The BDN Opinion section operates independently and does not set news policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com
The first time the Biden administration told the American people that President Joe Biden wouldn’t pardon his son Hunter Biden was in July 2023. After Hunter was convicted on three felony gun charges, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was asked whether President Biden would pardon him, and her answer was a curt “no.”
The question was asked many more times, and the answer was always the same. Biden himself first answered the question when sitting for an interview with ABC anchor David Muir in June of this year. Muir asked Biden, “Have you ruled out a pardon for your son?” The answer from Biden was “yes.”
Many in the national media lapped up the declaration. Circulating on social media right now is a nine-minute supercut of journalists, media talking heads and political analysts fawning over the supposed decision by Biden not to pardon Hunter. The reactions were so universally similar that it sounded as though they were being read from a script. One side, Democrats and Joe Biden protecting the justice system, and on the other Republicans and Trump protecting Trump.
“Our current president of the United States has so much respect for the law that he has said that he would not pardon his son,” Mika Brzezinski declared on “Morning Joe. “I mean, again, it is all about the contrast [with Donald Trump].”
That contrast that was portrayed, of course, was that Joe Biden is an honorable, virtuous man who puts love of country and the institutions of government over his own personal interest, while Trump is a lying, cheating, scheming threat to democracy who wants power to serve himself. It is a mythology that Biden himself reveled in creating, repeatedly declaring that “on my word as a Biden” — as if anyone thinks that counts for anything — he always supports “truth over lies.”
With the announcement that Biden was indeed going to be pardoning Hunter, the falseness of that sentiment is now all too apparent.
I believe anyone who heard Joe Biden deny that he would issue a pardon had to know that the promise was a lie. Remember that when the denials started to happen, both from Jean-Pierre and from Biden himself, Biden was still running for reelection to another term as president. He knew that Hunter’s conviction was a vulnerability for him in the election, and if he even flirted with suggesting a pardon might happen, it would hurt him greatly.
Biden knew that he couldn’t claim that Trump was a threat to the republic, ready to destroy the system to do favors for himself and his family while he was himself using power to do just that.
The disappointing thing, though, is that many in the media echo chamber (but not the BDN editorial board) bought it hook, line and sinker.
The reasons why they bought it, though, are a great example of the biggest problem I have with the media’s general posture on political figures: selective skepticism. For politicians that the media doesn’t like, they treat every utterance as a statement to disbelieve and disprove, “fact checking” anything and everything. They assume corruption is systemic, and they work overtime to prove that it exists. For politicians that they do like, that skepticism melts away, and they assume there isn’t much to look into or doubt.
Think here to Maine. When Paul LePage was governor, how many tortuous, excruciating long-form investigation pieces did we read about LePage himself, or the supposed mismanagement of key departments of state government over his eight years he was in office?
How many have you read about Janet Mills tenure? There has not been anywhere near the same level of scrutiny, and if you think there are fewer problems in her administration worthy of significant investigation, you aren’t paying attention.
Back to the pardon, ask yourself what the media’s reaction would have been in June if, instead of Biden, Trump was president, and Donald Trump, Jr. was convicted of felonies. If he declared, in the middle of a reelection campaign that he was not going to pardon his son, would the media have believed him, and congratulated him on his virtuous, honorable, and meaningful declaration? Or do you think they would’ve immediately scoffed, called him a liar and argued that “no one believes that is the truth?”
I think you know the answer, and so do I.
The president’s “word as a Biden” meant nothing, and frankly it never did.
