The New York Times recently released an article about Hunter Biden with a new correction after receiving backlash for its initial version. The correction was made on the same day as the article’s publication and addresses a misquote of Biden’s statement about his father’s involvement in his business.
The article now includes the full quote, which clarifies that Hunter Biden stated, “My father was not financially involved in my business — not as a practicing lawyer, not as a board member of Burisma, not my partnership with a Chinese private businessman, not in my investments at home nor abroad and certainly not as an artist.” The significance of the word “financially” in his statement did not go unnoticed, particularly by Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee.
Jordan emphasized that the use of the word “financially” represented a significant departure from previous statements made by President Biden and the White House on the subject. The congressman argued that this implied Joe Biden’s involvement in his son’s business, just not from a financial perspective, which contradicts the previous stance of the administration. He described the new statement from Hunter Biden as the most significant news of the morning.
In addition to the controversy surrounding the New York Times article, Hunter Biden is facing charges related to his taxes, possession of a firearm while lying about drug use, and non-compliance with a congressional subpoena.
Speculation has also arisen about the possibility of President Biden pardoning his son, prompting Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen of Tennessee to propose a constitutional amendment to prevent presidents from pardoning themselves or their family members. However, his proposal has gained little traction. There is a growing buzz in official circles about the possibility of President Biden pardoning his son, although White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre stated last week that the president would not pardon his son.
Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Democratic Rep. Gerry Connolly of Virginia also weighed in on the issue, expressing reservations about the use of the presidential pardon for personal purposes. They emphasized that pardons should serve the interests of the United States public and be reserved for extraordinary and mitigating circumstances.
The debate over a potential pardon for Hunter Biden continues to generate discussion and debate across political circles, with lawmakers expressing differing views on the subject. This ongoing controversy adds yet another layer to the scrutiny surrounding Hunter Biden and the potential legal implications for him and the Biden administration.
