The uncomfortable parallels between the convictions of Hunter Biden and Donald Trump

Donald Trump and Joe Biden may not have much in common. But when it came to their links to high-profile prosecutions, they sounded similar — even despite the displeasure from opponents and some in their own parties.

In the announcement “full and unconditional” pardon on hunter biden on sunday night joe biden condemned what he characterized as an unfair persecution of his son.

“No reasonable person who looks at the facts of the Hunter cases can come to any conclusion other than that Hunter was elected just because he's my son — and that's wrong,” Biden said.

The president's criticisms of a politicized justice system echo those regularly lobbied by Trump — perhaps most obviously in the New York case involving secret payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels. That charge ultimately led to the former president's conviction on multiple felony counts of falsifying business records to cover up campaign finance violations.

“What's happening in New York is an outrage,” Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a Trump confidant, said of the former president's hush money trial. “I think this is selective persecution for political purposes.”

The Hunter Biden cases and the Trump hush money case indeed have remarkable similarities—ones that have fueled attacks on the judicial process.

Both were brought to trial in 2024, years after the incidents in question. Trump's payments to Daniels were made in 2016. The gun filing Hunter Biden denies using drugs is from 2018, while his fraudulent tax returns are from 2016 to 2019.

Both cases took sharp turns after it appeared they would not go to trial. The Trump investigation in New York appeared to be on hold when Alvin Bragg was tapped to replace Cyrus Vance as Manhattan attorney. A plea deal that would have seen Hunter Biden plead guilty but serve no jail time collapsed at the last minute amid questions from the presiding judge.

Both involved applying existing law to new or unusual circumstances.

The primary campaign finance crimes in the Trump case were federal, not state, offenses that US government lawyers had already chosen not to prosecute. Gun use cases like Biden's are rarely prosecuted without a connection to more serious crimes. And his tax evasion violations were addressed through back pay and fines, a solution that usually avoids criminal charges.

Indeed, Trump's legal team drew explicit comparisons between the two cases in a legal filing Tuesday that cited Hunter Biden's pardon as a reason to throw out Trump's conviction in New York.

“President Biden argued that 'crude politics infected this process and it resulted in a miscarriage of justice,'” Trump's lawyers wrote. “These comments amounted to an extraordinary condemnation of President Biden himself (Department of Justice).”

“This case should never have been filed,” they concluded.

There are notable differences between the two cases, of course. Hunter Biden has never held public office. And the New York money laundering case was just one of a number of charges against the former president, several of which dealt with far more serious and recent alleged crimes. Trump, however, did not distinguish between them, claiming that all the investigations against him were a politically motivated “witch hunt” designed to damage his election prospects.

Differences aside, both Trump and the Bidens raised similar questions about whether politics unduly influenced their cases, even as Democrats insisted Trump's trial was fair and Republicans looked to Hunter's gun trial and guilty plea for tax evasion as of justice.

According to Kevin McMunigal, a law professor at Case Western Reserve University and a former assistant U.S. attorney, the claim that politics influences prosecutorial decisions is largely inaccurate. However, he notes that the public may not appreciate that there is a complex calculus behind when and whether to lay criminal charges.

“Congress and state legislatures love to pass criminal laws and rarely repeal them because of intervening politics,” he said. “Everybody wants to be tough on crime. You end up with statute books that are full of crimes, many of which go unprosecuted.

He adds that it is not common knowledge that these laws are often ignored by prosecutors. “It's kind of hard for people to navigate,” he said.

This lack of understanding could provide reason enough for those on both sides of America's sharp political divide to perceive a double standard when it comes to the American justice system—especially when it comes to high-profile cases involving public officials or their families, and especially when it is the politicians themselves who are fanning the flames.

Whether or not the charges were a proper exercise of prosecutorial discretion, both Trump and Hunter Biden were convicted of their crimes.

Because of his pardon, Hunter Biden will not face any consequences for this. And as Trump prepares to return to the White House, it seems increasingly likely that the nature of his high office will shield him from conviction for his conviction. That has already led to the federal cases against him being dropped.

The public perception of a double standard for the rich and powerful may not be so unfounded.

American faith in the Department of Criminal Justice has been eroded, said John Geer, a professor of political science at Vanderbilt University and director of its Project on Unity and American Democracy. However, he added that allegations of selective prosecution amounted to “a pebble in a very large pond” compared to the wider issues.

“Justice has never been blind,” he said. “There were periods of time when it was fairer than others, though.”

Recent events, he says, reflect a growing public distrust of political institutions everywhere — including Congress, the presidency and the Supreme Court.

Trump has capitalized on this distrust of institutions, criticizing the government “swamp” and promising sweeping reforms that his supporters believe more established politicians are unable or unwilling to deliver.

When taken in context, Trump's continued complaints about political persecution and Biden's recent acceptance of similar claims are reflective of a larger crisis of American faith in government — a crisis that both politicians have taken advantage of when circumstances put them in an awkward position. legal environment.

Biden's use of Trump's rhetoric to explain the exercise of presidential power to protect his son can only help the president-elect find more support to turn the wrecking ball against the institutions that Biden has long served and which has promised to protect.