Tag: pardon
Margie Greene Asking Trump To Pardon Felon Santos

Margie Greene Asking Trump To Pardon Felon Santos

Let it never be said that Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene is not loyal to her friends.

The Georgia Republican out here pleading former Rep. George Santos’ case, trying to get President Donald Trump to commute his sentence and free him from his grueling confinement, which has lasted … about 12 days. And without naming names, she’s happy to insinuate that far worse criminals than Santos still roam the halls of Congress.

Before diving into the merits of whether Trump should grant Santos mercy, let’s speculate about whom Greene could be referring to.

Fortunately, GovTrack, a government transparency group, maintains a database about legislator misconduct. Maybe Greene is referring to Rep. Andrew Ogles, the Tennessee Republican so eager to stay in Trump’s good graces that he wants to amend the Constitution so Trump can serve a third term. Ogles is the subject of an ethics complaint thanks to a discrepancy in his financial disclosures. Ogles also possesses the Santos-like penchant for inflating his resume.

Or maybe Texas’ Troy Nehls? In 2024, the Office of Congressional Ethics found that Nehls may have made illegal campaign disbursements and appears to not have provided complete financial disclosures. Nehls still has his job, though, and little has happened with that complaint.

And thanks to the GOP controlling the House, Rep. Wesley Hunt and Rep. Ronny Jackson, both of Texas, are still hanging about despite the OCE determining that they had violated campaign finance standards.

According to Greene, Santos’ sentence is unfair because a seven-year prison sentence for

campaign-related charges” is too much, so she’s asking the Office of the Pardon Attorney to urge Trump to commute Santos’ sentence. Of course, her characterization of Santos’ crimes is incorrect. Santos deceived donors, spent campaign funds on personal items, inflated the amount of donations he received so he could qualify for funds and assistance from the national GOP, did some identity fraud by charging donors’ credit cards without their authorization, committed some unemployment insurance fraud, and lied to the House.

However, Greene might be in luck: The extremely morally flexible Ed Martin now runs the Office of the Pardon Attorney. So she probably has a shot at getting this request in front of Trump’s eyeballs at the bare minimum.

It’s somewhat surprising Trump hasn’t already pardoned Santos, since Trump apparently loves to pardon people who have committed crimes that remind him of his own crimes. He’s already granted clemency to 16 corrupt politicians, including former New York Rep. Michael Grimm, who hid income and lied on his tax forms, and Michele Fiore, a former Las Vegas city council member, for her diversion of donations for a memorial to a slain police officer to her own plastic surgery needs.

It isn’t like Trump is unaware of Santos’ plight, either. Last Friday, Trump mentioned he had the power to pardon Santos, musing, “He lied like hell, and I didn’t know him. … But he was 100% for Trump. I might’ve met him. Maybe, maybe not, but he was a congressman and his vote was solid.”

It’s the same weird preemptive statement he made about his authority to pardon convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell, reminding the world that he’s perfectly happy to pardon the scuzziest people, given enough incentive.

And that might be Santos’ problem. He lacks the ability to provide Trump with the kind of incentive that woos him into pardons. Sure, Santos is notorious, but he’s not a reality star like Todd and Julie Chrisley, who, thanks to Trump, are free and clear of their 2022 convictions for fraud and tax evasion. And Santos didn’t donate millions to a pro-Trump campaign fund.

Ever the inveterate liar, Santos even had to lie about this. Per Santos, his pardon was a done deal, but then House Speaker Mike Johnson “blocked” it, which is not a thing. The presidential pardon power is absolute, not subject to veto by the speaker of the House. Santos knows this, but he likely just can’t stop himself.

Meanwhile, Greene will continue her efforts to free her friend. Greene and Santos could be a dynamic duo once again, cozying up side-by-side in Congress to spin conspiracy theories together. Now all they need is Trump.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Donald Trump and Ghislaine Maxwell

Dishonor And Depravity: Maxwell The Molester's Impending Pardon

When Donald Trump pardoned the January 6 gangsters upon returning to the White House, he proved that he is capable of any depraved act to protect himself. So while everybody should be disgusted by the prospect of a presidential pardon for Ghislaine Maxwell, nobody should be surprised. There is no dishonor too low for this president.

