Report: Preemptive Pardons of Fauci, Cheney, and Others Under Serious Consideration by Biden White House
“The deliberations touch on pardoning those currently in office, elected and appointed, as well as former officials who’ve angered Trump and his loyalists.”
Though it wasn’t entirely unexpected, Joe Biden’s 11th-hour decision to give his son, convicted felon Hunter Biden, a “full and unconditional” pardon has sent shockwaves through Washington, D.C., with some Democrats and press figures criticizing the move while others seem fine with President Rule of Law doing the exact opposite of what he pledged not to do in interfering in his son’s cases.
But anyone including Republicans who thought Biden invoking the Democrat Privilege card as it related to Hunter Biden was about as despicable as it could get is likely to be even more outraged after learning what the Biden White House’s next move on the pardons front may be:
Biden’s aides are deeply concerned about a range of current and former officials who could find themselves facing inquiries and even indictments, a sense of alarm which has only accelerated since Trump last weekend announced the appointment of Kash Patel to lead the FBI. Patel has publicly vowed to pursue Trump’s critics.
The White House officials, however, are carefully weighing the extraordinary step of handing out blanket pardons to those who’ve committed no crimes, both because it could suggest impropriety, only fueling Trump’s criticisms, and because those offered preemptive pardons may reject them.
The deliberations touch on pardoning those currently in office, elected and appointed, as well as former officials who’ve angered Trump and his loyalists.
Among the names reportedly being discussed for preemptive pardons are Dr. Anthony Fauci, former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY), and Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), who will be headed to the Senate next year.
The idea may be gaining steam thanks in part to public statements made by elected Democrats on the issue, with Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) being one of the more high-profile Democrats advocating for blanket pardons ahead of President-Elect Trump’s inauguration:
“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 on WGBH last week.
“I think that without question, Trump is going to try to act in a dictatorial way, in a fascistic way, in a revengeful [way his] first year … towards individuals who he believes harmed him,” Markey also said in his Boston Public Radio interview.
Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-PA) is another on board with the idea:
"If we’re serious about stopping Trump’s authoritarian ambitions, we need to act decisively and use every tool at our disposal…"
Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-PA) calls for President Biden to issue blanket pardon for those "targeted by Trump's Enemies List" pic.twitter.com/TiElKnHMQ4
— Scott MacFarlane (@MacFarlaneNews) December 4, 2024
Some media figures are advocating for Biden to do this as well:
Washington Post columnist calls for Joe Biden to issue blanket pardons to various categories of people to 'protect them from Trump and Kash Patel':
Jen Rubin: "Trump has sort of broken the mold once again. And so Biden needs to break the mold once again.
Although the vast, vast… pic.twitter.com/WVQiHLdhlz— Eric Abbenante (@EricAbbenante) December 4, 2024
MSDBC is now calling for Joe Biden to issue “PREEMPTIVE PARDONS” for himself, saying he will need a pardon. MSDNC also said Biden should pardon Jack Smith and his associates, because they know they’re in some deep crap. This is what panic looks like. pic.twitter.com/kXQj6g7PTz
— PogiBatch2 (@PogiBatch2) December 2, 2024
Needless to say, conservatives were not amused and had some questions:
The Biden White House is apparently now talking about giving pre-emptive pardons to Dr. Fauci, Adam Schiff, and Liz Cheney.
Why would all of those people need to be preemptively pardoned? 🤔 pic.twitter.com/aJYhozCwrz
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) December 4, 2024
Crimes against humanity https://t.co/waR04REt6F
— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) December 4, 2024
The fact that the Biden administration is even considering a “preemptive pardon” for people like Fauci just tells you how deep the rot is within Washington.
— Eric (@The_OtherET) December 4, 2024
When is Biden’s big announcement For Obama’s preemptive Pardon.
