Hunter Biden Trial

And they only have four years to complete the process before Trump's 3rd term begins.
Does that mean you expect that they'll find a way to circumvent the Constitutional limits on how many terms a President can serve?

Or are you just assuming that President Vance will be nothing more than a continuation of Donnie?
 
Does that mean you expect that they'll find a way to circumvent the Constitutional limits on how many terms a President can serve?
Or are you just assuming that President Vance will be nothing more than a continuation of Donnie?
You read me like a dime novel S2, sear's version of glum ("graveyard") humor. As many a pragmatist understands, even outside the Hollywood zip code, nightmares rarely have happy endings.

- 4 years -

FOUR YEARS ! !

A bull can do quite a lot of damage in a china shop in one month. And Trump's next term is scheduled to last for 48 months ! ¡Ay, caramba!

I'm sincerely not confident our Constitution will endure.

If they'll ignore the 14th Amendment ...
ARTICLE #14: Ratified July 9, 1868
SECTION 3. No person shall ... hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, ... who, having previously taken an oath, ... as an officer of the United States, ... to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.

... while flagrantly violating both section #1 ...
ARTICLE 2. SECTION 1.
7 Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm)that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

... and section #3 of Article #2 ...
ARTICLE 2. SECTION 3.
He shall ... take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed ...

why would they meticulously heed Article 22?
ARTICLE #22: Ratified February 27, 1951
SECTION1. No person shall be elected to the office of President more than twice ...
It is not a certitude our Constitution will fall.

Neither is a certitude it won't.
20 : 20 hindsight aside (through a terribly bloody "Civil" War, and two World Wars) our Constitution stands. Will that be so, in February 2029?

I'm hardly a fatalist. But in prospect of a 2nd four year Trump term, fatalism and pragmatism have a large potentially fatal Venn diagram overlap / intersection.
 
Point - 'Nother Point:

Point:
MSNBC
Opinion | Joe Biden chose fatherly love over his duties as president / Austin Sarat / Updated Mon, December 2, 2024 at 7:40 PM EST

I am an unabashed admirer of President Joe Biden. He has done a remarkably good job for the American people. But I am deeply disappointed by Sunday night’s pardon of his son Hunter.
I respect and admire the president’s devotion to his son and feel great sympathy for the Shakespearian dilemma he faced ahead of Hunter’s sentencing. This is a president who has made devotion to duty and restoring the “soul of the nation” his signature. Thus, pardoning Hunter can be viewed as the understandable act of a loving father, especially one worried about a Justice Department that may very soon be turned into a tool of vengeance.
But I still think it was the wrong decision.
Biden’s choice gives credence to President-elect Donald Trump’s repeated assertions that justice under his predecessor was tainted by favoritism toward his friends and animus toward his political opponents.

https://news.yahoo.com/news/opinion-joe-biden-chose-fatherly-213300444.html


Your conclusion is plausible Austin, your stated reasoning less so.

Another perhaps more plausible explanation:
- President Biden formalized his intention to not pardon son Hunter before the 2024 election.
- Though President-elect Trump accuses weaponization:
“The failed witch hunts against President Trump,” he said in a statement, “have proven that the Democrat-controlled DOJ and other radical prosecutors are guilty of weaponizing the justice system.
Trump’s spokesperson, Steven Cheung, source: 1733231197221.png
it hardly makes sense that the leader of the Democrats would turn this weapon on his own son.

The pardon is issued, but the criticism continues.

Austin,
More plausible, President Biden may have believed Vice President Harris would win the November election, and that the risk to Hunter Biden would be about the same as for other Americans convicted of similar crimes.
But Trump's specialty is unpredictable volatility, has publicly committed to pardoning January 6th insurrectionists, and has established / earned a reputation.
Your scenario would explain it Austin.
Perhaps more likely, President Biden didn't want his son, guilty though he may be for the crimes of which he was convicted, being caught in punitive partisan presidential crossfire, of which Hunter is substantially innocent.

Proportion tells the tale.
Republicans can squeal like stuck swine over President Biden reneging on his no-pardon commitment.
We'll see if their squeal is proportionate if / when President Trump fulfills numerous campaign commitments substantially more impactful, detrimental.
 
But Trump's specialty is unpredictable volatility, has publicly committed to pardoning January 6th insurrectionists, and has established / earned a reputation.
Trump has made it very clear that he wants revenge and his cabinet picks have one thing in common - they're loyal to Trump and nothing else (the Constitution and law be damned) so, absent the pardon, Hunter would have been done for.
 
"... so, absent the pardon, Hunter would have been done for." S2 #24
And this suggests Republicans criticizing Biden on this pardon are preparing for, expressing an intention to toe the Trump line for the next four years.
To others, a cowardly demonstration of them valuing keeping their job as a higher priority than doing their job.
For Democrats politics is dog eat dog. For Republicans it's just the opposite.
 
"A politician's first duty is to be re-elected." #26

I've read that before. BUT
Until now I hadn't recognized it as a distinction between "politician", & "statesman".

pol·i·ti·cian (pŏl′ĭ-tĭshən)
n.
1. One who is actively involved or skilled in politics, especially one who holds a political office.
2. One who deceives or outmaneuvers others for personal gain: distrusted him as the office politician. *


states·man (stātsmən)
n.
A man who is a leader in national or international affairs.
A male political leader regarded as a disinterested promoter of the public good.
A man who is a respected leader in a given field: "a mature statesman of American letters"
(Toby Thompson). *


In short:
The statesman serves the People, the politician serves himself.


* The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition copyright ©2022 by HarperCollins Publishers. All rights reserved.
 
Back
Top