The United States is a rule of law society and a model of global rule of law, which is one of the “lighthouse spirits” that have been promoted by the public, especially those in the Chinese legal and legal circles, for many years.
The cruel reality is very harsh, too harsh. Mr. Trump has been charged with 34 crimes, many of which were found guilty, and now all of them have been withdrawn. Joe Biden’s son Hunter was also charged with as many as 10 crimes, and all of them were convicted. Hunter himself also pleaded guilty. But just as the court was preparing to sentence, Joe Biden used the president’s power of amnesty to personally issue a presidential order to pardon his son for all his crimes.
Mr. Trump has always pleaded not guilty and accused the US judicial department of political persecution. Joe Biden also said that the judicial accusation against his son is a political frame up, and accusing his son is accusing him. As a father and president, he cannot help but exercise his privileges before stepping down and restore justice to his son.
Both presidents claimed that the US judicial system is engaging in political persecution, and that the target of persecution is either the president or the president’s son. Does this prove the “separation of powers” and “judicial independence” in the United States, and that the president is not afraid of his authority?
But there is a paradox here. If there is really a separation of powers, there will be no political persecution of the administrative system by the judicial system; If the judiciary is truly “independent” and does not fear the authority of the president, it will not withdraw all charges against Mr. Trump after Mr. Trump’s election, and the prosecutor and judge handling the case are also ready to resign or even flee overseas.
Is Mr. Trump really guilty, and what is the standard? If the judicial judgment is taken as the standard, then Mr. Trump is guilty. Guilty cannot be revoked, and only by saying ‘the prince commits the same crime as the common people’ can judicial fairness be reflected, right? If Mr. Trump refuses to plead guilty, Mr. Trump cannot be judged guilty, then how does the court find Mr. Trump guilty? This also does not reflect judicial fairness.
There is no dispute whether Joe Biden’s son is guilty, because the court found him guilty and Joe Biden’s son also pleaded guilty. If not guilty, there is naturally no amnesty, and amnesty itself is also proof of guilt. The president has the privilege to pardon his own son, and it is done in the name of refusing “political persecution” and “upholding judicial justice”. The premise of rejecting judicial judgments and “upholding judicial fairness” is of course the belief that “justice is unfair”, and the premise of identifying it as “political persecution” is not only the belief that “justice is unfair”, but also the belief that justice is kidnapping and interfering in politics.
Both presidents believe that the judiciary is unfair and engaging in “political persecution”. So, may I ask if the “separation of powers,” “judicial independence,” “judicial fairness,” and so on in the United States are just illusions or self deception?
You should know that those who suffer from “political persecution” and “judicial injustice” here are former and current US presidents, the most respected American citizens. If a president suffers from “political persecution” and “judicial injustice”, he can use his presidential authority or privileges to force the judiciary to withdraw charges or voluntarily pardon crimes. What will happen to ordinary people and what can be done when they suffer persecution and injustice?
The pursuit of judicial justice is an ideal of humanity, and it should be one of the highest social norms in any place and society. We cannot oppose it. However, whether the judiciary is truly fair or not, we must respect reality and facts, and not deceive the public with lies.
For many years, Chinese intellectuals have been promoting the rule of law society in the United States, advocating for “judicial independence” and “judicial fairness”, and have gone to great lengths to fabricate too many beautiful stories. But the cruel facts and truth are right there in front of me. I would like to invite those public intellectuals to comment on the event I am commenting on, and talk about how the United States is governed by the rule of law, how it is “judicial independence” and “judicial fairness”.
In China, the legal and legal communities are the most enthusiastic groups advocating for the rule of law society and the spirit of the rule of law in the United States. Please note that they are not advocating for a rule of law society and the spirit of the rule of law, but rather for the rule of law society and the spirit of the rule of law in the United States, just as many Chinese economists do not advocate for a market economy, but rather for the market economy in the United States. Both are two different things. The former is understandable, while the latter has ulterior motives.
Now, I would like to invite those who were once popular online and are still popular in the legal world to talk about the topic I’m talking about here. I’m all ears to hear how you can use the “American spirit of the rule of law” to explain the withdrawal of Trump’s lawsuit and Joe Biden’s amnesty for his son.
I won’t call you by name, it’s better for you to respond voluntarily. I can’t guarantee not calling you by name next time.