The Left has an infinite capacity to project its sins upon others to paint themselves as the “real” victim. Nowhere is this more evident and instructive than in the last rounds of “preemptive” presidential pardons issued by exiting president Joe Biden. One can almost hear the anile sock puppet-in-chief whistling along to the Rolling Stones as his pen feebly scrawled his sullied name across the prophylactic papers: Just as every cop is a criminal, and all the sinners saints….
The initial wave of eleventh-hour preemptive pardons included General Mark Milley, Dr. Anthony Fauci, and current and former U.S. Representatives who served on the House January 6th committee, including Chair Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), Adam Kinzinger, Liz Cheney, and U.S. Capitol and D.C. Metropolitan police who testified at the hearings.
In issuing this set of preemptive pardons, Mr. Biden employed a tired trope to excuse his unconscionable abuse of power: Trump made me do it: “I believe in the rule of law, and I am optimistic that the strength of our legal institutions will ultimately prevail over politics. But these are exceptional circumstances, and I cannot in good conscience do nothing.”
Offering no evidence that he has a conscience, and ignoring the evidence that his doing something has invariably made things worse than if he had done nothing, Mr. Biden nonetheless proceeded to portray the recipients of his pardons as “dedicated, selfless public servants” who, despite their heroic deeds in service of our democracy, have faced “ongoing threats and intimidation for faithfully discharging their duties… In certain cases, some have even been threatened with criminal prosecutions.”
Therefore, assuming the role of the omnipotent arbiter of justice, Mr. Biden pardoned these individuals who are beyond reproach for… What? Nothing. Mr. Biden issued these preemptive pardons not because of something these individuals may have done. He is pardoning them to protect them from the presumptive sins of Donald Trump.
“These public servants have served our nation with honor and distinction and do not deserve to be the targets of unjustified and politically motivated prosecutions,” Mr. Biden proclaimed to the heavens as he rendered these individuals above the law.
Yet, though finished, Mr. Biden wasn’t thorough. Of a piece with his earlier pardon of his son, Hunter, Mr. Biden then issued a final wave of eleventh-hour and fifty-nine minute preemptive pardons for his family members—his brother James Biden; Sara Jones Biden, his sister-in-law; his sister, Valerie Biden Owens; John T. Owens, his brother-in-law; and Francis Biden, Biden’s other brother.”
Extending the periods of the preemptive “blanket pardons” back to January 1, 2014, as he had done with the previous ones, Mr. Biden also employed the same bogus tropes: blame Trump, project, and play the victim: “My family has been subjected to unrelenting attacks and threats, motivated solely by a desire to hurt me—the worst kind of partisan politics. Unfortunately, I have no reason to believe these attacks will end.”
This is despite the fact his pardoned family members are absolutely, positively, unequivocally, and inarguably innocent of everything, as Mr. Biden once again maintained by arguing the granting and the accepting of said pardons are not an acknowledgment of wrongdoing or an admission of guilt.
That is despite the fact Mr. Biden’s Department of Justice informed “Jan 6 defendants in December, telling them that acceptance of a presidential pardon is ‘a confession of guilt’ for their alleged crimes.” Evidently, Mr. Biden didn’t wish to inform his own justice department of his decision and view of such pardons because it may tip his hand on these family pardons prior to their issuance.
After all, at the end of the first Trump administration, Democrats scrambled over themselves to self-righteously denounce the possibility of preemptive pardons. Consider this representative example, as Harold Hutchinson recounted for the Daily Caller News Foundation:
Former federal prosecutor Andrew Weissmann echoed similar sentiments in an appearance with MSNBC host Brian Williams.
“Is there an innocent explanation for someone to seek preemptive pardons for family members? Would you do that if you knew you were innocent and just worried about outside forces?” Williams asked.
“The answer to that is going to be no,” Weissmann responded. “If you haven’t done anything wrong, you sit there and go, ‘what do you need a preemptive pardon for?’”
