SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
pardons
Pardons for Trump's Insurrectionists Would Be Grotesque
Trump rewarding people who tried to ignite an insurrection turns the pardon power on its head.
Jan 11, 2025
President-elect Donald Trump says that, on the same day that he is inaugurated for his 2.0 presidency, he will pardon people who stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021. “It’s going to start in the first hour,” he told Time magazine when they interviewed him for their cover story after naming him man of the year, “Maybe the first nine minutes.”
On the campaign trail, Trump described the January 6 rioters as “political prisoners,” conveniently forgetting the fact that those progressing through the criminal justice system were charged by grand juries and convicted by either juries or federal judges. He calls them “great patriots,” even opening his first campaign rally in Waco, Texas, with “Justice for All,” a song recorded over the phone by imprisoned insurrectionists, set to the tune of the “Star Spangled Banner.”
Pardoning them would be, as Brennan Center President Michael Waldman has said, a misuse of the president’s clemency power. And indeed, two-thirds of Americans oppose it, according to a recent Washington Post poll.
Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution gives broad power to presidents to “grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States,” excepting only “Cases of Impeachment.” The power to both pardon crimes and commute sentences is unrestricted in any other way, except, perhaps, by the still-untested-in-the-courts limitation that a president may not pardon himself.
In other words, Trump can pardon the January 6 defendants. He would not violate the law or exceed the power extended to him by the Constitution if he did so. But while it would not technically be an abuse of his power to do so, it would be an appalling, unprecedented violation of the trust the American people place in their leaders.
In mid-December, President Biden pardoned 39 individuals convicted of nonviolent crimes and commuted the sentences of some 1,500 additional people who had qualified for early release from prison during the Covid-19 pandemic and succeeded in reentering their communities. He reflected on the exercise of the pardon power when he took that action, saying, “I have the great privilege of extending mercy to people who have demonstrated remorse and rehabilitation, restoring opportunity for Americans to participate in daily life and contribute to their communities.” The group includes “parents, veterans, health care professionals, teachers, advocates, and engaged members of their communities.”
By contrast, according to reporting compiled by NBC’s Ryan Reilly, the January 6 defendants were captured on video brandishing and using firearms, stun guns, flagpoles, fire extinguishers, bike racks, batons, a metal whip, office furniture, pepper spray, bear spray, a tomahawk ax, a hatchet, a hockey stick, knuckle gloves, a baseball bat, a massive Trump billboard, Trump flags, a pitchfork, pieces of lumber, crutches, and even an explosive device during the attack on the Capitol. More than 140 police officers were injured and members of Congress fled the building in fear for their lives. (Biden’s commutation of sentences for 37 people on death row should not be conflated with Trump’s proposed action. Commutation means they will serve the rest of their lives in prison instead of being executed, a far cry from the immediate release Trump has discussed for January 6 defendants.)
It’s even worse if Trump intends to pardon members of the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys organizations convicted of seditious conspiracy, something that he has not ruled out. Judge Amit Mehta, who sentenced the Oath Keepers’ leader, Yale Law School graduate Stewart Rhodes, to 18-years in prison for seditious conspiracy said, “The notion that Stewart Rhodes could be absolved is frightening — and ought to be frightening to anyone who cares about democracy.”
If Trump pardons January 6 rioters, he would be using the pardon power to erase an attack on Constitution and country. The purpose of that attack was his personal benefit — if it had succeeded, it could have permitted him to stay in power after losing the election, contrary to every principle of American democracy. An exercise of the pardon power along those lines would have no resemblance to what the Founding Fathers intended. The pardon power, which was only included after extensive debate, was based on the English “prerogative of mercy” that resided in kings and queens to undo punishment that was deemed too harsh. It was not about rewarding political loyalists.
Pardoning people convicted of plotting to interfere with the lawful and peaceful transfer of power following the 2020 presidential election isn’t a righteous grant of mercy. Few of these defendants have shown remorse and some have shown outright defiance, like Ryan Grillo, who said, “Trump’s gonna pardon me anyways” after Judge Royce Lamberth sentenced him in December. The January 6 offenders Trump has committed to pardoning aren’t people who committed nonviolent crimes in their late teens and early twenties and, having served significant portions of their sentence, are now prepared to return to their communities as rehabilitated individuals deserving of a second chance. If anything, the January 6 defendants’ return would give a boost to the white supremacist and domestic terror groups many of them participated in before they overran the Capitol, and it would severely dampen the deterrent effect of our laws against future aggression.