— Randy Quaid (@RandyRRQuaid) December 4, 2024
Now, if Biden wants to go total scorched earth and burn “norms” to the ground on the way out the door, he’ll proceed with the preemptive pardons that are allegedly on the table. On the other hand, Sen. Joe Manchin (I-WV) was on the right track with this idea:
Sen. Joe Manchin (I-W.Va.) called on President Biden to pardon President-elect Donald Trump Monday — for the sake of balance — a day after the commander in chief issued one to his troubled son, Hunter Biden.
“I am just saying, wipe them out,” Manchin, a former Democrat who is retiring from the upper chamber at the end of the year, told CNN.
“Why don’t you go ahead and pardon Donald Trump for all his charges and make it, you know, it would have gone down a lot more balanced, if you will,” the senator added.
Dems criticize Joe Biden over pardoning his son.
Joe Manchin says it makes Biden’s legacy “more difficult” and says Biden should have also pardoned Trump to be more balanced.
“Wipe them all out,” he told me pic.twitter.com/kbXHW4i6mO— Manu Raju (@mkraju) December 2, 2024
It’s an idea that has some support from Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC), to whom Biden is very beholden for multiple political favors including turning around his 2020 presidential campaign:
Rep. James E. Clyburn (D-S.C.) signaled he would support President Biden if he were to offer clemency to President-elect Trump in his legal cases, days after Washington was rattled by the president’s pardoning of his son Hunter Biden.
“Remember that Trump has not been convicted of anything in the federal realm,” Clyburn told CNN’s “Laura Coates Live” on Tuesday, specifically highlighting the president-elect’s New York hush money case. “Those convictions are state convictions.”
“So, I’m not talking about state here, I’m talking about things that could impede our federal government,” he continued, referencing outgoing Sen. Joe Manchin’s (I-W.Va.) similar sentiment earlier this week, when he too called for the president to pardon Trump.
“And so, I believe that Manchin may be on to something there,” the South Carolina Democrat added.
Oh my. Can you imagine? I don’t see it happening, but wouldn’t it be something for Biden, despite the bad blood between him and Trump, to go on a mini-revenge tour against the Democrats who turned against him in July by essentially wiping Trump’s slate clean?
In any event, Biden reportedly “has not been brought into the broader pardon discussions yet,”, so it will be very interesting to see how – and if – all of this ultimately shakes out.
As always, stay tuned.
— Stacey Matthews has also written under the pseudonym “Sister Toldjah” and can be reached via Twitter. —
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Dear Democrats,
No.
Sincerely yours.
America.
So a pardon is defined as applying to a specific offense already committed. Blanket and preemptive pardons are fiction and should go to SCOTUS.
What would Dems say on Jan 21st if Trump were to issue a preemptive pardon for something like Schiff’s assassination?
Wrong. Blanket pardons are perfectly valid. The one Hunter Biden got was deliberately patterned, almost word for word, after the one Ford gave Nixon.
And nobody is suggesting a pardon for offenses not yet committed. By raising that red herring you discredit anything you have to say .
I’m certain they will do this. And the way to spin it is that everyone who was active in the administration and recieved a Biden parden is obviously guilty of something – otherwise there would have been no reason to pardon them.
The MSM spin will be that these are all good, dedicated public servants and Biden needs to pardon them to protect them from Trump wasting millions of $$$ of taxpayer money trying to lawfare them to get revenge.
Over the last several years, the MSM and Deep State have constantly told us “…if you haven’t done anything wrong, you shouldn’t object to being investigated, and endlessly harassed by government officials.”
But the government officials and the MSM will go to any extremes to prevent us from even asking any questions. They certainly don’t have anything to hide………
Why would you need a pardon for a crime you did not commit?
The truth of the matter is that only peons like you and me are expected to follow the laws that are passed by this government.
The entire bunch of them should be serving long, long sentences in federal prisons for what they’ve done, starting with Joe Biden.
And just a footnote that my dog is smarter than Senator Markey.
My dog died seven years ago.
Your dog certainly has better cognitive brain function.
I’m revealing my ignorance, but how is it possible to pardon someone, preemptively or not, who hasn’t been convicted of a crime?
.