It is fitting Mr. Weissman should conclude our review of Mr. Biden’s preemptive pardons. He was one of the integral players in former FBI Director Robert Mueller’s special counsel criminal probe into Russian interference and its possible collusion with the Trump campaign during the 2016 election. It was the apex of the weaponization of the police and surveillance powers of the federal government against one’s political opponents, including a duly elected and serving president of the United States.
The irony is biting and instructive regarding Mr. Biden’s preemptive pardons. What Mr. Biden has done is to turn presidential pardons into talking points: those he pardoned—and by extension himself—are the real victims of government weaponization and violent MAGA extremists, and anyone who disagrees is a pawn of the fascist, wannabe dictator Donald Trump.
But what else could Mr. Biden do but once more point his fickle finger of blame and project? Having allegedly presided over a weaponized administrative state and a familial influence-peddling operation, Mr. Biden is bent upon not letting the cell door hit his ass on his way out of public office. Consequently, he is aiming to insulate himself, his family, and those who may have committed crimes and/or abused their power within the federal government from accountability.
So doing, Mr. Biden has further exacerbated the public cynicism regarding our public servants and undermined the rule of law. During the ongoing legal debate—including that between Mr. Biden and his own Justice Department—regarding the implications of a preemptive pardon, the bedrock judicial principle of “innocent until proven guilty” is being eroded by the public perception that only those who need a pardon accept.
The only silver lining is that, despite all his efforts to blame President Trump for having to issue these preemptive pardons, Mr. Biden is tacitly conceding he has no angst that the incoming administration will emulate his own by abusing its powers to persecute its political opponents. Because if Mr. Biden did, he would never have established the precedent of preemptive presidential pardons that can be used against those prosecutors who may be accused of abusing their power to investigate him for criminal corruption. Then again, truth is an absolute defense—for the prosecutors.
Ultimately, by turning presidential pardons into talking points, the venal Mr. Biden has provided his administration’s historical epitaph and, quite possibly, his family’s motto—one, as is his wont, aptly plagiarized from a sleeveless “Me Decade” tank top: “Do unto others then split!”
***
An American Greatness contributor, the Hon. Thaddeus G. McCotter (M.C., Ret.) served Michigan’s 11th Congressional district from 2003-2012, and served as Chair of the Republican House Policy Committee. Not a lobbyist, he is a frequent public speaker and moderator for public policy seminars; and a Monday co-host of the “John Batchelor Radio Show,” among sundry media appearances.
Biden’s pardons for assorted villainous bit players in his administration provided more confirmation for people who knew it was an unmitigated disaster. For true-believing Democrats, his pardons should have been their ‘Luke, I am your father’ moment. But there’s no guarantee it was after the last four years (eight if you’re inclined to pile on in complete fairness).
One more time: These “preemptive pardons,” as I believe Judge McCotter must know, are not pardons, any more than “social justice” has anything to do with justice. They are grants of immunity and, the president having no such power, they are illegitimate and should be so challenged. Every criminal law practitioner in the country, federal, state, and local, knows the difference. If you don’t accept the standard definition from Black’s, take it from James Wilson, the most frequent speaker at the Constitutional Convention and later, an associate justice of the Supreme Court. Pardons are given to people “after they have been apprehended, tried, convicted, and condemned.” It’s that simple.
A common response is that the presidential pardon power has somehow become “absolute.” That is incorrect. The President cannot pardon for civil liability, for example. Because that is not what is meant by a ‘pardon.’ Pardons are given to relieve someone of the consequences of committing “Offenses against the United States.” (U.S. Constitution) Also, I think everyone would agree that the President cannot say that someone is pardoned for anything they will do in the future. Why not? Again, because that is immunizing, not pardoning. The Constitution gives the President the power to pardon, not to grant immunity.
That is the basis upon which these acts should be legally challenged. And if this challenge fails, the pardon power should be amended or, better yet, repealed. We no longer need for modern presidents to have this atavistic power which is abused probably a thousand times for every time it’s exercised legitimately. It is a relic from the era of monarchies. Our president is not a monarch.