☕️ CHICKEN KIEV ☙ Tuesday, December 3, 2024 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

Hunter Biden Pardon Part II, after the story grew lots more legs yesterday and infested the Dems; questions answered; and The Washington Post gently dropped some hypersonic truth bombs on Zelensky.

Good morning, C&C, it’s Tuesday! The Hunter Biden crime spree pardon story grew even longer legs yesterday, and lots of you had questions, so we’re back with even more Hunter analysis as well as taking a look at how badly it is apparently hurting whatever is left of the Democrat ‘brand.’ That plus a quick but surprising Proxy War update, as Biden surges scarce weapons into the war-torn country, which is rapidly running out of men to shoot them, and the far-left WaPo sprinkled in some truth nuggets.

🌍 WORLD NEWS AND COMMENTARY 🌍

🔥🔥🔥

Just when depressed Democrats, still licking their post-election wounds, thought things couldn’t get any worse, Joe broke wind at the DC dinner party. If anything, the Biden Crime Family Pardon was an absurd faux pas, which continued heaving up hilarity and political entertainment all day yesterday, in heaping handfuls, as corporate media flailed wildly in desperate search of a mutually agreed narrative. It’s almost like their handlers won’t tell them what to do. Behold, Google’s Fractured Fairy Tales, I mean Top Stories, this morning:

For most of yesterday morning, the media tried coalescing around a typical “Republicans Pounce” narrative, sketching Biden as, perhaps, a good father, even if a bad president. In this failed morality play, Republicans were the unfeeling interlopers butting into a private family drama, like a nosy neighbor who saw cop cars at the house last night, and came over to deliver the unsolicited advice that “if you want to know what I think, you should just let him go to jail, to learn his lesson.”

But that narrative quickly collapsed, since Republicans weren’t so much pouncing as they were rolling around on the floor laughing and pointing at duped Democrat talking heads who, having bought Joe’s regularly regurgitated lie about never ever pardoning Hunter, swanked around for a year bragging about their party’s undying love and irrevocable respect for the majesty of the law, compared to knuckle-dragging Republicans. But now, these ‘elites’ look like idiots, and it smarts.

When the “Republicans Pounce” narrative collapsed yesterday, the narrative devolved into a chaotic free-for-all. Even beyond how bad the pardon looked yesterday, this scandal is further damaging the already well-dinged Democrat ‘brand.’ Democrats who crossed the aisle and voted for Trump are probably thanking their lucky stars. To witness the astonishing same-day rhetorical evolution, consider just two headlines, both from far-left Axios. Here’s Sunday’s headline, right after the pardon news broke. Call it Take One:

Groans and shrugs! Ugh, how long do we have to listen to these whiny Republicans complain about this nothing-burger? But one day later, see today’s Take Two headline, right in the same far-left newspaper:

Haha! From groans and shrugs to a deepening Dem identity crisis in one news day! This might even be a record for media retconning.

Here’s the bigger point: the reason for the Democrats’ deepening identity crisis is that, at least on the Hunter pardon issue, corporate media is obviously adrift, for the first time in years having no one to tell them what the approved narrative is. The Democrat party is both leaderless, thanks to an irascible, grudge-holding, hell-hath-no-fury like a scorned commander in chief who’s turned against the party, and also rudderless, having been abandoned by its deep state handlers. (At least, on this issue.)

Believe me, it’s tempting to speculate on where media coordination and Democrat party discipline has run off to. Let’s watch and see if they can stitch a coherent narrative back together today.

🔥 Meanwhile, yesterday’s comments included tons of questions about legal points relating to Hunter’s pardon. Evidently, I did a poor job anticipating the issues, so I’ll do my best today to answer these fine legal points.

How broad was Hunter’s pardon? Does it include (x, y, z)?

Hunter’s pardon was unusually and historically broad. The next closest example was Gerald Ford’s controversial 1974 pardon of Richard Nixon. This is a deeply embarrassing comparison for politically savvy Democrats, to whom Nixon was arguably even more Hitler than Donald Trump.

Hunter’s pardon was so broad it included unknown crimes and a breathtaking decade-long time span. Usually, presidents prefer not to pardon unknown crimes, because it could be badly embarrassing later if it turned out the person murdered somebody or blew up an airplane or something.

In other words, it wasn’t even close to being “just” a pardon. People are intentionally lying who claim Biden “understandably” pardoned his son out of protective fatherly instinct. Had Biden just been acting as a reluctant but loving father, the pardon would have been as narrow as possible or at least, limited to known crimes. Saying this pardon was just because Biden didn’t “want to see his son go to jail” is kind of like saying he only asked the Ukrainians for a little walking around money during his visit.

As for its scope, the pardon can’t reach two types of crimes: first, no future crime can be pardoned. Second, since the president's pardon power applies only to federal offenses, Hunter can still be charged under state law, if there was any state Attorney General brave enough to do it.

Did Hunter Biden’s pardon also ‘essentially’ pardon Joe Biden?

