Former President Joe Biden was willing to testify at his son Hunter’s gun trial despite a packed presidential schedule, revealing the tension between family loyalty and presidential responsibility.

At a Glance

• Biden repeatedly offered to testify at Hunter’s felony gun trial, according to new book “Original Sin”
• Hunter’s legal team rejected the offer, fearing it could backfire
• Despite initially claiming he wouldn’t pardon Hunter, Biden ultimately did so in December 2024
• The trial occurred during a critical period as Biden prepared for his re-election campaign
• Biden also pardoned multiple family members on his last day in office

Presidential Father Willing to Take the Stand

A new book titled “Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again” by CNN’s Jake Tapper and Axios’ Alex Thompson reveals that former President Joe Biden repeatedly offered to testify at his son Hunter’s federal gun trial. Despite his busy presidential schedule, including an upcoming trip to France and re-election campaign events, Biden was prepared to take the stand in a private testimony to support his son who faced three felony gun charges. The charges stemmed from Hunter allegedly acquiring a Colt Cobra revolver in 2018 while battling drug addiction and making false statements in the process.

Nothing to see. Move along. Hey look, a flag that became the worst possible thing in the world about four days ago.

Joe Biden Visits Hallie Biden Ahead of Testimony at Hunter Biden's Gun Trial | National Review https://t.co/USf7xKmpU7

— Kurt Schlichter (@KurtSchlichter) May 27, 2024

Legal Team’s Hesitation

While Biden was personally committed to testifying, Hunter’s legal team ultimately declined the offer. They were concerned that the president’s testimony could be risky and potentially backfire in court. First Lady Jill Biden also reportedly offered to testify, but her testimony was deemed less valuable as she had not directly witnessed much of Hunter’s addiction struggles in 2018.

Publicly, President Biden maintained a stance of not commenting on the trial, even as he privately expressed willingness to participate in the proceedings. This careful public approach contrasted with his behind-the-scenes determination to support his son.

Conviction and Controversial Pardons

Despite the potential for presidential testimony, Hunter Biden was ultimately found guilty on all three charges, facing a potential maximum sentence of 25 years in prison. The conviction created a significant political challenge for President Biden, who had previously stated he would not issue a pardon for his son. However, in December 2024, Biden reversed course and pardoned Hunter, an action that drew substantial criticism from political opponents. Even more controversially, on his final day in office, Biden extended pardons to numerous family members, including his brothers, sister, her husband, and his sister-in-law.

Book Reveals Biden’s Health Struggles

“Original Sin” doesn’t only detail Biden’s willingness to testify for his son. The book also explores Biden’s alleged physical and mental decline during his time in office. Among the revelations are reports that aides had considered using a wheelchair for Biden following the 2024 election. Additionally, the book claims Biden was diagnosed with an aggressive form of prostate cancer, which medical experts suggest he likely had while serving in the White House. These health concerns presented yet another layer of complexity to Biden’s presidency as he navigated both personal and political challenges.

Family Values Amid Political Pressures

Throughout Hunter’s legal troubles, President Biden maintained a public stance emphasizing his role as a father. After Hunter’s conviction, Biden issued a statement expressing his love and pride for his son. This public declaration of family loyalty demonstrated how Biden’s personal values influenced his approach to the presidency. The situation highlighted the unique challenges faced by presidents with family members in legal jeopardy and the difficult balance between public duty and private family loyalty, especially when those loyalties might conflict with political expedience or public perception.