The judge who oversaw Hunter Biden’s tax fraud case in California criticized the president for downplaying and misrepresenting the accusations against his son in his remarks announcing his pardon.
U.S. District Judge Mark C. Scarsi said in a decision late Tuesday that “the Constitution gives the President broad authority to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, but nowhere does the Constitution give the President the authority to rewrite history.”
In light of President Joe Biden’s Sunday night pardon, Hunter Biden’s lawyer had asked the judge to drop the indictment against his client. However, instead of providing a formal copy of the pardon, the lawyer first sent a link to the president’s statement claiming that his son had been “selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted” and had suffered a “miscarriage of justice.”
According to Scarsi, the president’s claims in the pardon announcement conflict with the facts of the case.
“For instance, the President claims that Mr. Biden ‘was treated differently’ from those ‘who were late paying their taxes because of significant addictions,’ suggesting that Mr. Biden was one of those people who paid taxes late because of addiction. However, the judge wrote, “He is not.”
He pointed out that up until “May 2019,” Hunter Biden had declared that he was seriously addicted to narcotics and alcohol.
“Mr. Biden acknowledged tax cheating following this period of addiction by falsely claiming as company costs things he knew were personal expenses, such as expensive apparel, escort services, and his daughter’s law school tuition, after entering a guilty plea to the charges in this case. Additionally, the judge noted that although Mr. Biden acknowledged that he “had sufficient funds available to him to pay some or all of his outstanding taxes when they were due,” he chose to “spen[d] large sums to maintain his lifestyle” in 2020 rather than make any payments toward his tax obligations, even “well after he had regained his sobriety.”
On the eve of his trial in September, Biden entered a guilty plea to every charge against him in the California case. The prosecution claimed that he “engaged in a four-year scheme to not pay at least $1.4 million in self-assessed federal taxes he owed for tax years 2016 through 2019.” Prosecutors said that despite owning a Porsche and renting a $17,500-per-month home on a canal in Venice Beach, he “filed false returns in February of 2020” claiming fictitious business deductions “in order to evade assessment of taxes to reduce the substantial tax liabilities,” which he still failed to pay.
After federal investigators informed Biden in December 2020 that they were looking into his affairs, the taxes were eventually paid.
Hunter Biden’s father granted him a “full and unconditional pardon” for “those offenses against the United States which he has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 1, 2014 through December 1, 2024.” Biden was originally set to be sentenced on the three felony and six misdemeanor tax charges later this month.
A Delaware gun case is also covered by the pardon. Biden was supposed to be sentenced in that case this month after a jury found him guilty of those counts earlier this year. After a plea arrangement that would have resolved both cases without jail time collapsed when a judge questioned some of the terms of the agreement, the cases were prosecuted separately.
Scarsi and Maryellen Noreika, the judge in the Delaware case, dismissed Hunter Biden’s assertions that he was the victim of selective prosecution in both cases. Trump nominated both.
“According to the President, ‘[n]o reasonable person who looks at the facts of [Mr. Biden s] cases can reach any other conclusion than [Mr. Biden] was singled out only because he is [the President s] son.'” Scarsi authored. However, two federal judges specifically dismissed Mr. Biden’s claims that the government had brought charges against him because to his kinship with the president. Additionally, the investigation that resulted in the charges was overseen by the President’s own Attorney General and Department of Justice staff. The President believes that the signatories and the rest of the federal public personnel are irrational.
In a court filing earlier this week, special counsel David Weiss, who launched the proceedings against Hunter Biden, made a similar point, pointing up that three appeals court panels had already dismissed the claims of selective prosecution.
According to his office’s filing, “never has been any evidence of vindictive or selective prosecution in this case.” The defendant’s allegations for selective and spiteful prosecution were examined and denied by a total of eleven (11) distinct Article III judges selected by six (6) different presidents, including his father.
A request for comment on the judge’s comments was not immediately answered by the White House.
Scarsi vacated the sentencing hearing despite his disagreement with the president’s remarks, stating that he would formally end the case once he received an authenticating declaration verifying the pardon.
On Tuesday, Noreika issued an order to end the Delaware case.
Note: Every piece of content is rigorously reviewed by our team of experienced writers and editors to ensure its accuracy. Our writers use credible sources and adhere to strict fact-checking protocols to verify all claims and data before publication. If an error is identified, we promptly correct it and strive for transparency in all updates, feel free to reach out to us via email. We appreciate your trust and support!