The 63-year-old Maxwell is probably the most notorious child predator in the U.S. federal prison system, globally reviled for enabling the sexual abuse of hundreds of young girls by the late Jeffrey Epstein. Sentenced to 20 years in prison for those crimes, she has until very recently languished in a Florida maximum-security prison, as required by federal law for felons like her.

Suddenly and mysteriously, however, the Bureau of Prisons moved Maxwell to a shiny new facility in Texas last week, with far less stringent security and far more comfortable quarters. It is the luxury version of detention coveted by all the incarcerated guests of the federal system.

Since registered sex offenders such as Maxwell are not supposed to be eligible for such a "Club Fed" dormitory, the events leading up to her transfer are highly suggestive of favoritism and even corruption. She was moved without any notice to the public or to her many victims following a series of long, closed meetings between Maxwell and her lawyer and Todd Blanche, the former Trump defense lawyer appointed by the president to serve as deputy attorney general of the United States Justice Department.

As everyone paying attention knows, those meetings occurred amid a national uproar over the Trump administration's continuing coverup of the "Epstein files" — meaning all the information gleaned by the FBI during its investigation of that predator. As rage mounted, even among Trump loyalists, the public has seen increasing indications that Trump himself has much to fear from his own multiple appearances in those files. He might be in even more trouble if his old friend Maxwell, a constant presence during his long and troubling relationship with Epstein, were to tell what she knows.

Yet with a pardon dangled before her eyes by a Trump defense lawyer wearing a Justice Department badge, Maxwell might easily be induced to forget whatever she knows about the president — or start to "remember" terrible things about his political enemies. When the old Trump Justice Department indicted her in 2019, prosecutors considered charging her with perjury after she lied repeatedly under oath. Now this Trump Justice Department has fired Maurene Comey, the professional prosecutor who won Maxwell's 2021 conviction, and have instead sent a hack defense counsel to bargain with her.

Julie K. Brown, the Pulitzer Prize-winning Miami Herald reporter who first exposed the Bush Justice Department's 2008 sweetheart deal with Epstein, says that the "survivors" who testified against Maxwell feel betrayed — and fear a renewed coverup. There is no conceivable reason to pardon her or commute her sentence, except to save Trump from embarrassment or worse.

"(Maxwell) does know a lot," Brown told Sidney Blumenthal and Sean Wilentz on their Court of History podcast last week. "She was on the ground level of this sex trafficking operation. In fact, some of the ... survivors believe that she, in a way, was a bigger monster than Epstein, because she was the one that made them feel safe. She was the one that brought them in. She used fraud (to attract girls) by saying, 'He's going to hire you, you're going to travel, you're going to be a masseuse.' ... She sort of acted like a motherly nurturing type, you know, English lady with her English accent."

Her false front allowed Epstein to get "a foot in the door" at local high schools and spas, where she scouted the "pretty girls" that she and her wealthy coconspirator would rape, abuse and intimidate. Even the consideration of a pardon for her is appalling — but wholly in character for this president, his Justice Department, and the pious hypocrites in his party.

Joe Conason is founder and editor-in-chief of The National Memo. He is also editor-at-large of Type Investigations, a nonprofit investigative reporting organization formerly known as The Investigative Fund. His latest book is The Longest Con: How Grifters, Swindlers and Frauds Hijacked American Conservatism (St. Martin's Press, 2024).

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

 January 6 insurrectionists

Presidential Immunity Plus Pardon Power Equals Absolute Despotism

Donald Trump’s pardons of January 6 insurrectionists on his first day as president in January of this year were an admission that he instigated the assault on the Capitol, and that he approved of the way the assault was carried out, including violent attacks on police officers resulting in at least one death and leaving others with career-ending injuries.

Looked at in a different way, Trump thus pardoned himself, even though such an action was not necessary due to the incredible law-busting fact that the Supreme Court, in United States v. Trump had given him blanket immunity for virtually anything he does or did that could be defined as an “official act.”

Trump has been using the toxic combination of immunity and the pardon power in a crescendo of lawlessness that was unforeseen by the founding fathers at the time they wrote the Constitution. It’s the biggest fuck you to our democracy since its founding. In his disassembly of whole departments of government that were established in laws written by the Congress, Trump is saying to the other two branches of government, “If you don’t like it, come and get me.”