Done all the time. Confederates were pardoned en masse after the Civil War. Draft dodgers were pardoned after the Vietnam War.
Both true, but they did commit crimes: the Confederate soldiers took up arms against the Nation, and the VN era draft dodgers evaded the draft, a crime. Maybe each and every one was not named with their illegal activity specified, but they did break the law. For example, all those who cross our border outside the provisions for doing that commit a crime, even if we don’t know their name or exactly when they did it
That they committed crimes is irrelevant. All of the people we’re discussing have either committed crimes, or are worried that they’ll be falsely charged with having committed crimes.
The question was about pardoning someone without a conviction and Petrushka correctly answered that it is done all the time, and is absolutely standard procedure and has been for centuries. There is nothing eyebrow-raising about it.
Done all the time.
________________
a couple of absurd examples by comparison–without delving into the war itself (at least not in this venue), you refer to a singular event in our nation’s history–extraordinary circumstances by any measure–and more than a hundred and fifty years ago
regards the pardons for ” draft dodgers ” have met / known many of them–their actions in no way harmed anyone–civil disobedience in action is one perspective
fjb and his cohorts deliberately attempted ( and, in several cases, acted ) to undermine the authority and lawful work of a sitting president and ( via direct action ) disregarded / disobeyed both scotus and the tenets of our constitution
The examples are not at all absurd. They are directly on point, and they are not the only ones either.
The question was how can someone be pardoned without having first been convicted, and the answer is that this is completely normal and unquestioned. If it were not then the pardons Petrushka mentioned could not have happened. There is no provision for “extraordinary circumstances”. Either a pardon is valid or it is not.
Blanket pardons to unnamed people, for crimes they haven’t even been charged with let alone convicted of, go all the way back to the Washington administration.
Oh, and FJB has never disobeyed SCOTUS. Anyone claiming he has is a liar.
I believe the pardon is only for acts which occurred before the pardon. For example, if Hunter were to go out and rob a bank tomorrow, that would not be covered by the current pardon. A new pardon would have to be given.
Suppose Fauci lied to Congress while under oath. He has not been charged with a crime. If Biden pardons him, he could not be charged with that offense after Trump takes office.
To answer your question, the pardon relates to the alleged act, not to a criminal indictment.
Of course it is. Whoever thought otherwise???? If an offense hasn’t happened yet then there’s nothing to pardon; when it does happen the pardon has already happened, so it’s not covered.
See Ford’s pardon of Nixon.
am sure there is some sort of legal legerdemain at work here but how is it possible to preemptively / presumptively pardon ANYONE ?
I’m not sure that the Minority Report will allow a pardon for a pre-crime.
I don’t understand your question. Why on earth would it not be possible to preemptively pardon someone so no charges can be brought against them? That’s been part of our legal system since the very beginning of the republic, and for centuries before that under the common law. It has never been necessary for someone to be charged, let alone convicted, before being pardoned.
the extraordinary step of handing out blanket pardons to those who’ve committed no crimes,
???
I see a profound difference between committing a crime and being charged. Many people firmly believe many crimes were not only committed, but sanctioned.
Hard to imagine what a more obvious admission of guilt would be other than this. It’s obviously an admission of guilt.
It’s a Cover Your Ass moment for Biden. Anyone complicit in the lawfare against Trump and the peaceful protesters who were denied their constitutional rights is getting a blanket pardon.
If Fauxchi gets a pardon, every state AG should bring state charges against him for his participation in the death of millions of Americans. Dr Mengele-Fauxchi needs to be imprisoned.
Sorry, fat fingers strike again.
It could be the next Babylon Bee headline: Biden gives a blanket pardon for the period of Jan 2014 – Jan 2024 to all of America that did not vote R in any election.
Just how many criminals is this White House shielding ?
Apparently, there’s not enough paper to cover the amount of pardons Biden is giving away.
I am sorry but that is a very deep question which involves quantum string theory and an answer is not available at this time.
Apparently all of them.
Under Serious Consideration by
Biden White HouseCabal running White HouseFIFY
They’ll just claim it HAD TO BE DONE because evil Trump!
