What Happened to Biden's Ambitious Criminal Justice Reform Plans?
Joe Biden ran on some good ideas to reform policing and incarceration, which he mostly failed to deliver.

In the January 2025 issue of Reason, we're giving performance reviews of Joe Biden's presidency. Click here to read the other entries.
To win the Democratic primaries four years ago, Joe Biden had to take a left turn on criminal justice, offering voters a smorgasbord of reforms to a carceral system he had helped build over his decades as a tough-on-crime senator. As Biden's presidency sputters to an end, the White House has made strides on some of those goals but failed to deliver on many others.
Biden's voluminous 2020 criminal justice platform (now scrubbed from his website) advocated eliminating mandatory minimum sentences, cash bail, and the federal death penalty. It called for ending the "school-to-prison pipeline" and heavily investing in mental health counselors at schools and in juvenile justice programs that provide alternatives to incarceration. Biden also promised to use the Justice Department to investigate systemic misconduct by police departments, and he vowed to use his clemency powers to free "individuals facing unduly long sentences for certain non-violent and drug crimes."
Biden's platform was still moderated by his old drug-warrior tendencies. For instance, it called only for decriminalizing marijuana rather than legalizing it, and it insisted on diverting individuals to drug courts and involuntary treatment. Still, The Marshall Project, a criminal justice news outlet, called it "the most progressive criminal justice platform of any major party candidate in generations."
Criminal justice advocates were dismayed, then, when Biden's belated moves on marijuana failed to fundamentally alter the drug's illegal status or the lingering injustices of drug convictions, such as barriers to employment, housing, and civil rights. Biden's son Hunter fell awry of those very laws when he was convicted in June of lying on a federal gun-purchase form by claiming he was not addicted to or using illegal drugs. The Biden administration has in fact defended the federal ban on gun ownership by illegal drug users against legal challenges from medical marijuana advocates.
Some of the Biden campaign's most ambitious proposals, such as repealing mandatory minimums, would have required new laws to be passed, which is not the White House's job—and apparently not Congress' anymore either.
But on other pledges, the Biden administration has unilaterally reversed course. Despite Biden's pledge to end the federal death penalty, Justice Department attorneys have sought the death penalty in the cases of defendants accused of mass shootings in Pittsburgh and Buffalo.
The Biden administration has followed through on some of its promises, though. The Justice Department has once again, after a four-year lull during the Trump administration, revived investigations into systemic constitutional abuses by rotten police departments, exposing illegal tactics in Phoenix, Minneapolis, and Louisville. Biden also appointed a reform-minded director to the Bureau of Prisons, which has been racked by sexual assault scandals and widespread corruption.
Biden did not deliver on his loftiest promises, and what he did accomplish could be easily reversed by the next occupant of the Oval Office. Many of his goals at the beginning of the term were commendable, but he lacked initiative, was easily sidetracked, and failed to work up to his potential.
Criminal justice policy performance review: incomplete assignments and missing homework
This article originally appeared in print under the headline "Unfinished Business on Criminal Justice."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Gee Ceej, it's kinda like I'm always saying: nobody - neither left nor right - in America likes druggies. Or wants them around, or wants anything to do with their worthless, useless, degenerate net-negative effect on society and community.
Comparison to alcohol in 3...
As much could be said about old-age.
Sure you don't mind if [WE] take all your stuff and lock you in prison because no-one wants to deal with your old incompetent age even if you've been a model citizen and haven't victimized anyone else... Yeah?
No. No-one wants to deal with them. That doesn't make them criminals until a criminal act has been committed against their fellow man.
How much do you want to criminalize?
If we turn incoherent shouting, stumbling into people, vomiting on the sidewalk, and all the other typical actions of extremely intoxicated people that the rest of us don't want to share in public spaces into crimes, can we then prosecute?
If we get 51% of the voters to agree that "the common man (or woman)" should not be allowed to speak their opinions loudly in public places, are you OK with outlawing that ass well?
How about we start with theft and assault again?
Enhancements if under drugs or alcohol.
Why enhance?
Enhancements are immoral. If Joe can drive better drunk than Bob can drive sober, why assume Joe is at fault just for being drunk. Look at tire marks, cameras, and ask witnesses. If Joe is at fault by those measures, drunkenness is only proof of intent to be negligent; it doesn't change the harm done.
