Next News Network

There’s been quite an uproar in the media these past few months. We’ve seen President Joe Biden broadcasted by liberal media platforms as the supposed embodiment of justice. They cheered for his commitment to respect whatever verdict came out of his son, Hunter Biden’s firearms crime trial. But, following Tuesday’s delivery of three guilty verdicts, ABC News prepared their audience for potential presidential interference. Adding to the drama, they were perturbed that the First Lady did not witness the verdict’s announcement.

ABC News interrupted their usual programming to share the unfavorable news for the Bidens. Dan Abrams, their chief legal analyst, was quick to suggest that the President may resort to manipulative measures to assist his son. He interprets Biden’s statement about refusing to pardon his son as leaving room for the commuting of Hunter’s sentence.

Adding fuel to the fire, Jon Karl, ABC’s chief Washington correspondent, recalled with certainty that President Biden affirmed his son’s innocence. He predicted heated discussions within the Biden family and at the White House. Now toss in David Muir and Olivia Rubin, who melodramatically lamented about First Lady Jill Biden not being present during the reading of the verdict.

If you didn’t think it could get more biased, the network constructed a sympathetic facade for the Biden family. Senior national correspondent Terry Moran falsely implied Hunter was Jill Biden’s biological son.She supposedly made a whirlwind trip to France for D-Day commemorations and rushed back to be there for her son – only to conveniently be absent for the verdict reading.

Interestingly, Olivia Rubin added fuel to their narrative by commenting on a juror who allegedly smiled before the verdict delivery. There was no evidence given to back this claim up.

In essence, from start to finish, ABC’s coverage was riddled with bias. They hinted at mercy for Hunter Biden through sentence commuting, painted a sympathetic picture of the Biden family with a skewed narrative, and hinted at brazen juror impartiality without substantiating their claims.

Yet, regardless of the verdict and the media’s response, one reality remains: no one, regardless of the name or the influential family they belong to, is above the law. It is quintessential for the media to act responsibly rather than treating such pressing issues as a chance to reflect their bias and influence public opinion. Bias clouds the truth, and the truth must never be obscured when it comes to administering justice. When all’s said and done, the independence of the judiciary should reign supreme, and all verdicts should be respected, as emphasized by President Joe Biden himself – no matter what the biased media insinuates.

SOURCE