Sign up for The Decision, a newsletter featuring coverage of the 2024 race and what comes next.
When President Joe Biden was running for a second term as president, he repeatedly ruled out granting a pardon to his son Hunter, who has pleaded guilty to tax fraud and lying on a form to purchase a gun. He was very clear, very up-front, obviously very definitive, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said of one of his many promises to this effect.
Biden professed a willingness to abide by the results of the justice system as a matter of principle. But in breaking his promise, and issuing a sweeping pardon of his son for any crimes he may have committed over an 11-year period, Biden has revealed his pledge to have been merely instrumental.
In a defiant statement issued tonight, Biden insisted that his sons prosecution was selective and unfair. No reasonable person who looks at the facts of Hunters cases, he wrote, can reach any other conclusion than Hunter was singled out only because he is my sonand that is wrong.
It is probably true that one of the crimes charged to Hunter Biden, lying on a form to obtain a firearm, is the sort of thing an average person would be unlikely to face charges over. (Hunter affirmed on the form that he was sober, but later admitted to having been in the throes of addiction.) The other charge, blatantly failing to pay millions of dollars in taxes, is routinely brought against people who are not political targets. That its true Hunter Biden was more likely to get caught than the average tax cheat is an indictment of the tax system. (It is also, ironically, an aspect of the system Joe Biden has set out to change by beefing up the IRSs enforcement capacity.)
President Bidens complaint about the higher standard applied to his son reflects the perspective of myopic privilege. Crimes by family members of powerful public officials are far more damaging to public confidence than similar crimes by anonymous people. Holding them to account through strict enforcement of the law is good and correct.
What the president fails to note in his self-pitying statement is that Hunter Biden for years engaged in legal but wildly inappropriate behavior by running a business based on selling the perception of access to his father. The only commodity Hunter had to offer oligarchs in Ukraine, China, and elsewhere was the belief, or hope, that he could put in a good word for them with his dad.
Joe Bidens defense in these cases was that he did not actually give Hunters clients anything of value. There is no proof to the contrary, and extensive Republican efforts to dig up evidence that Joe shared in the profits from Hunters access-peddling business came up empty.
But Joe Bidens defense of Hunters influence peddling by stressing its narrow legality merely serves to highlight the hypocrisy of his fatherly indulgence. The black letter of the law was a fence to protect Hunter from the consequences of his sleazy behavior. And when the law itself trapped him, he simply opened a door and walked through ita door no average American could access.
The most bewildering passage in Bidens pardon statement posits some amorphous conspiracy against him by Justice Department prosecutors: There has been an effort to break Hunter who has been five and a half years sober, even in the face of unrelenting attacks and selective prosecution. In trying to break Hunter, theyve tried to break meand theres no reason to believe it will stop here. Enough is enough.
Trying to break Hunter? And his father? To what end?
It would be tempting, but unfair, to draw a simple equation between Joe Bidens situational ethics and that of his successor. A willingness to evade the rule of law is the foundation of Donald Trumps entire career in business and politics, not a nepotistic exception. Still, principles become much harder to defend when their most famous defenders have compromised them flagrantly. With the pardon decision, like his stubborn insistence on running for a second term he couldnt win, Biden chose to prioritize his own feelings over the defense of his country.
Many months before farmers found themselves on the front pages of newspapers, after protesting in Whitehall against the new government’s inheritance tax rules, we at Sky News embarked upon a project.
Most of our reports are relatively short affairs, recorded and edited for the evening news. We capture snapshots of life in households, businesses and communities around the country. But this year we undertook to do something different: to spend a year covering the story of a family farm.
We had no inkling, at the time, that farming would become a front-page story. But even back in January, 2024 was shaping up to be a critical year for the sector. This, after all, was the year the new post-Brexit regime for farm payments would come into full force. Having depended on subsidies each year for simply farming a given acreage of land, farmers were now being asked to commit to different schemes focused less on food than on environmental goals.
This was also the first full year of the new trade deals with New Zealand and Australia. The upshot of these deals is that UK farmers are now competing with two of the world’s major food exporters, who can export more into Britain than they do currently.
You can watch the Sky News special report, The Last Straw, on Sky News at 9pm on Friday
On top of this, the winter that just passed was a particularly tough one, especially for arable farmers. Cold, wet and unpredictable – even more so than the usual British weather. It promised to be a challenging year for growing.
More on Farming
Related Topics:
With all of this in mind, we set out to document what a year like this actually felt like for a farm – in this case Lower Drayton Farm in Staffordshire. In some respects, this mixed farm is quite typical for parts of the UK – they rear livestock and grow wheat, as well as subcontracting some of their fields to potato and carrot growers.
A look at farming reimagined
But in other respects, the two generations of the Bower family here, Ray and Richard, are doing something unusual. Seeing the precipitous falls in income from growing food in recent years, they are trying to reimagine what farming in the 21st century might look like. And in their case, that means building a play centre for children and what might be classified as “agritourism” activities alongside them.
The upshot is that while much of their day-to-day work is still traditional farming, an increasing share of their income comes from non-food activity. It underlines a broader point: across the country, farmers are being asked to do unfamiliar things to make ends meet. Some, like the Bowers, are embracing that change; others are struggling to adapt. But with more wet years expected ahead and more changes due in government support, the coming years could be a continuing roller coaster for British farming.
With that in mind, I’d encourage you to watch our film of this year through the lens of this farm. It is, we hope, a fascinating, nuanced insight of life on the land.