It has been the practice in most recent administrations to use the Office of the Pardon Attorney in the Department of Justice to review requests for pardons and commutations before they are handed up to the White House counsel and the president for a decision. That process includes an extensive evaluation of each individual applicant’s request, including consultation with prosecutors, lawyers, judges, victims, probation officers, prison staff and others to determine whether the requested clemency would serve the interests of justice without endangering the community. Pardons have often been used in the interests of equal justice when people are serving lengthy sentences that would no longer be handed down or in cases of extraordinary rehabilitation when people have demonstrated a commitment to the future of their communities. None of those considerations will be in play if Trump pardons January 6 offenders.
The key to Trump’s pardons is that they are not about people and their communities. They are about personal loyalty to him. Trump summoned these individuals to the Capitol to support him and now he will pardon them to complete that transaction. Trump will use the pardon power to make it clear that violence and violation of the law can be forgiven in service to himself.
Pardoning the rioters is a grotesque misuse of the pardon power because, cloaked in the appearance of lawful authority, it would put the presidential seal on crimes that go to the heart of an attack on our democracy, an effort to undo the will of the voters and seat a man who lost an election as the country’s leader. By advertising his willingness to pardon the people who supported him rather than the Constitution, Trump is sending a message to the people he is counting on to support him this go-round: If they protect him, he will take care of them. It’s a message fit for a would-be authoritarian.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Pardons for Jan. 6 Insurrectionists Would Be 'Affront to Our Democracy'
"Political violence is a hallmark of authoritarianism and a direct threat to a functioning democracy," said Public Citizen's co-president. "The January 6 perpetrators—including Donald Trump—should be shunned, not celebrated; punished, not pardoned."
Jan 06, 2025
Two weeks away from U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's return to office, democracy defenders, including a former Capitol Police sergeant, are sounding the alarm over the Republican's promised pardons for people convicted over the January 6, 2021 insurrection.
Trump faced two criminal cases for his fight to overturn his 2020 loss, which culminated in inciting some supporters to storm the U.S. Capitol during the certification of the results four years ago. In an NBC News interview last month, Trump said he was inclined to issue pardons, and "while there may be some exceptions," he will likely act on the "first day" he is back in the White House—"maybe the first nine minutes," as he told Time. His comments have led defense attorneys to seek delays until he takes office.
"Political violence is a hallmark of authoritarianism and a direct threat to a functioning democracy," said Robert Weissman, co-president of watchdog group Public Citizen, in a Monday statement. "The January 6 perpetrators—including Donald Trump—should be shunned, not celebrated; punished, not pardoned."
The group's other co-president, Lisa Gilbert, said that "Trump has once again showed us his disregard for the rule of law as he signals his eagerness to pardon the criminals responsible for the deadly insurrection."
"The incoming administration believes that their word trumps historical facts," Gilbert asserted. "A potential flurry of pardons of January 6 attackers would be an affront to our democracy and a blatant rewrite of history. Attempting to overturn an election through violence should neither be celebrated nor pardoned. We condemn former and future President Trump's commitment to a corrupted justice system."
According toCBS News:
Prosecutors have charged more than 1,580 defendants with crimes tied to the January 6, 2021, riot, including more than 170 who are accused of using deadly or dangerous weapons like fire extinguishers and bear spray against officers. While a majority were charged with nonviolent misdemeanor crimes, some were accused of conspiring to use force to resist the peaceful transfer of power. Others admitted to fighting officers and attacking members of the media.
More than 1,000 defendants have since pleaded guilty, and about 220 more were convicted at trial. Federal investigations said they are also seeking the public's assistance in locating at least five known fugitives.
According to the Justice Department, 1,100 defendants have already had their cases fully adjudicated, and hundreds have already completed prison terms.
"Trump did not pay for inciting January 6, escaping conviction in his Senate impeachment trial," freelance journalist Martin Pengelly highlighted in a Monday analysis for The Guardian. Since then, he has "called January 6 prisoners 'patriots' and even characterized the day they smashed their way into Congress—some looking for lawmakers to capture or kill in a riot linked to nine deaths—as 'a day of love.' At rallies, and at his Florida home as his return to power draws near, Trump has played a recording of January 6 prisoners singing the national anthem."
There are at least nine deaths tied to the insurrection: four Trump supporters—including Ashli Babbitt, who was fatally shot by a Capitol Police officer as the MAGA mob tried to enter the chamber of the U.S. House of Representatives—and five officers. Officer Brian Sicknick, who suffered strokes after being assaulted by rioters, died the next day, and four others have died by suicide.