If Misek, JewFree, and misconstruman beat someone up for being a Jew, the hate crime enhancement only shows intent, but does not change the harm done.
Enhancements are no more moral than being arrested for driving while black. Stick to the relevant facts.
Yes, and this: If I am dead because of a drunken driver, I am no more and no less dead than when killed by a sleepy driver, or a driver so mad at his wife, that he couldn't drive responsibly. Or too old to drive! Drive responsibly! Period!
I don't think you understand what enhancements are.
They are not a primary violation.
I don't care about use of alcohol and drugs until it harms someone. Just like I think DUI should be secondary not primary.
That's exactly what enhancements are -- piling up the charges for causes, not effects. Damage is damage, and it doesn't matter how it was caused.
Yes. The drugs and alcohol led to the crime. Just like using a weapon enhances a crime.
It is an enhancement.
Why did you bring up a safe DUI driver if you understood?
I also think enhancements should be made for driving while legally blind and other issues.
Basically intentionally doing stupid shit due to vanity leading to higher risks of others. You know the violating others rights thing.
It is amazing to me that some of you are so pro drug you will ignore the harm caused due to them. No different than an open borders acolyte.
And all those cases where there is no ... "harm caused" to others?
Why do you think those who cause harm are legally untouchable?
Cause I gotta say. Gov-Gun Pharmaceutical monopolies that have grown out of the 'approved drug' prohibition wars certain is causing a massive amount of "harm". Maybe what one does with themselves just isn't any of the government business. Maybe the government is there to ensure Individual Liberty and Justice for all (ONLY).
Intent should be a factor in criminal prosecution.
Though; Liability doesn't hinge on intent.
Hmmm. I'm sympathetic to your and SQRLSY's sense of justice and agree, up until drunk driving.
As a teen/young 20's in the 1990's my friends and I were the scourge of PA back roads as drunk driving was a way of life in that time and place. I was even in 2 accidents in one night (both times as a passenger). Thank God we never hit another person and caused no serious injuries before we wised up and sobered up. There was only 1 DUI among my friend group, but there were many warnings. Cops were sympathetic to the lifestyle, I think.
Also let me preface my comment by saying I have done no prior research on the veracity of my upcoming claim, but it seems that drunk driving laws have saved many lives. Compared to getting stoned or drunk on a couch, drinking and driving puts others at greater risk. My principles allow me to punish a drunk driver if there's a greater, but still small, chance of harming others if it saves lives overall? Maybe there's a middle ground or you can convince me how I'm wrong.
How about not linking the endangerment aspect of drugs\alcohol to the accident and have a seperate charge for the willful endangerment or neglegent endangerment type of additional charge? that way there are no 'enhancements' but treated separately.
Keep them logically and legally separate.
Its not like the "justice system" is averse to throwing the kitchen sink at people.
Yes. This seems like a reasonable start.
Because the theft is usually done to supply the addiction. Meaning future thefts. Assaults because they are assaults. Just like enhancements exist for other reasons.
To curb that kind of behavior. Instead of coddling them. Which has worked oh so well.
To curb that kind of behavior.
To curb drug use? The law against theft is intended to curb theft. The drug enhancement is intended to curb drug use or as an additional punishment for immorality.
I agree there should be no coddling. But if a person shoplifts because they are a cleptomaniac, or just too cheap to pay, should they be coddled with a lighter sentence than a drug user?
Motivations lead to more violations of rights. Drug addiction, wether you agree or not, is a primary driver of theft and violations of others rights.
It's a preemptive strike.
"You're a criminal because *I think* you'll commit a crime."
That isn't ensuring justice at all.
Perhaps; Drug prohibition should reside in judicial correction orders just as gun-criminals are prohibited from gun-ownership during probation periods. Just as restraining orders are issued on stalkers, etc, etc... That just might be the best criminal justice reform without a UN-Constitutional FDA trying to dictate/babysit everyone.
I wouldn't be against LOCAL nuisance public intoxication laws.
Federal substance control is FAR beyond that measure & UN-Constitutional.
