Days after President Joe Biden pardoned his son Hunter for a 10-year period dating back to his involvement with Burisma, senior White House aides are reportedly locked in a contentious debate over a potential unprecedented move: issuing preemptive pardons to a wide range of current and former public officials who could find themselves under intense scrutiny, and prosecution, after Donald Trump takes office, Politico reports.
Among those discussed for potential pardons are high-profile figures like Senator-elect Adam Schiff (D-CA), former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY), and Dr. Anthony Fauci, the former head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
Their justification is that Trump will seek retribution, with their concerns growing more urgent following Trump’s announcement last weekend appointing Kash Patel as FBI director. Patel, a staunch ally of Trump, has vowed to pursue the former president’s critics, heightening concerns among Biden aides about possible investigations or indictments against officials who have opposed Trump in the past.
Biden aides are deeply divided, according to the report. On one hand, granting preemptive pardons could provide a shield against Trump’s promised "revenge tour" but might also create the appearance of impropriety, effectively validating Trump’s accusations of corruption. Additionally, those offered pardons might refuse them, citing innocence or the perception of guilt that could accompany a pardon.
Meanwhile, were there any takers on this?
Because...
Historical Precedent and Political Risk
End-of-administration pardons are always politically fraught, but the stakes in this case are uniquely high. Biden’s aides have privately discussed the precedent set by President Gerald Ford’s 1974 preemptive pardon of Richard Nixon, which spared the nation further division after Watergate. Democrats like Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) have invoked that example, suggesting that pardons might be necessary to heal a polarized nation and protect officials from undue political persecution.
"If it’s clear by January 19 that [revenge] is his intention, then I would recommend to President Biden that he provide those preemptive pardons to people, because that’s really what our country is going to need next year,” Markey said in a recent interview.
Others are far less supportive. Schiff, who chaired the House Intelligence Committee during Trump’s first impeachment, has been outspoken in his opposition. "I would urge the president not to do that," he said, adding "I think it would seem defensive and unnecessary."
Hunter Biden’s Pardon and the Broader Clemency Debate
Biden’s recent pardon of his son, Hunter Biden, has further complicated the White House’s deliberations. Hunter’s sweeping 11-year pardon drew criticism from many within the Democratic Party and intensified pressure on Biden to extend clemency to others.
House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) invoked Hunter Biden’s pardon this week in calling on the president to, on a case-by-case basis, spare “the working-class Americans in the federal prison system whose lives have been ruined by unjustly aggressive prosecutions for nonviolent offenses.” -Politico
Trump has repeatedly vowed to go after those he views as part of the Deep State. His disdain for figures like Cheney and Fauci is well-documented, with Trump even calling for members of the Jan. 6 committee to face jail time.
The decision to issue preemptive pardons would undoubtedly solidify Biden's status as one of the worst presidents in US history. On one side lies the risk of fueling Trump’s narrative of impropriety; on the other, the prospect of leaving key public servants exposed to investigations that are completely warranted.