Much to say about yesterday’s pardons and commutations. Before getting to the updated chart, some general reflections.

Trump has upended the traditional criteria for clemency: https://t.co/HkOXJwY4G7. The traditional guiding principle: “a pardon is granted on the basis of the petitioner's demonstrated good conduct for a substantial period of time after conviction and service of sentence.”
Request for pardon presumptively must wait 5 years after conviction or release. Traditional criteria include superlative post-conviction conduct & character; acceptance of responsibility & remorse; and hesitation to pardon serious offenses (violent crime, white collar fraud, etc)
V few of Trump’s clemency decisions meet these criteria. His pardons usually based on insider contacts, & are for v serious crimes that often dont satisfy 5-year rule, usually for people who do not express remorse. They almost always serve Trump’s personal or political interests.
As I told WP: “Other presidents have occasionally issued abusive, self-serving pardons based on insider connections. Almost all of Trump’s pardons fit that pattern. What other presidents did exceptionally, Trump does as a matter of course.” https://t.co/dF2NaHGK9S
The pardon power perfectly marries Trump’s privatization of the presidency to serve his personal interests with his love of exercising hard unilateral presidential powers in ways that make his enemies heads explode.
It’s the pardon power unleased to serve private gratification, score-settling, and eye-poking. And more transactional pardons are on the way. "Trump has told aides, advisers, allies, lawmakers and others to bring him names for consideration.” https://t.co/0JEubGK931.
Trump is stingy w/ pardon power even as he abuses it. He's granted a significantly smaller percentage of pardon requests than other presidents. https://t.co/yaJl9YHpaS He has issued new pardons since this chart, but nbr of requests also higher now. Trump is historical outlier
Now for updated chart in light of yesterday’s events. Some of these pardons were unusually tricky judgment calls based on incomplete and mixed evidence. We lay out the “evidence” in table below. Our best assessment of Trump’s pardons/commutations right now is as follows.
Total pardons/commutations by Trump: 94.

Breakdown:

1) Advance political agenda? 68/94
2) Personal Connection? 40/94
3) TV/TV Commentator? 13/94
4) Celebrity? 20/94

Personal or Political Connections (i.e. 1,2,3 or 4): 86/94 (91%)

https://t.co/gGHEUOuEGR
As best that we can tell (the data is obscure, we draw lots of inferences here), only 7/94 of Trump's pardons/commutations were recommended by the DOJ Pardon Attorney.

Thanks as always to @matthew_gluck for his work on the chart.

Let us know if we got anything wrong, please.

More from Law

There is a now-relevant parallel here to the difference here between matters before a judge & matters before a jury. Judges are far more reluctant to strike testimony or evidence if they are the only recipients of it, with the theory being that they are really smart about ...


law stuff & will know what they can & can't consider. For instance, there is a long-held rule that a fact witness can't make legal arguments, only a lawyer. So what will happen in a motion for summary judgment, where the entire proceeding is on paper, will play out like this:

1) Defendant makes a motion for summary judgment. It includes a sworn declaration from some fact witness.

2) The declaration includes all sorts of legal arguments about why the defendant should win. Often the declaration includes arguments the brief didn't even make.

Defendants (especially DOJ-represented ones) often do this to get around the word or page-limits placed on briefs.

3) Plaintiff moves to strike the declaration for its inclusion of inadmissible legal arguments.

4) Judge denies the motion to strike, on the grounds that a ...

judge is a sophisticated consumer of evidence & can choose what to consider & what to ignore, unlike a jury.

The legal fiction behind this impeachment exception is that Senators are also smart enough to know what to listen to & what to ignore. Now, that may not be ACCURATE, ...

You May Also Like

**Thread on Bravery of Sikhs**
(I am forced to do this due to continuous hounding of Sikh Extremists since yesterday)

Rani Jindan Kaur, wife of Maharaja Ranjit Singh had illegitimate relations with Lal Singh (PM of Ranjit Singh). Along with Lal Singh, she attacked Jammu, burnt - https://t.co/EfjAq59AyI


Hindu villages of Jasrota, caused rebellion in Jammu, attacked Kishtwar.

Ancestors of Raja Ranjit Singh, The Sansi Tribe used to give daughters as concubines to Jahangir.


The Ludhiana Political Agency (Later NW Fronties Prov) was formed by less than 4000 British soldiers who advanced from Delhi and reached Ludhiana, receiving submissions of all sikh chiefs along the way. The submission of the troops of Raja of Lahore (Ranjit Singh) at Ambala.

Dabistan a contemporary book on Sikh History tells us that Guru Hargobind broke Naina devi Idol Same source describes Guru Hargobind serving a eunuch
YarKhan. (ref was proudly shared by a sikh on twitter)
Gobind Singh followed Bahadur Shah to Deccan to fight for him.


In Zafarnama, Guru Gobind Singh states that the reason he was in conflict with the Hill Rajas was that while they were worshiping idols, while he was an idol-breaker.

And idiot Hindus place him along Maharana, Prithviraj and Shivaji as saviours of Dharma.