Fine. Eat, drink, and smoke what you want, but take responsibility for your asshole actions.
A point this nation isn't set-on but a very good one to go with.
Hits gays the hardest.
And from behind.
Druggies and addicts of all sorts don't seem to give a fuck about the externalities of their actions. Responsibility and accountability aren't high on their list of priorities. The consequences of not issuing punitive actions against violations from that sort of person is that there is nothing to discourage future violations. Criminal justice reform doesn't work if you abandon justice.
Failure to understand this has set criminal justice reform back decades, if not forever. Dave Smith, Liz Wolf and Zach Weissmueller had a good discussion on the latest Part of the Problem podcast about this.
What injustice has been done by some druggie passed out on his couch? None. If he steals to get the money to finance his addiction, prosecute him for the theft. The reason he stole is nobody else's business.
And when that druggie hits his 100th theft to feed his addiction? Your view is why inner cities are shit holes and target locks shit up.
Then punish him for the 100th time.
Maybe a there wouldn’t be 100 thefts if law enforcement was focused on theft crimes instead of drugs. And I think you've way oversimplified what's wrong with inner cities, particularly overlooking the effects of the black market/gangs.
Do you think it is even possible for a person to commit 100-thefts considering the time in prison they'd spend in-between those prosecutions?
If you do. Perhaps that's the 'justice' reform that needs addressed.
Lol. Yes. There are examples on the pages of Chicago and New York Times.
California has entire organized theft rings due to leniency around it.
17000 cars a year are broken into in SF.
Indeed. Democrat-havens do love their criminal minion / minds.
but I think drug prohibition paints a big fat brush over the real solutions.
Same with immigration. There would be a difference between properly vetted immigration and a big fat paint brush of every immigrant is a 'savior' / 'sinner'. The system is broken but most of the broken is coming from big-fat paint brushes trying to address 'gang' association instead of Individual Crimes.
I'm sorry but the expense of allowing them to repeatedly cycle through the system like that is prohibitively expensive. The existing penalties are not for habitual offenders and set accordingly.
And how exactly do you figure the 'Drug War' being less expensive?
Not even taking into consideration the UN-Constitutional and Medical monopoly at-play.
How about passed out on the bench at the kid's playground?
Kick him off the bench if it is yours.
Collective public ownership is a bitch. But if you think drunken bums have equal rights to the toddler playground we might have to disagree.
Do we need drug laws to prevent vagrants from sleeping in playgrounds?
Nope. But we need laws (and enforcement) that might differentially impact some protected (oppressed) groups.
I'm not sure I get your point. If you're saying we need to enforce vagrancy/theft type laws (or really any law) considering only the crime committed and not the group(s) the perpetrator belongs to, I agree.
Without prohibition laws systemically wrecking the economy to produce Hoovervilles, America hardly ever knew vagrancy. It was rare before Bert Hoover was sworn in for his "building a new race" plan. Hoover's Moratorium on Brains and "Narcotics" Limitation fixation sure as hell got Hitler elected once those were foisted on Germany in July 1931. As a result, by 1933 most everyone in the US and Germany became government workers like in Russia.
Even if drugs were fully legalized for recreational home use, I imagine most people wouldn’t have a problem with public intoxication laws.
Remember ENB and others here supporting the mostly peaceful looting and rioting in 2020? That set back criminal justice reform almost as much as letting bums shoot up and shit on the sidewalks.
Much more so.
Coddling scumbag addict behavior has been an absolute catastrophe. One only needs to look at what Alvin Bragg is doing to Daniel Penny.
I’m ok with drugs being legal, as long as drug users are held accountable if they engage in shitty addict behavior. And that isn’t happening anytime soon. So no, we don’t need to legalize hard drugs at this time. Obviously, pot isn’t a problem, as well as certain other drugs.
Fix the accountability issue first, and then I’m on board with legalization. But that won’t happen while democrats have a say in things. So let’s get rid of them first.
"that sort of person" that demonstrates "nothing to discourage future violations" would be in prison most of their existence.
Turning "that sort of person" into a criminal without a crime against their fellow man isn't justice at all but instead biased and prejudice prosecutions.
I'd guess it depends where you draw the line on 'druggies' since it includes everything from recreational pot smokers to heroin addicts.
If we were being honest, it would include wine moms and 20 something bar flys too.
You leave my 20 something drunk girls alone!
So light beer and ciragettes have been pardoned from beng drugs? Whutabout needle-freaks with their insulin?
Actually, Biden didn't run on any ideas of his. He ran on Obama staffers ideas and hid out in a basement. Dude has the mental ability of a head of cabbage. Anyone who thought he was going to do anything when reports told everyone he was already senile were kidding themselves because they wanted power for themselves or are still suffering from TDS. Biden was a disaster on day 1 and kept his foot on the futility pedal blowing up the world.
Observe that ATF blinkers leave only a monofilament line from Christian National Socialism to Soviet commnism as all that exists. Reason and the LP--with its Nolan Chart--must therefore be vaporized and memory-holed to make Murrica safe for girl-bullying cowards to rob and shoot people over plant leaves. They tried to include beer as a narcotic, but that got narcs shot on such an accelerating curve they suppresses reporting on it by 1931. Fanatical bigots live only for coercion by deadly force, and nothing else. It's what blond Jesus taught them with His/Her whip.
Biden and his party congressmen 'reformed' justice alright.
They literally USC-coded legalized Gov-Gun 'armed-theft' for their minion Sun-Gods (environmentalists) and countless other UN-Constitutional 'armed-theft' plans.
The BIGGEST 'armed' criminals in the USA sit in [D].C. where they ignore the Supreme Law of the Land, ignore everyone's Individual Liberty and *real* Justice, like nobodies business.
[D].C.
What is the purpose of this?
Took, me a second too, but I'm pretty sure it's to emphasize which party runs DC.
^Bingo 🙂
Needless to point-out D.C. voted 90%+ for the [D] candidates.
The richest area in the USA that produces absolutely NOTHING to speak of.
Biden may have delivered on the Koch / Reason #OpenTheBorders agenda, but he fell short on the Koch / Reason #FreeTheCriminals agenda. 🙁
#CheapLaborAboveAll
22 Soros prosecutors lost their jobs this year. More are well under water in polling for their next election.
It turns out most non koch/soros funded people do not like amnesty for violent criminals while focusing on locking up political enemies or those defending themselves from said criminals.
Rev. Arty did. Where is that fucktard? I’ve been waiting to rub some salt in his wounds since the election.
Turns out Arty was the bitter clinger all along. Or maybe just a bitter Klinger.
but he fell short on the Koch / Reason #FreeTheCriminals agenda.
Hunter disagrees.
Soon to be the featured artist at Koch Galleries?
Obama here confuses the Anarcho-Rotbutt-infiltrated LP with the real thing. The genuine Libertarian platfom of 1972 says not a word about importing Mohammedan suicide bombers or pauper refugee victims of Reagan-exported economy-destroying prohibitionism anywhere in its 2542 words. Limited government with individual rights is what both the anarcho-communist and christiano-fascist halves of the looter Kleptocracy despise. Hence the alternation between bootheaded and jackbooted infiltrating saboteurs hacking the platform.
Note to foreign readers: To Kleptocracy altruists, a criminal is anyone who ever passed a joint. Non-criminals jail the harmless, break windows and furniture and get people killed wrecking buildings because #soreloserwaah!
Hey all of ye Reasonoid readers! Do NOT bother to read this article about Joe Biden (or his policies)! Do NOT bother to read (or read about) ANY links, facts, or logic contained in this article and-or video! Do NOT bother to trouble your pretty little heads about silly factual details gathered by useless Reason-writer eggheads!
Because I, the SMARTEST ONE, can “summarize” it ALL for you! Here it is, above article summarized: “Senile Mackerel Snapper Bad”!
(/Sarc, revenge for moronic “summaries” about “Orange Man Bad”)
There is no unfinished business. POTUS Biden presided over increases of crime. A record of failure. Good riddance.
I am curious where 'lawfare' fits in here, perhaps unfinished business?
Lawfare is never finished.
He pardoned Hunter.
Mission accomplished.
You forgot the first phase, where Joe enabled Hunter to expand the Biden brand, rake in the cash, and party like it was 1999.