And Dim voters will buy it.
I wonder what’s the going price for a pardon by the head of the Biden crime family? 1 Hunter painting?
They’ll just claim it HAD TO BE DONE because evil Trump!
______________________________________________________
once they’ve negotiated the ” price ” for each individual ” service “
The next smart move by Trump (and he’s made many since the election) —
— don’t say a word about these potential pardons.
Don’t say anything at all about the people on the “presumptive pardon” list, no matter how much they might deserve prosecution. No tweets, no pressers, no statements. Anyone asks, his response is “I’m much more concerned about getting the economy going and fixing the government.” Conservatives should follow his lead and also say nothing. Let this go all the way to January 19th and see if the Dems actually do it, in the face of a Jerry Seinfeld-like nothing.
Because if the Biden team does it at that point, it will wreck the Dems for the next couple of years. They’ll be doing it based on their own Jen Rubin-like hysteria. It will have no basis — why, did anyone hear Trump say anything about prosecutions? No? Of course not.
Play political jiu-jitsu on this one. Say nothing and let the Dems immolate themselves.
“The next smart move by Trump…”
Disagree profoundly. Never let the enemy get away with anything. Respond and make sure the American people are aware what the deep state marxists are doing here.
Ah, but Trump only has to remain silent until the Democrats show their hand. If at some point (let’s say, end of December, when they hope fewer people are watching) they decide to preemptively pardon ~ 500 people, THEN Trump can lead the charge. And people will listen, they’ll be outraged, and the Dems will have immolated themselves for a generation.
If Trump speaks before this happens, then the story shifts to him and not on the odious, perfidious scheme the Dems are hatching. The Dems (if they have an ounce of sense left) will say, “oh no, we aren’t going to do it, we were just, um, discussing it, yeah, that’s it”. And won’t pay.
No, no — if the Dems are stupid enough to consider pardoning all these people for the outrages of the past four years, I want them to pay for it. I want retribution that’s Biblical. Trump need merely keep his powder dry and wait to see the yellow-whites of their eyes…
This would usually be sound advice, and may be the soundest in this situation. But it still may not work. Joe is a lame duck president at the very end of his political career. He has no need for money, and does not have to worry about being hired onto a corporation’s board, publishing books, or going on the lecture circuit (and because of his cognitive state he’s unsuited to these activities). He’s rather be at the beach eating ice cream. He also hates many people in his own party and is unlikely to shy away from burning it down as he leaves office.
IOW, Joe will do what pleases Joe, for a wide variety of reasons, no matter the damage it causes. He has no reason to care.
Agreed. The incoming Trump Admin would be well advised to leave this topic of potential pardons alone. Don’t address or speculate instead simply state that Biden is President until inauguration day and as such can issue whatever pardons he wishes.
Doing this causes the d/prog surrogates to flail b/c they don’t have anything concrete to push back against. Let them twist in the wind. They are dreaming up a far more nightmarish scenario than anything that is likely to occur and are responsible for putting the question into public. After all why would they need a pardon for their actions…if their acts were legitimate?
Perhaps the people should take preemptive action against them?
Stop playing games with my government
I hope he does pardon them. Not because I think they are innocent but because it will rip the final scraps of the “we are pure as snow” mask off the left that they like to hide behind. Not even the media spin can help in this one.
Politically it will be a boon to Trump and he should pound on it for the next four years. Word should go out that anytime a pardoned person is mentioned the word pardon should be said, “Pardoned Senator Schiff.” “Pardoned Liz Cheney.”
It will help in the midterms and in 2028.
Also the investigations should still go on. These people don’t operate in a vacuum. They have staff and family. If laws were broken and the staff/family helped in breaking those laws they can go to prison if convicted.
And if state laws were broken well a Presidential Pardon won’t protect you from that prosecution.
They have already spun it.
According to Teh Narrative™, Trump is so vengeful and authoritarian that he will bring unjust prosecutions against innocent civil servants, and HE MUST BE STOPPED.
