President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, has said he will not take the pardon issued by his father for granted.
“In the throes of addiction, I squandered many opportunities and advantages. In recovery we can be given the opportunity to make amends where possible and rebuild our lives if we never take for granted the mercy that we have been afforded,” Hunter Biden, 54, told news outlets in a Dec. 1 statement.
“I will never take the clemency I have been given today for granted and will devote the life I have rebuilt to helping those who are still sick and suffering.”
Jurors also found Hunter Biden guilty of lying about his drug use and illegal possession of the gun. In a separate case, he also pleaded guilty to tax evasion.
“No reasonable person who looks at the facts of Hunter’s cases can reach any other conclusion than Hunter was singled out only because he is my son—and that is wrong,” the president said on Sunday.
He added later that he believes in the justice system but also thinks that “raw politics has infected this process and it led to a miscarriage of justice.”
“I hope,” President Biden wrote, “Americans will understand why a father and a President would come to this decision.”
President Biden had previously said that he would not pardon his son.
The pardon means Hunter Biden will not receive any prison time or other punishment for his crimes.
The pardon means that the cases must be dismissed and not brought again in the future, lawyers for the president’s son informed the judges handling the cases.
Sentencing in the gun case was scheduled in November, but a federal judge delayed sentencing until December. The pardon came days before the new sentencing date.
Hunter Biden was facing up to 25 years in prison for gun-related crimes and up to 17 years in prison in the tax case. He also faced fines exceeding $1 million.
The decision also drew criticism from Democrats.
Rep. Greg Stanton (D-Ariz.) said he disagreed with the president’s claims that Hunter Biden’s prosecution was politically motivated.
Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, a Democrat, said that the president’s move set a “bad precedent” that could be exploited by future presidents.
“After a 5 year investigation the facts as discovered only made that clear,” Holder said. “Had his name been Joe Smith the resolution would have been— fundamentally and more fairly—a declination.”