Read the Full, Blistering 5-Page Letter Judge Used to Blast Joe Biden For Attempting to 'Rewrite History' in Scandalous Pardoning Case of Son Hunter
Biden's latest move comes shortly after he pardoned his son, Hunter.
Dec. 5 2024, Published 7:00 p.m. ET
The judge presiding over Hunter Biden's tax fraud case slammed Joe Biden for pardoning his son.
RadarOnline.com can reveal the blistering five-page letter Judge Mark Scarsi fired off in response to Biden's pardon.
Scarsi accused Biden, 82, of trying to "rewrite history" in his reasoning laid out in his pardon announcement.
Biden announced he was pardoning his son on December 1 after months of saying otherwise.
Prior to Biden's December 1 pardon announcement, Hunter, 54, was facing two criminal cases.
He was first convicted of lying on a federal form to buy a gun and possessing a firearm while battling drug addiction in June. Months later he pleaded guilty to tax fraud charges.
Now, those cases have been tossed following his dad's pardon weeks before president-elect Donald Trump takes office in January.
Joe recently pardoned his son Hunter – a decision that ruffled feathers in his own party.
While Scarsi accepted Biden's pardon, it was not without condemning the president's actions, particularly the reasoning he gave for freeing his son of the criminal cases in his official statement.
First, Scarsi blasted Biden for sending "a hyperlink to a White House press release" announcing the pardon instead of providing a "true and correct copy of the pardon with notice'.
He added: "The Court previously noted its disapproval of this practice.
"The President's statement illustrates the reasons for the Court's disapproval, as representations contained therein stand in tension with the case record."
Judge Scarsi slammed Biden for sending a 'hyperlink' to a White House press release on his pardon statement instead of a 'true and correct copy' of the pardon.
Scarsi then continued to list reason's for "the Court's disapproval" starting with Biden claiming his son "was treated differently” than other defendants accused of similar crimes.
The judge stated: "For example, the President asserts that Mr. Biden 'was treated differently' from others 'who were late paying their taxes because of serious addictions,' implying that Mr. Biden was among those individuals who untimely paid taxes due to addiction. But he is not.
"In his pretrial filings, Mr. Biden represented that he 'was severely addicted to alcohol and drugs' through May 2019.' Upon pleading guilty to the charges in this case, Mr. Biden admitted that he engaged in tax evasion after this period of addiction by wrongfully deducting as business expenses items he knew were personal expenses, including luxury clothing, escort services, and his daughter's law school tuition.
The government has had much to say when it comes to the mysterious drones.
Never Miss an
Daily updates from the heart of Hollywood, right to your inbox
By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you’re agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
"And Mr. Biden admitted that he “had sufficient funds available to him to pay some or all of his outstanding taxes when they were due,” but that he did not make payments toward his tax liabilities even “well after he had regained his sobriety,” instead electing to “spen[d] large sums to maintain his lifestyle” in 2020."
He then addressed the president's claim Hunter was "singled out only" because he was the first son.
Scarsi noted "two federal judges expressly rejected (Hunter's) arguments that the Government prosecuted (him) because of his familial relation to the President", before adding the president's own "Attorney General and Department of Justice personnel oversaw the investigation leading to the charges".
The judge continued: "In the President’s estimation, this legion of federal civil servants, the undersigned included, are unreasonable people.
"In short, a press release is not a pardon. The Constitution provides the President with broad authority to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, U.S. Const. art. II, § 2, cl. 1, but nowhere does the Constitution give the President the authority to rewrite history."
Have a tip? Send it to us! Email RadarOnline.com at tips@radaronline.com.
