Many Americans were outraged on Sunday after learning that President Joe Biden had issued a sweeping pardon to his son, Hunter. This decision came despite repeated public denials from both Biden and White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre. Hunter, who faced convictions on three gun-related charges and a guilty plea for tax evasion, was on the brink of near-certain incarceration. The pardon effectively wiped the slate clean. Yet, as with most complex matters, it is not without limitations.
During a Monday night panel on Fox News’ Hannity, investigative journalist John Solomon, editor of Just the News, and Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett discussed the ongoing risks facing Hunter and the Biden family.
“Hunter’s pardon does not prevent the Department of Justice from pursuing fraud charges against him,” Solomon explained. Drawing a comparison, he noted how O.J. Simpson was acquitted of the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman in a criminal trial but was later found liable for their wrongful deaths in a civil suit, and ordered to pay $33.5 million in damages.
Solomon said, “You can’t bring criminal charges against Hunter Biden, but there’s nothing that prevents the Trump Justice Department from filing a fraud case and seeking civil remedy and taking money from him and other members of the family on allegations that they reported false information. They committed fraud. Those are things that are still on the table. A pardon doesn’t protect you from civil actions.”
“He no longer will be able to deny or say ‘I don’t want to testify in any proceedings because I invoke my Fifth Amendment right against incrimination.’ The president took that away from him, so he’s going to have to testify if he’s compelled.”
[Note: According to Reuters, if Hunter is called to testify before the House of Representatives or the DOJ about the Biden family business dealings, the fact that he was pardoned “could limit his ability to invoke” his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. That is “because he no longer faces criminal jeopardy for any federal crimes committed during the period covered. Before he was pardoned, he could have declined to do so, citing the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.”]
Additionally, Solomon noted that “the [burden of] proof [required] in a civil case [is] much lower” than it is in a criminal case.
The panel unanimously agreed that the pardon was more than just a selfless gesture from a loving father. Its broad immunity, covering the period from January 2014 to December 2024, revealed its true intent. As I mentioned yesterday, 2014 marked the beginning of Hunter’s tenure on the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings. This was the year the family’s influence-peddling operation ramped up, and the flow of money began.
Jarrett pointed out that “[t]his sweeping pardon is not only beneficial for Hunter, but it’s self-serving for Biden himself because there is, of course, compelling evidence that the father actively aided and abetted his son’s financial schemes, selling access, promises of influence. That’s what China, Ukraine, Russia, and other countries were buying in exchange for tens of millions of dollars funneled into Biden-controlled shell companies.”
He continued, “By his pardon, the president didn’t just wipe out Hunter’s two convictions. No, he granted clemency for a decade, eleven years to be precise, of other uncharged crimes in which documents show the father was implicated as an accessory. So, by foreclosing any future charges for the son, Joe Biden effectively impedes further inquiry into his own crooked role. And by protecting his son, he is protecting himself. The Ukrainian quid pro quo, the $5 million Chinese pay to play deal. So, this grant of clemency, as broad as it is, is far more cunning and devious than meets the eye.”
There remains the possibility that James Biden, Joe Biden’s brother and Hunter’s partner in the family business, or even Joe Biden himself, could become targets of a criminal investigation. Joe Biden denied knowledge of his son’s activities for years—most notably during the 2020 presidential debate—but Hunter’s former business partner, Devon Archer, identified him as the “brand” they were leveraging.
The panel was split over whether the president might issue pardons for James or even himself before leaving office in January.
It wouldn’t be a bad idea.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY