Staff Reports
Rep. James Clyburn recently made headlines for his spirited defense of Hunter Biden, claiming that the embattled son of President Joe Biden would never have faced legal trouble if he weren’t the son of the man currently sitting in the Oval Office. Clyburn went on NewsNation’s “The Hill” to proclaim that the only reason Hunter found himself on the wrong side of the law was the unfair scrutiny that comes with having a famous father. Apparently, that means getting a pass for potentially breaking gun laws.
Clyburn’s argument seems to boil down to this: if Hunter Biden weren’t tethered to a presidential brand, he would be leading a charmed life free from any consequences. It’s fascinating how the congressman can casually overlook the fact that even the most powerful “relationship” in America didn’t prevent Hunter from facing a felony charge. Instead of accountability, Clyburn paints a picture of victimhood for the Biden clan, as if they are just pawns in a game played by malicious adversaries who refuse to accept that this administration could have any scandal touch it.
Clyburn: Hunter Got Convicted Because Joe Was 'Object of a Lot of Unfair Untruths' https://t.co/TLP03poHhP
— Steve Ferguson (@lsferguson) December 6, 2024
The congressman went further to assert that had Hunter inherited a different last name, there’s a possibility those pesky legal troubles wouldn’t have existed at all. A bit of “whataboutism,” perhaps? Clyburn is convinced that if Hunter were the child of Sen. Michael Bennet or Rep. Greg Stanton, there would have been no felony charge. That’s right—conveniently ignoring the fact that many Americans have faced harsher repercussions for considerably less.
It’s difficult to imagine how filling out a form incorrectly could lead to a felony conviction under regular circumstances. But Clyburn’s take seems to suggest that denial of drug use should come with a VIP pass to escape judicial consequences, especially for the privileged. When it comes to the Bidens, it’s almost as if the laws of man cease to apply, and the rules are simply suggestions that can be bent depending on familial relations.
In a world where accountability is vital for a functioning society, it seems Clyburn’s defense of Hunter Biden signals that some people are just more equal than others. Clyburn’s argument isn’t just a defense of Hunter; it’s an indictment on how political connections can turn criminal behavior into palatable anecdotes. The jury may be out on Hunter Biden’s character, but it seems Clyburn is determined to secure a not guilty verdict in the court of public opinion.
