Hunter’s Pardon Won’t Stop the Truth: Constitutional Attorney Reveals How Republicans Can Expose Biden’s Crimes
Despite receiving a full federal pardon from President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden may still face serious legal consequences as key legal experts reveal critical limitations to presidential clemency. According to KY Rep.-elect and constitutional attorney T.J. Roberts, Hunter has effectively lost his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent if subpoenaed to testify on crimes committed between January 1, 2014, and December 1, 2024.
The pardon, which covers federal offenses, does not shield Hunter from potential state or local charges, nor does it protect him if he perjures himself during testimony. Roberts emphasized that Hunter can still be compelled to testify in related investigations, and any lies under oath would constitute a new federal crime—beyond the reach of Biden’s blanket pardon.
This loophole opens the door for Republicans in Congress to pursue answers about the alleged Biden family corruption, from questionable business dealings in Ukraine and China to Hunter’s notorious foreign lobbying efforts.
Roberts explained, “Federal pardons only apply to federal offenses. They do not cover state crimes, local crimes, or private civil offenses. If Hunter committed state-level crimes, he’s still fair game.”
With Republicans gaining momentum in their investigations, calls to expose the Biden family’s alleged crimes are growing louder. GOP lawmakers are urging aggressive action to subpoena Hunter and delve into his business records, which could shed light on what many believe to be years of illicit activity involving the “Big Guy.”
This legal revelation highlights the growing scrutiny of President Biden’s decision to pardon his son and reinforces GOP efforts to hold the Biden family accountable, despite attempts to sweep the scandal under the rug.
Mark Van der Veen offers some of the most analytical and insightful writings on politics. He regularly opines on the motives and political calculations of politicians and candidates, and whether or not their strategy will work. Van der Veen offers a contrast to many on this list by sticking mainly to a fact-based style of writing that is generally combative with opposing ideologies.