The Republican Congress, at this point a wholly owned subsidiary of Donald Trump and the Trump Organization, has sat on its hands, and individual Republican members of Congress, including the speaker of the House, have endorsed Trump’s rape of the government. Congressional Republicans, as well as conservative members of the judiciary, adhere to a royalist theory of presidential power called the unitary executive, which holds that Trump, as president, has sole authority over the executive branch, including the right to fire all appointees and executive branch officers, with or without cause.

Since taking office for a second time, Trump has tested the limits of his executive power repeatedly, eliminating entire divisions of the government such as the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and firing directors of Congressionally created agencies that had previously been considered independent of the Executive.

Last week, the Supreme Court adopted Trump’s position on his powers by issuing an order allowing him to fire board members of the National Labor Relations Board and the Merits Systems Protection Board. The top court paused lower court orders that had allowed the two board officials to continue to serve while a lawsuit they filed makes its way through the courts. The lower courts observed that under the congressional statute establishing the boards, its members could be fired only for “good cause,” and the administration had not provided such cause.

Trump’s unilateral moves in firing government employees and disestablishing government departments have been stymied by the courts multiple times. A report by Adam Bonica on his Substack, “On Data and Democracy,” found that during the month of May, “federal district courts ruled against the Trump administration in 26 of 27 cases—a stunning 96% loss rate.” Trump lost 76 percent of the cases against him in April, and 74 percent in March.

Yesterday, Trump added to his court losses when he suffered a stinging rebuke by a federal judge who found that his moves to punish the WilmerHale law firm were unconstitutional. Other judges have struck down Trump’s similar moves against Jenner & Block and Perkins Coie. Trump had issued orders against the law firms blocking their access to federal buildings and representing clients in lawsuits involving contracts with the federal government. Trump asserted his “right” to punish these law firms and several others because of his absolute control over the federal government.

What Donald Trump has done with his 140-plus executive orders and his attempts to punish law firms and other independent businesses such as CBS and entertainment companies has been to assert authoritarian control not only over the government, but over companies that do business with the government or are subject to government regulation. This is an unprecedented assertion of presidential power. So far, the only check on Trump has been lawsuits filed one after the other by individuals, businesses, and universities affected by Trump’s orders.

Courts have rejected the great majority of Trump’s attempts at absolute control, but as the lawsuits make their way through the courts, they all have one ultimate destination: the Supreme Court. Trump appointed three arch-conservative justices to a court already dominated by Republican-appointed justices. The Supreme Court has gone back and forth with its recent orders on its “emergency docket,” ordering that migrants have rights under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment and ordering the return of at least one migrant who was wrongfully deported by Trump’s Department of Homeland Security.

But the court has so far failed to enforce its own order to return the mistakenly deported migrant KIlmar Abrego Garcia from El Salvador. So far, no court has found the Trump administration in contempt of court, but legal experts predict that such an order is inevitable in multiple cases because of the Trump administration’s refusal or inability to provide legal justification for many of the moves they have made.

If and when such a contempt order is issued against one or more of Trump’s departments, we have been told that the United States will be in the first real constitutional crisis of its history. In the past, as in the Pentagon Papers case, and in the Watergate case in which Nixon was ordered by a federal judge to produce the White House tapes, the president then in power capitulated to the court orders and a crisis was avoided.

But this time, the president in office enjoys something Nixon and other presidents never had: absolute immunity from prosecution from his acts as president. Trump also enjoys the power given him under the Constitution to pardon anyone for committing any crime. Last Friday, Trump issued a full and unconditional pardon to a man who had been convicted of several tax crimes that charged him with using his unpaid taxes to finance a lavish lifestyle and buy luxury goods, including a $2 million yacht.

The pardon was issued after the man’s mother attended a $1 million-a-head Mar a Lago fund raiser at which she spoke to Trump personally. She had been a major Republican fund raiser in the past and had contributed to Trump’s election effort in 2024, co-hosting at least three fund-raisers for Trump. In a very real sense, the mother of this tax-cheat bought a pardon for her son by paying Donald Trump directly.