No, I don’t agree with this hot take. Biden did not “essentially pardon himself.” He might have pardoned his agent or his co-conspirator, but it seems unlikely to me that Joe can raise for himself any effective pardon-related defense. The only truth in this hot take is the pardon might make it harder to prosecute Joe — if, that is, you believed Hunter would have ever testified truthfully against his dad.

Can Hunter be compelled to testify since, having been pardoned, he cannot raise the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination?

Unfortunately, Hunter probably cannot be compelled to testify. He could still incriminate himself in crimes under state law (that were not pardoned).

Why did Hunter’s DOJ prosecutors refuse to voluntarily dismiss his case?

Yesterday, Newsweek ran a story headlined, “Prosecutors urge court not to dismiss Hunter Biden case after pardon.” This new created confusion and a lot more hot takes. But there’s nothing there. It’s only a fine procedural argument.

Hunter’s lawyers immediately and correctly sought dismissal of the criminal cases after the pardon came through. The DOJ special counsel handling the cases immediately responded, saying ‘dismissal’ wasn’t the correct procedure, since the crimes and convictions were only pardoned, not vacated or expunged. The special counsel argued instead that the cases should be administratively terminated.

In other words, everyone agrees the cases should end. The only argument is over how to end them. Hunter’s lawyers are earning their fees by trying to clean up his record as best they can on the way out.

If you are looking for a deeper dive, including the Hunter Pardon Kiev Connection, try Ron Paul’s reaction discussion:

CLIP: The inimitable Ron Paul rants about the Hunter Biden pardon (21:35).

🚀🚀🚀

This morning, the Washington Post ran a story with a surprising tone headlined, “Biden surges arms to Ukraine, fearing Trump will halt U.S. aid.” The sub-headline added, “The directive has stirred debate, as some officials worry it will cut too deeply into American stockpiles and jeopardize the military’s needs elsewhere.”

In other words, Zelensky is saying, please! let us keep the killing going just a little bit longer!

How can it possibly help Ukraine to extend the war out for another 30 or 60 days when Ukraine is losing? I could see drawing it out if Ukraine were winning. But this is like getting demolished in a kickboxing match and, as soon as you come to, deliriously begging for a second try through broken teeth. Put me back in!

Even worse, as WaPo admitted, the U.S. has sent so many weapons to Ukraine it is running dangerously low on its own defensive inventories. On top of that, the article makes clear that weapons aren’t even the real problem anymore—it’s that there aren’t enough bodies. “Over the course of especially this last year, it’s just that they’re not mobilizing and training enough soldiers to replace battlefield losses,” a senior administration official explained, adding “on the manpower side, it’s just a question of math and physics.”

Bizarrely, Kiev blames America for its manpower shortage. Since potential recruits recognize there aren’t enough good weapons for a fair fight, the argument goes, they won’t volunteer to join the army. Thus, since America is too slow in sending more more more, Ukraine’s manpower shortage is our fault.

See? There aren’t enough recruits to justify supplying more weapons, but there aren’t enough weapons coming to attract new recruits. Chickens and grenades.

Curiously, I discovered Democrat angst over Hunter’s pardon seeping into the comments of WaPo’s article about Ukraine weaponry:

Whew! The list of Democrat complaints against Biden is really growing.

So, to summarize, the WaPo itself identified four good reasons not to send any more weapons to Ukraine:

1. Trump will end the war soon anyway, and there’s no chance Kiev could win in the meantime.

2. U.S. defensive stocks, such as air defense missiles, are getting critically low.

3. At this point, Ukraine lacks enough men to use the weapons even if supplied.

4. Zelensky is an annoying little git and everyone is sick and tired of hearing his stupid accent and mangled malapropisms.

Okay, I admit I added the fourth one. The WaPo gave us three good reasons. I won’t repeat the article’s dumb arguments in favor of sending weapons, threadbare as they were. Take my word for it; they were all ineffable expressions of intangible, unquantifiable, zero-calorie, virtue-signaling nonsense, like “teaching other authoritarians a lesson.”

Yeah! Teach them a lesson! Wait, who? What lesson? Who cares! Rockets wheeeeeee

What was most remarkable about this otherwise unremarkable story was that the WaPo actually included both sides of the argument, a breathtaking reversion to pre-pandemic journalistic standards. It’s far too early to conclude the media is trying to rehabilitate itself; it’s more likely that the embargo on anti-Kiev reporting is over, because voters recently proved the constant stream of pro-war propaganda isn’t working anymore.

Have a terrific Tuesday! Since I have an early meeting, I’ll end it here, but there is a LOT happening this week. Get back here tomorrow morning to fuel up with all your essential news and commentary.

Don’t race off! We cannot do it alone. Consider joining up with C&C to help move the nation’s needle and change minds. I could sure use your help getting the truth out and spreading optimism and hope, if you can: ☕ Learn How to Get Involved 🦠

How to Donate to Coffee & Covid

Twitter: jchilders98.
Truth Social: jchilders98.
MeWe: mewe.com/i/coffee_and_covid.
Telegram: t.me/coffeecovidnews
C&C Swag! www.shopcoffeeandcovid.com