It makes no sense to conclude that the Founders wanted to allow the President to dispense pardons to influence testimony. But the Supreme Court found a way, and Trump exploited the gift.
Rudy Giuliani: No one tried to be more helpful to Donald Trump than Rudy Giuliani. He was Trump’s attorney, emissary to Ukraine and teammate in overturning the 2020 presidential election. Unfortunately, though, Trump can’t pardon him from his two indictments (because they’re for state crimes and presidents can pardon only for federal crimes). One was in Georgia for election fraud and the other in Arizona for pressuring state legislators and the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors to change the outcome of Arizona’s election by encouraging the losing Republican electors to vote for Trump. But he could have given him money to help pay his enormous debts. But he didn’t.
Giuliani just had to surrender his Mercedes-Benz, wrist watches and a ring on account of a $148 million judgement won by two Georgia election workers for defamation. It won’t make a dent. $148 million is just the tip of the iceberg of Giuliani’s woes. He also had his radio show, which paid him $400,000 annually canceled because of his 2020 election lies. Pardons won’t work there either.
Giuliani made a pilgrimage to Mar-a-Lago to beg Trump to help pay his debts and for mounting legal liabilities. Although Trump arranged a payment of $340,000 through his PAC and a $100,000 a plate dinner at Mar-a-Lago that was expected to yield $1 million, none of it was Trump’s own money and neither would make a dent. Here comes the bus.
Shamefully, the Supreme Court overturned existing law and ignored legal experts and gave presidents permission to dispense pardons in exchange for bribes. Trump went wild with pardons for testimony and stone-walling.
Paul Manafort, Trump’s campaign chairman who sought Russian meddling to flip the 2020 election in favor of Trump, was sentenced to more than seven years in prison for federal crimes in two criminal cases brought by Special Counsel Mueller. He also pleaded guilty to 10 other criminal charges and agreed to cooperate with the Mueller investigation, but violated his plea agreement by lying about his Russian contacts before and after the 2016 election all in order to protect Trump. He was rewarded with a pardon.
Rick Gates, a Trump campaign senior official, was sentenced to three years of probation and 45 days in jail after testifying that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to help Trump win the 2016 election. Although Trump could have pardon him he didn’t. Unlike Manafort, who was pardoned for lying to protect Trump, Gates was left to serve his sentence. Here comes another bus.
Roger Stone, Trump’s friend and political adviser for decades, was sentenced to three years and four months in prison for impeding a Congressional investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. According to the judge, “He was prosecuted for covering up for the president.” Just like Trump-protector Manafort, Trump pardoned Stone and commuted his sentence on seven felonies.
Michael Flynn, Trump’s National Security Adviser protected Trump
by making false statements about Flynn’s conversations with Russia’s ambassador regarding Russian meddling in the 2016 election. Flynn also sat before a special grand jury investigating whether President Trump illegally tried to influence the 2020 election in Georgia by asking President Zelensky to investigate his opponent, Joe Biden, in exchange for weapons to fight the Russian invasion. There he repeatedly invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Although he pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with the Russians, he tried to change his plea to not guilty, and Attorney General William Barr moved to dismiss the charges. A federal judge refused, but it all became moot after Trump pardoned him for his stone-walling and false testimony during the Russian meddling investigation.
It defies common sense to think that the Founders of the Constitution intended the President to dispense bribes in exchange for testimony or for refusing to testify. But somehow the Supreme Court found a way even though Legal experts have warned that the pardon power is constrained by laws of Congress prohibiting bribery and obstructionof justice, and the president may not issue a pardon in exchange for a bribe. Nor may he issue a pardon to influence or tamper with a witness’s testimony.
