When Ethics Alarms decided what had been a close competition between Woodrow Wilson and Joe Biden for “Worst President Ever,” I honestly thought all of the evidence was in. There were only eight days to go, after all; it had finally been made sufficiently clear that our so-called President was on his way to becoming a zucchini, and worse, had been transitioning for years under the protection of an Axis cover-up. But then came Biden’s endorsement of censorship and the most unethical exit speech in U.S. Presidential history, followed by Biden’s embarrassing announcement that he was ruling the 28th Amendment ratified when it was not. Today, I woke up to the news that Biden had issued prospective pardons to Gen. Mark A. Milley, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who betrayed his country with unauthorized contact with China; Dr. Fauci, the perjuring, lying, Deep State hack who was significantly responsible for the disastrous response to the Wuhan virus, Trump Deranged former Representative Liz Cheney and all the other members of the Pelosi-rigged House committee that dragged out and manipulated a partisan investigation of the Jan. 6, 2021 riot.
The close call now is whether this last official act by Biden is the worst of the batch. It may well be.
To chase the metaphorical elephant out of the room, prospective pardons are legal, constitutional, and probably irreversible. Presidents have issued general pardons applying to groups of people involving many offenses yet to be proven, and many times. There have been at least thirty amnesties before puppet Joe entered the White House: Presidents Lincoln and Andrew Johnson issued them during and after the Civil War to benefit Confederates, and Jimmy Carter issued a mass pardon for Vietnam war draft dodgers. My favorite was President Madison’s 1815 pardon of pirate Jean Lafitte and his crew, who joined Andy Jackson’s American forces at the Battle of New Orleans. Madison’s grateful proclamation covered all who assisted in the defense of Louisiana in the battle (that occurred after the War of 1812 had ended), granting “a full and free pardon of all offenses committed in violation of any act or acts of the Congress of the said United States touching the revenue, trade, and navigation thereof or touching the intercourse and commerce of the United States with foreign nations at any time before the 8th day of January, in the present year 1815, by any person or persons whomsoever being inhabitants of New Orleans and adjacent country, or being inhabitants of the said island of Barrataria and the places adjacent . . .”
The fact that this vague and general sweeping Presidential pardon was issued by James Madison, the primary author of the Constitution, makes it about as irrefutable a precedent as one could ask for. And thus the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the pardon power “extends to every offense known to the law, and may be exercised at any time after its commission, either before legal proceedings are taken or during their pendency or after conviction and judgment.”
Nonetheless, just because one can do something (or get away with it) doesn’t mean it is ethical, prudent, responsible or right. Biden’s pardons for alleged crimes never investigated or proven to individuals holding his favor stretches the existing precedents to the breaking point, or perhaps gagging point is a more apt description. After all, Jean Lafitte was a pirate; the Confederate soldiers fought against their country, and the draft-dodgers were, you know, draft dodgers. Even Richard Nixon, pardoned by President Ford in what may be the nearest thing to a precedent for Biden’s pardons today, was a President of the United States whose potential indictable crimes had only been uncovered in the course of a House impeachment inquiry. At that point, the precedent could have been limited by those not insignificant details. Then came Biden’s Once and Future pardon of his black sheep son for crimes he had been convicted of committing and anything else he might have done yet undiscovered, just in case darling Hunter has been a serial killer when he wasn’t high. Today’s pardons take us to the end of the slippery slope.
Be proud, Democrats. Biden’s irresponsible prospective pardons open the door for a President to eliminate accountability and legal punishment for flagrant and serious criminal behavior that has yet to be discovered, investigated or prosecuted, by his friends, family members, loyalists, political allies, and supporters. I see no limit. Let’s say that Biden learns that a so-far unsolved murder was committed by, oh, say, David Muir, who tried so hard to bolster Kamala Harris in her debate with Trump. That’s OK! says Joe; I appreciate the effort: let me grant you a prospective pardon just in case they ever find Megyn Kelly’s body. Look at “The Pelican Brief,” in which President Robert Culp, an idiot, learns that his chiff of staff has been paying hit men to eliminate a journalist and his source who threaten the President’s re-election. It’s a perfect time for a prospective pardon. After all, the guy was just trying to help….
To be less hyperbolic, I will just point out that the prospective pardon precedent allows deliberate, damaging criminal behavior including treason within a Presidential administration with the perpetrators being assured in advance that they will be guaranteed immunity when and if the crimes are discovered. An entire administration could be infected with a criminal enterprise, and a complicit President could, using the clemency power, ensure that it succeeds without risk.
The rationalization being used by the Axis—these people really are scum: is that clear enough now?—is that Biden is only handing out these “Stay Out of Jail No Matter What You’ve Done” cards to counter, as the New York Times puts it today, a “promised campaign of ‘retribution'” and “to head off politically driven prosecutions.”
But speculative retribution does not justify using this unethical means to an end. I never believed that Trump would waste his time, political capital and public good will on seeking vengeance when he has a) won and b) has far, far more important things to do. If his typical bloviating bluffed Biden into doing something so stupid and irresponsible, that’s Biden’s blunder, not Trump’s.
To answer the question I keep hearing and reading, “Do these pardons mean that the recipients committed indictable crimes?”: Yes, it almost certainly does. That conclusion means that the prospective pardons should not stop thorough investigations of Milley, Cheney and Fauci; in fact, the pardons mean that investigations are more important than ever. If these three cannot be properly punished under the law, then they should at least have to live in a society that knows how untrustworthy and corrupt they are.
Back to the main issue, however: the precedent Biden has set today is too dangerous to let stand, and both parties should recognize that the clemency power is now a threat to the nation and democracy. A Constitutional amendment is needed, and I see no reason why one couldn’t be passed quickly. While they are at it, they should settled the question of whether President can pardon himself, and the answer should be “No.”
The bright side for Joe is that he would be responsible for a 28th Amendment after all, just not the one he thought he had ratified.
UPDATE 1: Biden also pardoned his brothers, James and Francis Biden, his sister, Valerie Biden, and their spouses. This is persuasive evidence, if not proof, that the Bidens are indeed a crime family.
Earlier, we learned that Biden preemptively pardoned Rep. Jamie Raskin for his role in the corrupt Jan 6th committee. Raskin had previously opined on Presidential pardons: “The seeking of pardons is powerful demonstration of the consciousness of guilt, or at least the consciousness that you may be in trouble.”
UPDATE 2: This just re-surfaced:
Ethics Alarms 
I think a very good amendment would be that a president can’t pardon from the start of election day until inauguration day.
Where is the fun in that?
jvb
How plausible is it that someone will try to argue in court that his pardons were null and void because he wasn’t mentally competent and therefor someone else was using him as a puppet?
Until the 25th amendment is invoked it doesn’t. And we know the reason the 25th isn’t being invoked is the fact that Kamala is no more competent than a senile old man. Replacing Joe with Kamala will just be changing the shade of the drapes. It is just swapping one puppet figure head for another one.
The democrats standing aside and allowing Kamala to be vice president when they knew Biden was already in decline are trators who put winning above the country.
I remember Jack saying all those years ago something along the lines:
It was true then and it is true today. Well with one exception… but the democtrats are even more inclined to reject Tulsi Gabbard now, after defecting to Trump.
I’m curious to see the details on these pardons? So far the details are scant. Are they highly broad like Hunter’s pardons or a bit more specific? I get they’re fresh off the press so no one has dug through them yet.
As you note Jack, investigations are in order. One of these consequences is that the pardoned no longer have the ability to plea the 5th amendment protections for self incrimination as they’re already immune. Something these pardons don’t do is protect the pardoned against perjury nor obstruction charges. Many of these folks are not immune to the Martha Stewart charge. What’s worse for them is in the eyes of the court, they’re already guilty of these crimes and that makes obstruction charges easier simce it could be construed as an ongoing coverup of a conspiracy that they were convicted for.
So, masses of populations of the world killed can be excused and forgiven? Not only does the President leave office, but he and his family receive lifelong protections, and the President receives a lifelong retirement at the taxpayer’s expense for the rest of his life.
Shouldn’t Congress have pulled ahead and completed the investigations into Fauci’s crimes and ruled one way or the other long before this occurrence of being pardoned?
Can the pardoning powers of presidents be changed so this does not occur again as and how Biden did? It was evident that occurrences such as this should not have occurred, and unless this privilege of presidents is not changed, then the current way this privilege is written only lends itself to happen again in the future.
Biden’s family does not get lifelong protection. Obama is the last president that does. Congress changed the law.
Where can the privileges of a current President and past president privileges be viewed? Thank you for your time.
Actually I’m incorrect. Congress has repealed that law.
More information on Wikipedia (But as always the case, check out the references) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Former_Presidents_Act
Hold onto your butts. I don’t think this episode is over. I bet Joe will pardon himself and all the other members of the Biden syndicate, including Dr. Jill and brother Jim, who’ve been running a shakedown cum influence pedaling operation for the last fifty years.
A minor point: St. Anthony of Fauci should be investigated and prosecuted for giving federal money to the Wuhan lab to do change of function research in violation of the federal regs prohibiting such funding. He didn’t just bungle the reaction to the Wuhan flu, he funded and over saw the flu’s creation and inadvertent (?) release. Talk about having blood on one’s hands. It’s that little shit.
And might I add, “pompous and not very smart little shit.”
I’m waiting for the details of each of the pardons for questions like these. What’s the time range and limitations on Fauci’s pardons? Does it include the time period where funding was happening?
I’d also like to point out what is being covered less: The capital police are getting pardons too. Does this include shooting an unarmed woman in the pardons?
That’s why I’m waiting for the details of the pardons to come out. This very example is one, I want Fauci to be recognized as not only bungling the response, but getting the credit he deserves for helping to make covid. What was the time frame of the Fauci pardon? Just the virus response, or did Biden include the time back when the funding happened?
There is also some of the pardons getting little coverage. Apparently all of the capital police officers who testified before the Jan 6 hearing are getting pardons too. So does a capital police officer get a pardon for shooting an unarmed woman?
PS: If there is a double, similar comment, it was because I thought word press ate it… If there is not, word press just sucks.
It is being reported that, yes, shooting an unarmed woman and beating unconscious people are covered by the pardons of the Capitol police. If the Republicans in Congress had any backbone, they would fire every single one of the officers that accept the pardon. Since accepting the pardon requires an admission of guilt, that would be commonsense, no? I don’t see the argument for retaining an officer who is tacitly admitting that he murdered an unarmed, defenseless woman. I think whoever promoted that officer for shooting the unarmed, defenseless woman should also be fired.
Are you sure one can reject executive clemency? I haven’t been able to find any authority that its possible.
Other than a pardon for himself and Jill, you nailed it: https://x.com/BillMelugin_/status/1881383332392624252
Wow. The icing on a fifty years-long cake.
I’m not stupid. I’m smart!
“I’m totally shocked by that action.”
— No one
What’s interesting about pardons is, because a pardon prevents any prosecution for the things that the individual was pardoned for, it also renders the individual’s 5th Amendment right (protects citizens from self-incrimination) basically irrelevant as long as the questions are related to the things the individual was pardoned for, the individual can no longer self-incriminate, they MUST answer the questions.
These late pardons could be a real positive for the American people because Congressional investigations into some of the things that took place over the last four years could be a huge windfall of valuable information. President Trump needs to stay completely out of it, but Congress needs to have some very public hearings about a few things to inform “We the People” about the corruption that took place over the last four years.
P.S. If an individual that is pardoned lies under oath in a Congressional hearing they CAN be prosecuted for that.
Pre-emptive pardons completely undercut our system of justice and the foundational concept of “innocent until proven guilty.” How can someone be pardoned for a crime he/she has yet to be declared guilty of committing?!?
Because we need not require individuals to go through the rigors of a criminal trial for a pardoning aithority to pardon them.
Criminal trials do exert costs on the accused. A pardon would spare the costs.
I quote Paul Harding.
https://www.quora.com/How-can-a-gun-enthusiast-still-claim-their-right-to-bear-arms-is-more-important-than-public-safety/answer/Paul-Harding-14
All of your Constitutional Rights come at the cost of safety.
For example, you would be much safer if I could search houses, cars, and people whenever I wanted to, for any reason, or no reason at all. I’d catch more real bad guys. You know those stories about creeps who keep sex slaves locked in their basements for years? I’d find those victims and rescue them. That neighbor of yours who might have a meth lab that is going to send poisonous fumes into your child’s bedroom window, or explode and burn down your house? I’d find out for sure whether a lab was there.
How about all those guys who are probably child molesters, and we’ve got some evidence, but it isn’t enough to convict in front of a jury, especially with that defense attorney throwing doubt all over our evidence? Those guys are on the street right now, and a child you love may be their next victim.
Give up your rights under the 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments, and I’ll make the world safer for you. No question about it.
The only problem is that if you give up all those rights, which are really just restrictions on the things I’m allowed to do to you, what’s going to keep you safe from me?
Every right you have increases your danger from other people who share that right. Free speech? It allows monsters to spread hateful messages, possibly about a group to which you belong, just the same as it allows you to petition your government with legitimate grievances.
That free speech even allows you to argue in favor of discarding freedom and liberty as just too dangerous to trust in the hands of ordinary people. Now that, my friend, is what scares me – that people with opinions like that will spread them to weak-willed individuals who haven’t really thought through the consequences. I won’t argue for taking that right away, though, despite the dangers. That would be even more scary than you are.
Yes, some people in a free society are always going to abuse those freedoms. Criminals are going to hide behind the 4th amendment to conceal the evidence of their crimes. People who commit horrific acts are going to hire excellent defense attorneys who can convince a jury that doubt exists. And, yes, some people are going to use guns to commit murders.
Freedom is scary, but lack of freedom is scarier.
The pardon power can enable criminals to avoiud punishment for crimes, just like the 4th Amendment, 5th Amendment, 6th Amendment, 7th Amendment, and 8th Amendments.
I would rather have an unrestrained pardon power than to make it impossible for someone outside the judiciary to free someone wrongly convicted.
Actually it occurs to me that a pardoned person could still invoke the Fifth amendment right not to incriminate him or her self. If he or she lies under oath, he or she can be prosecuted for that action.
Since they got preemptive pardons for acts they might have committed, perhaps they can preemptively invoke the Fifth Amendment for lies they move be about to utter.
Now, I would certainly like to hear someone explain that reasoning to a Congressional panel. It would be appointment TV.
Actually it occurs to me that a pardoned person could still invoke the Fifth amendment right not to incriminate him or her self. If he or she lies under oath, he or she can be prosecuted for that action.
Since they got preemptive pardons for acts they might have committed, perhaps they can preemptively invoke the Fifth Amendment for lies they move be about to utter.
Now, I would certainly like to hear someone explain that reasoning to a Congressional panel. It would be appointment TV.
The political expedient response of President Trump should be to pardon all those who where involved in the events of January 6, 2020. Vice President Jack Vance left open the possibility of not pardoning all of the J-sixers a couple a weeks ago, but that should be off the table now since the outgoing President is unilaterally clearing the slate of only the wrongdoers of his own political persuasion. (Given Biden’s latest pardons I do not think that Trump’s constituency would stand for a scenario with any J-sixers not being pardoned.) I would have had more respect for Biden if he had pardoned all the J-sixers himself; that would have appeared statesmanlike. Apparently he could not bring himself to do that as the Democrats want to keep J6 as a cudgel to hit the Republicans as the Pam Bondi confirmation hearings demonstrated.
There are a couple of silver linings here: a) if there are congressional hearings about J6 and the handling of the pandemic Cheney, Fauci et all cannot hide behind the 5th amendment b) it gives Trump the opportunity to pardon all J-sixers and declare that we should put J6 and the 2020 election behind us; if the Democrats want to keep bringing it up it would only prove their own smallness c) it prevents Trump from responding with legal warfare against political opponents, feeding into a narrative of vindictiveness. My estimate is that the President Trump would benefit much more from appearing magnanimous, while making sure that political enemies who may have broken the law are out of power, and not in a position to sabotage his administration.
The alternative is worse.
See the Innocence Project for details.
This from the guy who pursued Trump relentlessly in four different Soviet style persecutions:
“I believe in the rule of law, and I am optimistic that the strength of our legal institutions will ultimately prevail over politics. But baseless and politically motivated investigations wreak havoc on the lives, safety, and financial security of targeted individuals and their families. Even when individuals have done nothing wrong and will ultimately be exonerated, the mere fact of being investigated or prosecuted can irreparably damage their reputations and finance,” Biden said.
Kiss my ass, Joe.
I hope you’re soon roasting in Hell next to your old buddy Harry Reid. Thank God the last four years are over.
I think Joe’s eligible to be declared a Fick.
Biden and his team all still think he’ll be back in the Capitol soon.
Joe is the only one who hasn’t realized it will be in a flag-drapped casket.
While I’m not a lawyer, Just from my understanding of the constitution, I remain unconvinced that these preemptive pardons are constitutionally legal, and I expect this issue will eventually get to the SCOTUS.
I suppose it would be too much to hope that Hunter or some of the other Biden Crime Family miscreants have filed state income tax returns in some red state?
These pardons are just the icing on the cake. Every time I hear about a ‘Biden’ action after the election, it seems like he is a bitter ex-spouse destroying the joint property before it can be distributed. From negotiating 5-year employment deals with federal employees (to be president for a second term) to permanently forbidding oil extraction from the Gulf of Mexico, they all seem bent on damaging the US economy and harming its people. You may say that Biden loves this country, but I am not convinced the people acting in his name are. If Mike Johnson is telling the truth, Biden has been unaware of what his executive orders actually are doing and he is not in favor of the orders he has signed.