A large swath of Americans already believe Trump Is Literally Hitler, so this little bit of spin won’t bother their limited higher brain functions at all.
And this is why Trump should be quiet for the moment — hard to make him look vengeful if he’s not saying anything, right?
Especially if it is eventually proven that Fauci and /or Daszak did the pandemic deliberately to stop Trump’s reelection. If this is proven, Daszak might still be subject to state prosecution b/c he doesn’t have any immunity from being a federal official, but Fauci would skate.
5thA protection goes away. Everyone of them must tell the truth or be guilty of lying under oath.
Not entirely. Some federal offenses are also state crimes, like tax evasion. Most states base income tax on the federal.
Just remember OJ. He was not convicted of murder, but then lost in the civil suits. Civil suits have a lower burden of proof. Also, Biden can pardon everyone he wants against criminal prosecution, but not against civil suits.
Therefore, prepare for civil suits against everyone that Biden is pardoning. Bankrupt Fauci. First step, remove his personal security. He’s rich; let him pay for his own security.
I don’t believe SCOTUS has ever upheld the concept. This would almost certainly find its way before SCOTUS. There is valid argument that pardons must be more narrowly defined, and are not blanket immunity for anything and everything a person might have or have not done during certain period of time.
Fair point. Article II, Section 2: “…and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”
However, according to Ex Parte Garland, 71 U.S. 333 (1866), the President’s authority to pardon extends to every offense known to U.S. law and able to be exercised either before legal proceedings are taken, or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment. For example, President Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon, who had not (yet) been charged with anything, over any possible crimes connected with the Watergate scandal. That’s a preemptive pardon, and while the USSC has never opined on whether it is constitutional.
But to your point, there is the question of whether a President can pardon someone who has committed an illegal act on behalf of the President. Per Wiki, at the Virginia Ratifying Convention, George Mason argued against ratification partly on the grounds that “the President ought not to have the power of pardoning, because he may frequently pardon crimes which were advised by himself.” That also has never been tested in court; one could see that Mr. Biden may well pardon many people in the White House who were up to their ears in illegal acts, and that such pardons would be seen by many as a spiteful repudiation of justice.
I tend to agree with you: pardons should be narrowly defined, thoroughly vetted, done only for an actual act that has been committed, and for which that act is clearly described in the instrument of pardon.
But I don’t think that’s the world we live in today.
I think that in the world in which we live today, when the how and why of a law’s meaning and purpose has little relevance for how it may be applied in the future (see various prosecutions of Trump, which all include legal novelties), a blanket pardon is practically a necessity. Pardon someone specifically for violations of statutes A, B, and C, and the feds will still prosecute for the same acts under statutes X, Y, and Z. A pardon should mean you’re untouchable for particular criminal acts, so that whatever laws may be applied to those acts are nullified with respect to the person pardoned. The multiplicity of laws and the possibility that law will be applied in novel ways preclude the effectiveness of pardoning for specific statutory violations.
There’s nothing to test. It’s crystal clear that a president can pardon crimes that he himself suggested. As you say, George Mason pointed out this possibility, so it’s not as if no one had thought of it. He said, and everyone agreed, that the constitution does indeed allow this. He thought that was a reason not to ratify the constitution; but it was ratified despite his objections, so his opposition is irrelevant.
he is going to do an Oprah …
instead of you get a car .. you get a car…you get a car … it will be
you get a pardon .. you get a pardon
etc etc…
and again … if state laws were violated … let the state AG go after them… and as noted 5th goes away
and if you perjury. yourself .. you still go to jail.
the list of blanket pardons will be long… Liz C. Obama, both Clintons
Gen Milley… Pencil neck Schiff
Nancy P. everyone on the Jan 6 committee …Chucky S just because
the dirt bag with the Chinese girl friend fang fang … I cud go on but I won’t … watch .. stock up on pop corn.
In my opinion, the more the merrier. I like hanging the “pardoned” necklace around a lot of Democrats. Also, