Hunter Got Whacked

Hunter accepted his dad's pardon for tax evasion and gun registration violations, both of which are felonies. So he is a convicted felon. His acceptance is a default admission of guilt.The blanket pardon of all potential criminal prosecutions from January 2014 on is another thing altogether.

General pardons do not signify innocence, and do imply that a crime/offense was committed. An unconditional pardon does not specify a specific crime, so it carries no implication and is only a legal amnesty for the period specified.

Giving someone a blanket pardon, amnesty, clemency, reprieve or commutation does not stop authorities from investigating the activities of that person. In fact, investigators can still bring charges and pursue convictions of other participants, but they cannot, in the end, punish that pardoned person for those (in Hunter's case unspecified) crimes. Because of that fact most prosecutors do not move forward because of the great expense that would not result in any preventative measures. A pardon is the exact opposite of an exoneration, but in reality, it effectively bestows clemency and ends most investigations and related prosecutions.

Joe Biden said he was contradicting his own promise not to give Hunter a pardon because he was convinced Hunter was only being persecuted because of his association with his dad, who himself was a victim of political harassment and therefor Hunter deserved mercy.

But that begs the question, why extend the pardon back so far in history? Why 2014? If Hunter was simply a victim of over zealous authorities seeking to punish him for otherwise innocuous administrative paperwork errors, what made the President decide to stretch out the period of clemency to 10 years? 

If you think there is much more involved than paperwork mistakes, that the President is covering his own ass by silencing critics of Hunters international financial machinations, than you are not alone. Joe's pardon is a blatant attempt to derail scrutiny of the relationship he and his son, and others, had with the Ukrainian government, and the enormous amounts of money and military armaments being transferred out of America and disappearing into oblivion. 

The nature of the pardon has massive implications because it effectively blocks further inquiries into the entire Biden Family Ukrainian Shakedown Operation. If, as many observers think, Hunter was essentially a bagman, extorting millions from various parties in and around Ukraine, making him legally "disappear" is tantamount to whacking him.

So what now? 

Federal pardons do not extend to violations of State laws. Nor does it preclude civil actions.

"...a pardon will not interfere with any rights a third party has to recover damages for another’s criminal behavior even if that behavior has been forgiven by a pardon."

If a California art broker claimed his business was damaged by Hunter Biden selling forged artworks, he could sue for damages in a California court. Not likely, but there may be dozens of folks who suffered damages via the Biden Crime Family, all across America. I'll leave it to more qualified legal eagles to uncover plaintiffs, but I am guessing once Joey Bananas retires to his beach-side mansion, there will be no country for that old man, or Hunter.

Why do I say that? Pardoned individuals cannot use their legal status to claim 5th amendment (self incrimination) rights to avoid testimony in court proceedings involving others regarding the circumstances of their activities surrounding the crimes included in the pardon. Should prosecutors ever bring charges against Hunter's business associates involving money laundering, forgery, fraud, or tax evasion in or around his energy business interests in Ukraine, he would be forced to testify in Federal court, or face charges for obstructing justice, a crime that would occur post pardon.

"Although truthful testimony might shame a witness or open Biden or others up to suits for civil damages, these considerations cannot support Fifth Amendment claims. Also, with criminal prosecutions off the table, Congress or the Justice Department, perhaps acting through special counsel, might be more, rather than less, willing to explore the possible crimes and bad acts of Biden and his associates.  

To a degree determined by the scope of Biden’s pardons, recipients could be required to flesh out details about crimes for which they had been pardoned, perhaps implicating others whose involvement had gone undetected. If they then lied to avoid shaming themselves or to protect others, they could be tried for that crime."  
​--  (My apologies to Brooking Institution)