Journalist Matt Taibbi expressed in a recent interview that these pardons represent a significant error. He stated, “The reality is that these pardons have made it considerably easier for us to uncover the truth.” He elaborated that once a pardon is issued, the individual loses the ability to plead the Fifth Amendment. If summoned before a grand jury or a congressional committee, they are compelled to provide testimony without the protection against self-incrimination.
Taibbi further noted, “This situation is particularly intriguing because I have spoken with criminal defense attorneys and both former and current Senate investigators, and they all share a common perspective. It seems illogical to grant a pardon if the intent is to conceal information; the only rationale for doing so would be if serious crimes are involved.”
He added, “This raises a red flag for us. When we observe someone receiving a pardon, we question the motivation behind it, suspecting that there may be something significantly troubling at play. It could either be a blunder that inadvertently facilitates investigations or indicate undisclosed matters of interest.” Taibbi’s views align with the sentiment that the preemptive pardons for Fauci, Cheney, and members of Biden’s family may not offer complete immunity from future legal challenges.
Federal litigation attorney Jesse Binnall previously emphasized that President Biden’s pardons do not protect individuals from repercussions if they provide false testimony under oath, particularly if they are subpoenaed by the GOP-controlled Congress. He suggested that these pardons could be beneficial for those advocating for prosecution of the two individuals involved.
Binnall stated on X, “The pardons are indeed positive news. Those who have received pardons cannot invoke the 5th Amendment to decline to testify in civil, criminal, or congressional proceedings.” He further expressed a candid opinion, noting, “Let’s be realistic. Many of these reprehensible individuals would likely face charges in Washington, DC, which tends to avoid convicting partisan leftists.”
Other users on X proposed a potential remedy for the perceived liberal bias in Washington, DC, including retired U.S. Army officer, lawyer, and author Kurt Schlichter. He remarked, “It is crucial that depositions and actual testimonies occur outside of Washington DC. The venue is biased and unlikely to convict Democrats for perjury. Therefore, we should take this matter elsewhere.”
Among those who received pardons on Sunday night were former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman and Army General Mark Milley, who had previously criticized Trump during his first term, along with all members of the January 6 committee.
While signing executive orders in the Oval Office last month, Trump specifically commented on Biden’s pardon of Cheney. He stated, “I intended to discuss the actions Joe took today regarding the pardons of individuals who were very guilty of serious crimes, such as the unselect committee of political figures,” referring to the January 6 panel.
“Why are we doing this? Why are we assisting someone like Milley? Why are we aiding Liz Cheney?” he questioned. “Liz Cheney is a disaster. She’s a crying lunatic, constantly crying.”