Yesterday, Trump pardoned a Virginia sheriff who had been convicted on multiple counts of bribery for accepting “cash-stuffed envelopes” from wealthy people he provided with badges. appointing them as bogus “auxiliary sheriffs,” that allowed them to break the law. Along with other sheriffs, he had formed a “Protect America Now PAC” to support Trump. The sheriff was sentenced to 10 years in federal prison for his crimes. The pardon was overseen by Ed Martin, newly appointed as Trump’s “pardon attorney” in the Department of Justice in addition to being put in charge of the DOJ office of “weaponization,” intended to undo actions by the Biden administration the DOJ sees as unfairly punishing MAGA supporters of Trump.

Pardoning random MAGA supporters and people Trump wants to reward for giving him money is the least of it. The real problem is Trump’s ability to pardon anyone he orders to commit a crime in his name. For example, if a judge ends up finding an assistant U.S. Attorney in contempt of court and orders him or her fined, Trump can issue a pardon and negate the contempt finding. This will allow the Trump DOJ to go into court and lie to judges with impunity, knowing that they will suffer no consequences as long as the lies they tell are in support of Trump’s illegal actions being challenged in court.

The same would go for anyone working for Trump in his administration. If Trump orders one of his cabinet secretaries to defy a court order, or to execute an illegal act such as administratively fining a government employee for some imagined crime such as signing a document refusing to carry out an illegal order, he can simply order Pam Bondi and his DOJ not to prosecute whoever is involved. At the end of his administration, Trump can issue blanket pardons that will prevent a new administration from prosecuting crimes carried out under Trump’s orders today.

Trump’s pardons are being called “get out of jail free” cards, but they’re worse than that. By preemptively ordering that certain people not be prosecuted, they will never be charged, much less come to trial and be convicted. As he has shown with his two most recent pardons, Trump can nullify prosecutions which predated his return to office, turning the Department of Justice into an office of revenge and retribution unseen before in American history and certainly not contemplated by the signers of the Declaration of Independence, who asserted in the name of the 13 colonies and their citizens that the corruption of royal rule was being thrown off in contemplation of something better.

Speaking of the rights of “the people,” the signers declared that “When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

We have entered into a new age of “absolute Despotism.” Whether we will throw off those who would impose upon us such “abuses and usurpations” as we have endured for the last four months remains to be seen.

Lucian K. Truscott IV, a graduate of West Point, has had a 50-year career as a journalist, novelist, and screenwriter. He has covered Watergate, the Stonewall riots, and wars in Lebanon, Iraq, and Afghanistan. He is also the author of five bestselling novels. He writes every day at luciantruscott.substack.com and you can follow him on Bluesky @lktiv.bsky.social and on Facebook at Lucian K. Truscott IV. Please consider subscribing to his Substack.

Reprinted with permission from Lucian Truscott Newsletter.

Trump Reportedly Ready To Pardon Roger Stone

Trump Reportedly Ready To Pardon Roger Stone

A federal judge is currently weighing whether Roger Stone should get prison time for the seven felony counts of witness tampering, obstruction of justice, and lying to Congress he was charged with.

However, even if Stone gets the maximum nine-year sentence prosecutors in the case asked for, he’s unlikely to serve a day in prison. Donald Trump is almost assured to pardon his longtime friend and political ally, Politico reports.

A Stone pardon would be the latest move by Trump to help his friends and allies who have been convicted on corruption charges.

Earlier this week, Trump pardoned or granted clemency to 11 criminals — all of whom either had personal ties to Trump or were pushed by personalities on Fox News, Trump’s favorite television network.

And at the same time Trump is letting convicted crooks like former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich free, he’s purging his administration of people battling corruption.

In one example, Trump forced out Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman from the National Security Council after Vindman complied with a congressional subpoena in the impeachment inquiry.

Trump subsequently said he thought forcing Vindman out of his job wasn’t enough and suggested Vindman be punished for telling the truth under oath, as he was legally obligated to do.

Trump also purged a Pentagon official who raised concerns about Trump’s military aid hold to Ukraine.

But it’s not just people who opposed Trump’s Ukraine scheme who should be worried about their jobs — Politico reports that Trump loyalists are urging Trump to purge any Department of Justice officials who were part of special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe.

“This is a straightforward issue,” Tom Fitton, a conspiratorial right-wing figure who runs Judicial Watch, an organization that pushes investigations of Democrats such as Hillary Clinton, told Politico. “The president runs the Justice Department and there are a lot of people who don’t want the Justice Department to investigate Democrats.”

Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World