"For my efforts doing my duty as a Capitol Police sergeant, I was beaten and struck by raging rioters all over my body with multiple weapons until I was covered in my own blood," Aquilino Gonell recalled in a Sunday opinion piece for The New York Times. "My hand, foot, and shoulder were wounded. I thought I was going to die and never make it home to see my wife and young son."
"I required multiple surgeries, years of rehab, and treatment for recurrences of the post-traumatic stress disorder I was diagnosed with in the Army," explained Gonell, who has testified in court and given victim statements. "Although I left the Capitol Police force, I remain haunted by that day. Now Mr. Trump's promised actions could erase the justice we've risked everything for."
U.S. Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), chair emeritus of the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC), noted Monday that "today, Members of Congress return to the U.S. Capitol to do one of our most important constitutional duties—certify the results of the presidential election and ensure a peaceful transfer of power."
Despite Trump's performance during his first term, 2020 loss, the devastating tantrum that followed, and related and unrelated legal trouble—including arguments that he is constitutionally disqualified from holding office again after engaging in insurrection—the 78-year-old Republican won both the Electoral College and the popular vote this past November.
"What we do today will be in stark contrast to what happened four years ago, when insurrectionists—fueled by sitting President Donald Trump—attacked the U.S. Capitol in the most violent attack since the War of 1812," Jayapal said, acknowledging the members of law enforcement whose deaths and injuries resulted from the 2021 attack. "Today, we remember their courage and bravery even as Republicans have refused to put up a congressionally mandated plaque to honor those officers."
"As we certify the elections today, let us never forget how close we came four years ago to losing our democracy completely. As someone who was trapped in the gallery that day, I remember vividly how close we came to not making it out alive. I will never forget the pounding on the doors, the shouting and screaming of both those trying to overrun our democracy and those putting their lives on the line to defend it," she continued. "I also will never forget the handful of brave Republicans who, in the weeks following, stood up to put country over party during Trump's impeachment trial."
"If Donald Trump moves forward with pardoning the January 6 rioters, as he has pledged to do, he will once again be doing violence to our country and our democracy and encouraging it again in the future," Jayapal warned as she kicked off her fifth term, vowing to "work to protect and strengthen our democracy every single day."
U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland—an appointee of outgoing Democratic President Joe Biden often criticized for not targeting Trump more aggressively for his actions on that day—said in a Monday statement to The Associated Press that prosecutors at the Department of Justice "have sought to hold accountable those criminally responsible for the January 6 attack on our democracy with unrelenting integrity."
"They have conducted themselves in a manner that adheres to the rule of law and honors our obligation to protect the civil rights and civil liberties of everyone in this country," added Garland—whom Trump is set to replace with former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, after ethics issues led to the withdrawal of his first choice, former Congressman Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.).
Trump has named loyalist Kash Patel as his pick to direct the Federal Bureau of Investigation, an agency of the Justice Department. Both his and Bondi's nominations require confirmation from the Republican-controlled Senate. CBS pointed out that "if confirmed, Bondi and Patel—who has said he opposes the January 6 prosecutions—would have the power to shut down the Capitol breach investigations altogether and weigh in on the administration's clemency strategy."
Newly elected CPC Chair Greg Casar (D-TX-35) said Monday that "four years ago, Americans watched right-wing extremists storm the Capitol live on television. But behind the scenes, Republican officials continue to undermine our citizens' rights every single day."
"Trump's election will be certified, and his administration will be filled with more certified liars, grifters, and corrupt billionaires than any other in American history," Casar added. "But when Trump's Republicans try to cut Social Security and Medicare to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy, you can count on progressives to fight back for everyday Americans."
Keep ReadingShow Less
How About a Blanket Pardon for the People of Gaza, Mr. President?
Will the programs you championed be submerged in the memory of a president who served as Benjamin Netanyahu’s enabler? Or will you be remembered for a final act of good?
Dec 15, 2024
Dear President Biden,
Rumor has it that you’re considering blanket pardons for certain persons whom you have reason to believe the incoming, self-proclaimed vindictive Donald Trump administration may prosecute for alleged crimes, when they in fact did nothing other than carry out the duties of their government positions. Your inclination to save these people from the burden of potential future politically motivated prosecution is admirable. But there are a far greater number of innocent people that you might be able to spare from fates far worse than the aggravation and expense of defending themselves from political and legal retribution — the 2.2 million inhabitants of Gaza.
Some people—potential recipients included—think preemptive pardons would be a bad idea, because it might be seen to imply guilt in cases where the people in question are in fact innocent of any crime. Whether they are correct in that assessment we don’t know, but there would be no such potential downside in “pardoning” Gazans, the vast majority of whom are not only not guilty of any crime but are the victims of one—a war crime that is massive and ongoing.