I’m sure this upcoming week will have a Reason article asking why the pardon goes back to 2014.
HAHAHAHA! I crack myself up.
Hey now! There being an edgy, libertarian cosplaying political hipster. Then there’s completely running off the democrat plantation. And when I say edgy, that cuts more towards remarks about inviting conservatives to red weddings, not questioning their democrat overlord’s earning activities.
Reason writers keep their minds right, and know their place.
I've read three Reason articles about that. Are you incompetent at searching or just a damned liar?
Biden's criminal justice reform legacy is the 1994 crime bill, which he drafted and championed:
- 'Assault' weapons ban
- Expanded federal death penalty (now including drug offenses!)
- Minimum mandatory sentences (85% rule included)
- 'Three Strikes' rule
- Expanded federal definitions of 'hate' crimes
. . . Etc.
Biden, spending his whole Senate career as a lawn order type dude who picks a prosecutor proud of her career locking up people for smoking pot, fails to do any of the promised CJ reform stuff he promised? Color me shocked.
But, you know, reluctantly but strategically and the adults were back in charge and all.
The best part is Biden presiding over a massive increase in violent crime after taking over during one of the most peaceful eras we've seen.
Hey, I hope you're not confusing violent crime with mostly peaceful protesting and justified righteous acting out by oppressed people.
It's odd. C.J. seems to think Biden was in charge of the government instead of a puppet reading speeches and teleprompters written by the "power behind the throne."
That's Mitch Katie is confusing with the other mandatory minimums guy. Mitch runs on batteries and freezes, where Joe fades into mumbling.
Donate to reason so idiots like cj can tell you ho shocked he is that progressives are evil totalitarian liars!
The best thing that can happen to Reason is that they lose Koch funding and become more accountable to actual libertarian and libertarian leaning voters. As it stands now, they are more beholden to the Kochtopus and faggoty fucks that are in Pedo Jeffy’s direction.
Biden's "criminal justice reform"?
Assuming Joe's primary goal is that no Biden will ever face criminal justice, I say his reforms are working great--so far.
Will he pardon his entire staff, and all immediate members of his family under the same blanket terms Hunter got? Especially his scumbag brother Jim.
I look for his other family members including DR JILL as they are knee deep in the grift. Members of his administration, though, I don't know although rumors are out on Fauci, Lizzy and Sleezy from CA.
If by "criminal justice reform" you mean encouraging NAP-violating criminality and abusing the justice system to invent crimes and punish political opponents, then he did exactly what his campaign made clear he would do. It was always clear that he had zero interest in actual justice.
I want no part in the sort of progressive criminal justice reform Ciaramella advocates for. It creates more victims and incentivizes criminals to violate other people's rights.
When leftists say "criminal justice reform", what they mean is protecting Black criminals from the consequences of their criminal acts.
Like all those white girls raped by black males?
https://www.threads.net/@zc2125034/post/C5O7AbBS-IT
These people would simply let these rapists go to rape other white girls!
And if some of these white victims became pregnant as a result of these rapes, these people would abandon their stance on abortion rights to force these girls and their parents to raise these babies!
Thus no justice that Penny was acquitted.
"Joe Biden ran on some good ideas to reform policing and incarceration, which he mostly failed to deliver."
What?
Biden lied?
That can't be right.
We all know Biden is pure as the driven snow.
Just ask anyone on CNN or "The View."
We know where most of the habitual violent criminals come from--we breed them at public expense. The most effective thing we can do to reduce crime is to stop subsidizing the reproduction of unmarried indigent women.
Far from PC, but the truth is we could reduce murder rates much more by banning black men than by banning black rifles.
And since most black crime is black on black, maybe let the law abiding black people arm themselves. That might cut down on crime. Especially if bloated, corrupt turds like Alvin Bragg are disbarred and prosecuted.
Truth sits in separating by Party-partisanship not skin-color (of which Black Americans run 80%-90% [D]) and prison rates run 70%+ [D] affiliated. That also makes sense being the party of 'armed-theft' entitlement.
Have you heard of Operation: Ceasefire?
https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/how-the-gun-control-debate-ignores-black-lives/80445/
Think of all the school shootings and gang violence we can prevent?
To win the Democratic primaries four years ago, Joe Biden had to take a left turn on criminal justice, offering voters a smorgasbord of reforms to a carceral system he had helped build over his decades as a tough-on-crime senator.
A consummate wife beater swore to Reason he'd stop beating her, and of course they believed him. There's no enemies of libertarianism in the Democratic Party.
On a side note, how long before Pedo Jeffy starts advocating for necrophilliac rights?
You know it’s coming.
"It okay as long as they weren't dead when you started, and you felt sorry afterwards"
I do find it rather amusing that there are still people who believe that anything Biden says, or has said in the past, has any relationship with the truth. Biden had no intention of doing anything more but making promises on the "Criminal Justice reform" issue.
Biden's "word as a Biden" has no value. Never has, never will.
Do people still think he a) knew nothing about Hunter's business, b) never discussed Hunter's business with his son, or c) made no money from Hunter's business? He and the media's narrative on the issue evolved over time as more evidence came out that all three were a lie. Why do you think Hunter's pardon covers the period from 2014 to 2024?
President Trump did take action on the issue with the "First Step Act" ( for an example see Alice Johnson's case), but received no credit for his actions except from those such as Ms. Johnson who actually benefited from his actions. Which makes one think the attorneys, law professors, politicians, and activists who had been so vocal on the issue, didn't really want action, but instead prefer to use it as a fundraising and political issue.
For instance, why bring up the issue now as Biden physically heads out the WH door (his mind left some time ago) instead of nearly 4 years ago when he was installed in the White House?
And let’s be honest. A promise from almost any democrat has a very short shelf life, if any. Biden is just one of the more egregious examples of this fact.
...all about "[WE] Identify-as" RULES absolutely party-foundation ('democracy') without any principle (US Constitution).
No. They don't care about the lies. All they care about is their [WE] Identify-as gets to 'Gov-Gun' STEAL from those 'icky' other people.
Exactly what they advertise day-in and day-out with soft-core criminal words like 'equality'.
A promise from almost any politician.
I'm still waiting to see the files from JFK's assassination and Crossfire Hurricane.
Ask Cindy what it was that Errol Flynn rubbed on his pecker to attract starlets in Hollywood.
How hopelessly naive of you Ciaramella.
"Despite Biden's pledge to end the federal death penalty, Justice Department attorneys have sought the death penalty in the cases of defendants accused of mass shootings in Pittsburgh and Buffalo."
The way for a President, acting without Congress, to curb the federal death penalty, is to issue pardons. He can either change death sentences to life in prison, or, arguably, he can pardon the aggravating-factors which are preconditions to the death penalty, leaving suspects to be convicted and sentenced on the noncapital aggravating factors.
But prosecutors are supposed to uphold the law and can't grant pardons - that's reserved solely to their boss in the White House. So prosecutors need to apply the death penalty laws as written, not ignore them.
""The way for a President, acting without Congress, to curb the federal death penalty, is to issue pardons.""
No need to pardon, just commute the sentence to life.
The only purpose of Biden's Crime Bill was to give idiot leftist propagandists like the author cover for their support of him. In that it did all that was expected so this dishonest turd can STFU about being betrayed.
Somebody explain to Ciaramella and Suave N Deboner that cocaine is neither addictive nor habit-forming. So unless Hunter was atrophied into smack addiction, he was not lying on the form--at least not about THAT. Republicans use Divinely-Revealed Creationist Faith to interpret reality, and believe that stimulants are narcotics with the same bovine incomprehension that convinces Democrats that gasoline causes Climate Sharknados. Both parties are packed with superstitious fools, so we have Reason and the LP as alternatives.
You have never bought a firearm or filled out a 4473, have you? Question 21 (f) is quite clear: "Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?"
Hunter Biden lied on the form clear as day. Don't like it then join us in getting the ATF abolished. Until then, it's a felony to lie on the form.
If you know anything about Joe ( do you?) his main trait , which you should see after his 50+ sub-sub-par DC grazing , is LAZINESS
Almost like being suprised that he wasn't reallyl the Great Unifier. Are you kidding me? That vain hateful spiteful gangster !!!
I am definitely running for a 2nd term
I definitely will not pardon Hunter