Worth Noting: Turley's Take On The Pardons
Nothing new, but some feel good observations:
Jonathan Turley @JonathanTurley
President Biden has pardoned Dr. Fauci, General Milley and members of the House Jan. 6 committee and their staff. With his declaration that the Equal Rights Amendment is suddenly part of the Constitution, it is the latest use of presidential powers as a type of performative art.
In reality, these pardons will not absolutely protect these individuals from being subpoenaed to give new testimony on prior claims. Lying in such interviews or hearings would constitute new criminal acts.
In the case of Fauci, some members such as Sen. Paul have suggested that he lied under oath repeatedly about his knowledge of gain-to-function work at the Wuhan lab. If called again, he would have to repeat or disavow the earlier testimony.
What Turley is suggesting here is that if Fauci repeats his earlier testimony, he would be subject to prosecution for perjury if the government can prove the case. New testimony would not be covered by the pardon. To take advantage of the pardon he’d need to admit that he lied earlier. That could prove problematic in civil cases or, conceivably, even in forfeiture proceedings.
Those who followed the Hunter scandal may enjoy reading Turley on that. Please note—this article is from October 19, 2021. The vanishing scandal act endured up to today:
This week marked the anniversary of one of the greatest political tricks in history: the disappearance of Hunter Biden scandal. New emails were released that added new details to what was a raw influence peddling operation that netted millions from foreign sources. A new tranche of emails connecting President Joe Biden to key accounts proves just how this political sleight of hand was worthy of Houdini. After all, Houdini only made an elephant disappear. The Bidens made the equivalent to an entire circus disappear in front of an audience of millions.
What an indictment of the MSM! And so Turley goes on:
Just minutes before leaving office, President Biden completed his race to the bottom of government ethics. He issued pardons for additional family members, including The pardon applies to James Biden, Sara Jones Biden, Valerie Biden Owens, John Owens, and Francis Biden.
In taking this step, Biden secured a place in infamy to attempt to blunt any further investigation into one of the most corrupt political families in history.
Signing these pardons for his family just before the inauguration was clearly timed to blunt any media attention. Biden hardly had to worry. The media has long worked to deny and deflect the reality of the corruption scandal.
Turley expands on this in his article for The Hill. I quote his conclusion:
Biden, however, may have been too clever by half this time. In the final moments of his presidency, He broke into the open and exposed not just himself but his allies in the media. Reporters are now fully visible as willing dupes in one of the greatest corruption scandals in the history of this country.
In his pardon statement, Biden insisted that “the issuance of these pardons should not be mistaken as an acknowledgment that any individual engaged in any wrongdoing, nor should acceptance be misconstrued as an admission of guilt for any offense.” Of course, that is the very opposite of what most people will conclude. More importantly, the pardons will not end the threat to his family.
Figures such as James Biden have been accused of lying to Congress about the influence-peddling operation. He can still be subpoenaed and, if he lies, he can be charged with a new crime.
Indeed, after James Biden’s pardon, it will be argued that he has less of a basis to claim the right to remain silent about any alleged crimes that have been during the period for which the pardon applies. (He could argue that there is a danger of state charges, but that is less credible due to the running of statutes of limitation and other factors.)
The pardons, if anything, make such an investigation even more compelling for those who want answers to longstanding questions of corruption.
Biden sealed his legacy with a finality that escapes most presidents. While his diminished mental capacity will remain an issue for historians, his longstanding lack of ethics was conclusively established with these pardons. It was Biden’s final act of corruption.
Well stated. Especially that the the pardons make further investigation more compelling. Can we get some full disclosure re Ukraine? Who has the stomach for it? Will some enterprising lawyers bring civil suits?
If I read your previous post correctly, acceptance of a pardon expressly implies an admission of guilt for crimes committed. So I guess Biden still thinks that just because he says it, that makes it true and the law of the land. As Turley said, Biden may have been too clever by half and it couldn’t happen to a more deserving individual.
I know that it’s not a virtue to gloat over the misfortune of others, but after what has happened over the last 8 years, and particularly the last 4, I have to admit to a certain emotional satisfaction anticipating this whole grotty little scheme blowing up in all of these “unfairly persecuted” individuals collective faces!!
Barack Obama:”Never underestimate Joe’s ability to f**k things up!” BINGO
Acceptance of a pardon is an admission of guilt, most criminal convictions are a result of plea agreements, entered into under extreme duress upon the accused. Preemptive pardons seem very sketchy to my simple mind. Think about it, a President with a stroke of his pen can render someone guilty of an unnamed, uncharged offense, and at the same moment erase any criminal responsibility . . . facially ridiculous! Presidents are divine and godlike ???
A finding of guilt is a judicial act of a judge and/or jury, the executive prosecutes and punishes crimes, preemptive pardons are a blatant usurpation of power.