You can watch the Sky News special report, The Last Straw, on Sky News at 9pm on Friday
Russian President Vladimir Putin has said he would be open to peace talks with Ukraine in Slovakia “if it comes to that”.
Mr Putin said Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico, who this week visited the Kremlin, had offered his country as a location for negotiations as the war in Ukraine nears the three-year mark.
The Russian president said the Slovakian authorities “would be happy to provide their own country as a platform for negotiations”.
“We are not opposed, if it comes to that. Why not? Since Slovakia takes such a neutral position,” Mr Putin said, adding he was resolved to end the conflict in Ukraine, which started with a land, air and sea invasion of Russia’s smaller neighbour in February 2022.
Ukraine is yet to comment on Slovakia’s offer but President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has repeatedly criticised the country, which borders Ukraine, for the friendly tone Mr Fico has struck towards Russia since his return to power after an election in 2023.
Mr Fico has been critical of EU support for Ukraine, where millions have been displaced since Mr Putin’s decision to launch a “special military operation” to “denazify” and “demilitarise” the 37 million-strong country.
More on Russia
Related Topics:
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:52
Mr Zelenskyy on North Korea and Slovakian PM in Moscow
Mr Putin has repeatedly said Russia is open to talks to end the conflict with Kyiv, but that it would nevertheless achieve its goals in Ukraine.
He has previously demanded Ukrainewithdraw its bid to join NATO and asked it to recognise Russia’s gains. Both Kyiv and the West have rejected those demands.
But while Mr Zelenskyy had for most of the conflict insisted Ukraine would keep fighting until it regained control of its territories, his position on negotiations now appears to have shifted.
Inan interview with Sky News, Mr Zelenskyy suggested a ceasefire deal could be struck if the Ukrainian territory he controls could be taken “under the NATO umbrella”.
This would then allow him to negotiate the return of the rest later “in a diplomatic way”.
The Ukrainian leader admitted last weekhis forces would be unable to recapture any territories occupied by Russia in the east of Ukraine and the Crimean peninsula.
While Kyiv would never recognise Russia’s rule, he said diplomacy is the only option to get Mr Putin to withdraw his army.
The war in Ukraine has taken a devastating toll on Russia too. UK government and military analysis estimates that Russia has lost around half a million troops killed or wounded in Ukraine.
Such is the pressure on manpower that The Kremlin turned to one of its remaining allies, North Korea, to provide additional forces.
It’s thought 10,000 to 12,000 troops were sent in October to fight alongside the Russian military in the fighting in the Kursk region.
However it’s suggested their lack of combat experience has resulted in heavy losses, with Mr Zelenskyy saying earlier this week that 3,000 North Korean troops have already been killed and wounded.
Children with special educational needs are being “segregated” and left to struggle in the wrong schools because councils are trying to “save on costs”, parents have told Sky News.
Maire Leigh Wilson, whose four-year-old son has Down’s syndrome, says she “shudders to think” where he would be now had she not been in a “constant battle” with her council.
“I think he would probably just be at the back of a classroom, running around with no support and no ability to sign or communicate,” she said.
Mrs Leigh Wilson wanted her son Aidan to go to a mainstream school with additional specialist support, but her council, who decide what is known as a child’s Education Health and Care Plan (EHCP), wanted him to attend a special school.
The number of EHCPs being appealed by parents has risen “massively”, according to education barrister Alice De Coverley.
She said councils are struggling to meet the volume of demand with “stretched budgets”, and parents are also more aware of their ability to appeal.
Mrs De Coverley said more than 90% of tribunals are won by parents, in part because councils do not have the resources to fight their cases.
More on Education
Related Topics:
She said, in her experience, parents of children with special educational needs will put “anything on the line, their homes, their jobs”.
On whether she thinks the system is rigged against parents, Mrs De Coverley said: “I’m not sure it’s meant to be. But I think that parents are certainly finding it very tough.”
She added the number of “unlawful decisions” being made by local authorities means parents who can afford it are being “utterly burnt out” by legal challenges.
Mrs Leigh Wilson’s case was resolved before making it to court.
Her council, Hounslow in southwest London, said they complete more than four in five new EHCPs within the statutory 20-week timescale, twice the national average.
Hounslow Council said they “put families at the heart of decision-making” and young people in the area with special educational needs and disabilities achieve, on average, above their peers nationally.
They admitted there are areas of their offer “that need to be further improved” and they are “working closely with families as a partnership”.
“We have a clear and credible plan to achieve this, and we can see over the last 18 months where we have focused our improvement work, the real benefits of an improved experience for children, young people, and their families,” a Hounslow Council spokesman said.
He added the council had seen the number of EHCPs double in the last decade and they “share parents’ frustrations amid rising levels of national demand, and what’s widely acknowledged as a broken SEND system”.
Emma Dunville, a friend of Mrs Leigh Wilson whose son also has Down’s syndrome, describes her experience trying to get the right education provision for her child as “exhausting mentally and physically”.
She said: “For the rest of his life we’ll be battling, battling, battling, everything is stacked up against you.”
Unlike Mrs Leigh Wilson, Mrs Dunville wanted her son Albie to go to a special school, but she had to wait more than a year for an assessment with an education psychologist to contribute to the council’s decision, which meant she missed the deadline for an EHCP.
“The people making these decisions just don’t see that all children with Down’s syndrome are totally different and can’t be seen as the same.”
The guidelines are that if there are not enough local authority-employed education psychologists they should seek a private assessment, but her local authority did not do that.
Mrs Dunville said her son has been “segregated” in a mainstream school, where they are “trying their best” but “it’s just not the right setting”.