As you’ve no doubt heard, Amnesty International has recently concluded that in its ongoing Gaza assault, Israel is committing “prohibited acts under the Genocide Convention, namely killing, causing serious bodily or mental harm and deliberately inflicting on Palestinians in Gaza conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction in whole or in part.”
I do understand that you might consider using the word “genocide” in connection with Israel to be simply beyond the pale—even if both the U.S. and Israel have ratified the Genocide Convention that defined it—in that it was the extermination campaign waged against the Jewish people that caused the crime to be defined in the first place—and is generally cited as the justification for the creation of Israel.
However, you also probably know that although he did not use the word “genocide,” Moshe Yaalon, Israel’s defense minister during the 2014 Gaza War, has declared “on behalf of commanders who serve in northern Gaza,” that “War crimes are being committed here.” And we know that the Administration is quite aware of the “conquering, annexing, ethnic cleansing” Yaalon cites as Israeli policy ever since the October 7, 2023 Hamas massacre. After all, on October 13, 2024, your Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin signed a letter to the Israeli Ministers of Defense and Strategic Affairs calling for improved humanitarian conditions in regard to increasing access to food aid, ending forced evacuation, and opening border crossings in Gaza. They even went so far as to suggest that should the Israelis not improve conditions within 30 days your Administration might enforce U.S. laws prohibiting transmission of weapons to nations blocking humanitarian aid. Unfortunately, however, Israel didn’t—and you didn’t.
I don’t expect you to have the statistics at your finger tips—and numbers in war will seldom be exact—but the German online data gathering platform Statista puts the number of Israelis killed in the initial Hamas onslaught at 1,200 and records 380 additional Israeli military deaths since that time. During the same period it counts 44,502 Gazan deaths resulting from the Israeli military response. That’s a 28–1 death ratio. This in addition to Brown University’s Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs estimate of more than 62,000 additional deaths from starvation as of October 7, 2024, as well as something in excess of 5,000 more due to the destruction of medical facilities.
We realize that you can’t actually issue a “pardon” to the people of Gaza, in that you can’t simply order the slaughter and starvation to cease. But—given that the Watson Institute also calculated that America’s military contribution to Israel’s Gaza campaign cost “at least $22.76 billion and counting” up to that point—you could obviously make a big difference by cutting the cash flow. And, as the Blinken/Austin letter indicated, you would clearly have the force of American law on your side. Perhaps then Israel—and the world—might no longer think that it could continue to act with impunity in regard to Palestinians; that there might be consequences.
If nothing else, perhaps you will consider the children involved. I suspect you’ve heard that as far back as November 6, 2023, UN Secretary-General António Guterres warned that “Gaza is becoming a graveyard for children.” You may not, however, have heard the rather harsher way some Israeli fans put it a year later, following a recent soccer match in Amsterdam. As NBC News reported it, they actually sang the words: “Why is school out in Gaza? There are no children left there.”
Were you to issue that metaphorical pardon—whose impact would be far from metaphorical—we might certainly ask if Donald Trump couldn’t just immediately reinstate it. Yes he could, and probably would. But if his re-ascendancy to the White House should require making the case for resuming the shipment of 2000-pound American bombs for Israel to drop on the already devastated enclave—rather than simply involving a seamless continuity of policy—well, I think even you might have trouble buying that argument.
Mr. President, I do not claim to be of your political stripe; I was a Bernie Sanders supporter. Yet your administration has exceeded my expectations in many ways. For one, I didn’t really ever expect to see a U.S. president on a labor picket line—unless Bernie got elected. (And I’ll never forget you for telling Donald Trump to “shut up” during your 2020 debate.) A significant factor in this, it seems, was that, unlike Hillary Clinton, you took him and us—his supporters—seriously, even going so far as to establish joint Biden/Sanders-campaign issues committees before your nominating convention. I think that to a degree Sanders steered your administration toward the better angels of our nature at its outset. You should let him do it again on your way out. His motion to cut off military support for Israel’s barbarism failed badly in the Senate, but you could make it happen.
Lyndon Johnson presided over the introduction of a slew of programs collectively known as the “Great Society” which changed life for the better for a lot of Americans. But what is he most remembered for? His pursuit of the Vietnam War. Imagine how differently he’d be regarded had he the courage to end that disaster before he left office. You face a similar choice. Will the programs you championed be submerged in the memory of a president who served as Benjamin Netanyahu’s enabler? Or will you be remembered as the one who finally had the nerve to say, “Enough is enough!”
Sincerely,
Tom Gallagher
Oakland, California
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular