6-pardons-trump-justice-department:
President Donald Trump has pardoned, commuted the prison sentences or vowed to dismiss the cases of all of the 1,500-plus people charged with crimes in the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol riot, including people convicted of assaulting police officers, using his clemency powers on his first day back in office to undo the massive prosecution of the unprecedented assault on the seat of American democracy.
Were either of those J6 pardons appropriate?
First, regarding the J6 committee: Did they destroy evidence? Did they hide evidence during the investigation? Did they act in a fair and impartial manner? We demand others commit to fairness and account for their actions, so why exclude the J6 committee from answering tough questions under oath? Furthermore, why issue pardons if nothing wrong was done? what-did-we-learn-from-the-j6-committee
[Johnathon Turley:] Pelosi’s decision to shred the long tradition on balanced committees was a signature muscle play. The Jan. 6 Committee was stripped of any pretense. It was as subtle as her ripping up President Trump’s State of the Union speech on the House floor…
I also encourage Representative Jamie Raskin, J6 Committee member and lawyer extraordinaire, to reject his own pre-emptive pardon.
Leila Fadel: Have you made the decision on whether to accept [the pardon] or not?
Rep. Jamie Raskin: Well, I don’t even know whether that’s a choice, and I’m going to consult lawyers about that. It’s not clear to me that a pardon is something you reject or you accept. I think it is a statement of the law, but I’m just not sure.
Sir: given your fervent claim of innocence, it is vital you reject this pardon. You did nothing wrong, so stand tall without this meaningless shield and don’t blame your lawyer for your silence. Clear your name and defend the honor of the J6 committee. Show us how men of honor conduct themselves. Please tell us more. Please help us determine who is telling the truth and who is not. Justice should ultimately prevail.
Next, how about Trump’s J6 pardons? Should he be criticized for commuting sentences for violent offenders? Very possibly, yes. Still, the vast majority of sentences were not commensurate with their actions.
Journalist Steve Baker followed a large crowd through the Capitol for less than an hour corruption-alert-journalist-arrested-for-January-6. He was put through an exhausting legal process and arrested for a stroll basically, a stroll entirely captured on video and monitored by Capitol police. There was nothing to see throughout.
Angelo Pacheco spent eighteen seconds in the Capitol yet received probation, home detention, and a criminal record for this offense kc-man-who-spent-18-seconds-in-the-capitol-on-Jan-6. He walked in to the building, immediately turned around, and exited. There was nothing to see, yet one-channel media claims there were extenuating circumstances, sinister activities like wearing sunglasses and a bandana and social media posts on the 2020 election (speech protected under the First Amendment, by the way). It is outrageous to call Mr. Pacheco’s actions a crime. His J6 “criminal record” has also prevented this young man from finding employment. The inappropriate and extreme consequences are the true injustice.
Jacob Chansley, one of the more memorable J6 characters, was sentenced to 41 months in prison. After Tucker Carlson and Fox News released video of Chansley in the Capitol (evidence not allowed during his trial), there was outrage. Again, there was nothing to see. Why had this man been imprisoned at all? Almost immediately after Carlson’s report, Chansley was released. https://www.newsweek.com/january-capitol-riot-video-footage-calm-twitter-1631994.
The AP (along with the rest of one channel media) labeled January 6 an “unprecedented assault on the seat of American democracy” . This characterization is the very definition of hyperbole. Maybe a few protestors should not be freed, but for the overwhelming majority, there is finally some measure of justice.
Our justice system was designed to protect the innocent from punishment at the expense of allowing a few guilty miscreants to slip through. We seek to prevent both types of injustices, but we deliberately err on the side of protecting the innocent. In Soviet Russia nearly everyone charged was convicted. Our system, despite its flaws, is far better. Trump’s pardons align with that basic American philosophy.
Folks who did no more than walk around the Capitol while being ushered in and monitored by Capitol police should not be prosecuted. I mentioned three of the 1,500, but there are countless more similar stories. Video evidence demonstrates January 6 was not what so many claim what-does-an-insurrection-look-like? Few other events in American history have been so distorted. The justice system ran amok and President Trump is abruptly ending this collective injustice.
Trump said the pardons will end “a grave national injustice that has been perpetrated upon the American people over the last four years” and begin “a process of national reconciliation.
President Trump ended an even greater injustice by pardoning 23 people who peacefully protested in a different fashion:
trump-pardons-peaceful-pro-lifers-for-protesting-outside-abortion-clinics
President Trump pardoned nearly two dozen pro-life activists Thursday who were convicted under a federal law of illegally trying to block abortion clinic entrances or otherwise keep women from undergoing the procedure.
More Questionable Pardons
Leonard Peltier was sentenced to life in prison for killing two FBI agents during a 1975 incident at Wounded Knee (Indian Reservation) in South Dakota. Mr. Peltier, now 80 years old, will serve out his sentence in home confinement per President Biden’s order. This announcement was greeted as a watershed moment: https://www.ocregister.com/2025/01/22/clemency-for-leonard-peltier-a-step-toward-justice-and-healing/
This moment marks a significant step toward justice, but it also reflects the broader struggle for fairness and healing that Indigenous peoples have faced for centuries.
If I were a Native American concerned about injustice for my people, I would not would not claim the release of someone who murdered two law enforcement officials brings healing to anyone. Why elevate Mr. Peltier, at all? Still, President Biden received the praise he was seeking.
One can certainly question Trump’s J6 pardons for those assaulting law enforcement, but there were no murderers among them.
“Today, I am commuting the sentences of nearly 2,500 people convicted of non-violent drug offenses who are serving disproportionately long sentences compared to the sentences they would receive today under current law, policy, and practice.” President Biden, January 17, 2025
Adrian Peeler is another “non-violent” person who sentence was commuted by President Biden.
Biden’s ‘non-violent’ clemency includes CT child killer Adrian Peeler | Fox News
A 48-year-old Connecticut drug kingpin who killed a mother and her 8-year-old son so she wouldn’t testify against his brother has received a commutation as part of former President Joe Biden’s clemency for nearly 2,500 federal inmates he described as “non-violent.”
Did this commutation for a “non-violent” offender bring healing to anyone?
In comparison, these folks pardoned by President Trump were actually non-violent.
trump-pardons-peaceful-pro-lifers-for-protesting-outside-abortion-clinics
“Biden prosecuted pro-lifers—including an 89-year-old concentration camp survivor—for singing hymns in a clinic hallway,” [Senator Josh] Hawley said on X. “And then Biden turned around & handed out pardons for criminal murderers on his last day in office. President Trump can & should right these wrongs.”
President Trump did indeed right these wrongs his first week in office.
So, how do the dueling J6 pardons from the two presidents compare?
Dr. Anthony Fauci also received a last minute pardon from Biden (also for crimes not specified). Dr. Fauci should account for his actions as the nation’s COVID response czar; he was wrong on virtually every important COVID issue: vaccines, masking, treatment, lockdowns, and more. Many say he should not be prosecuted for good intent. Dr. Fauci has even used this excuse in his own defense.
However, was it good intent when Dr. Fauci repeatedly insisted the COVID virus did not originate in a Chinese lab? Did he take this public stance to hide his own role in funding gain-of-function research in Wuhan (skirting the US ban imposed by the Obama Administration).
This past week, the CIA updated its analysis saying it now suspects the virus was indeed hatched in a Wuhan lab. This is yet another fatal error from Fauci. Was his error a legitimate mistake or a deliberate lie? More importantly, could Dr. Fauci’s implication in the creation of a virus which killed more than a million Americans be considered criminal? Is this the unmentioned crime he was pardoned for?
The CIA has shifted its stance about the origin of the virus that causes Covid-19, NBC News reported on Saturday. The intelligence agency now believes that the coronavirus escaped from a Chinese lab, a shift from its previous stance, in which it did not take a position.
There is a ton of prima facie evidence implicating Dr. Fauci: conclusions from the CIA and US military as well as a bevy of Dr. Fauci’s medical peers who have repeatedly discredited his judgment.
SARS-CoV-2 is an American-created recombinant bat vaccine, or its precursor virus. It was created by an EcoHealth Alliance program at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), as suggested by the reporting surrounding the lab leak hypothesis. The details of this program have been concealed since the pandemic began. These details can be found in the EcoHealth Alliance proposal response to the DARPA PREEMPT program Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) HR00118S0017, dated March 2018 – a document not yet publicly disclosed.
DARPA rejected the proposal because the work was too close to violating the gain-of-function (GoF) moratorium, despite what Peter Daszak says in the proposal (that the work would not). As is known, Dr. Fauci with NIAID did not reject the proposal. The work took place at the WIV and at several sites in the US, identified in detail in the proposal.
Why did Dr. Fauci’s department fund gain-of-function research? Why was he so insistent (for so long) the Wuhan lab was not the COVID source? Was this an error in judgment or was he protecting his own reputation as well as his friend, Dr. Peter Daszak? Why did he also target critics (often highly credentialed medical authorities), threatening their reputations, their careers, their licenses, and more? We need a full reckoning.
Making a virus more infectious in order to come up with a vaccine . . . that is the marketing plan of this bio-pharmaceutical complex. Daszak said this before COVID in writing in various forms . . . More papers have been written that we have to do gain-of-function research, so that we can get to vaccines . . . the reason to create SARS2/COVID-19 is to get to the vaccines. Dr. Peter McCullough, interview 5/5/24 on Steve Deace Show 1:17:39.
Pleading the Fifth
Investigations should move forward despite pardons. Did the Biden family benefit financially from Joe Biden selling influence throughout his nearly fifty-year political career? Did Dr. Fauci misuse his position to benefit friends and himself at the expense of million of American lives? Was the J6 committee truthful or did they too misuse their position to unduly influence an election?
Those receiving pardons can still be questioned. In fact, given their immunity from prosecution, they no longer have the right to plead the Fifth against self-incrimination. They must answer questions under oath or risk new charges.
Prosecutions are not the main concern. Retribution is not the goal. The pardons can stand, but the truth about COVID, J6, and political corruption matters more. Many will say we already know enough, but that is doubtful. There certainly is no consensus among us. Many Americans are not even aware of any controversies; let’s enlighten them. Let’s expose the truth about shameful practices and clear the names of folks unjustly accused.
Let’s tell the whole story regarding Angel Pacheco, Steve Baker, Leonard Peltier, Adrian Peeler, and others pardoned, not elevating those who don’t deserve recognition, and not demeaning folks who don’t deserve discredit.
Let’s contrast pardoning actual murderers with pardoning J6 protestors who committed no murders. Let’s highlight pro-life activists jailed for singing hymns and blocking entrances to abortion clinics. Let’s contrast President Trump considering pre-emptive pardons and President Biden actually executing pre-emptive pardons.
Finally, let’s expose a corrupt media for their extreme bias and lack of perspective regarding these stories.
Dave https://seek-the-truth.com/about/
https://seek-the-truth.com/
https://seek-the-truth.com/category/covid/
https://seek-the-truth.com/category/life/
https://seek-the-truth.com/category/elections/
Seek the Truth 
One thought on “A Tale of Two Pardons”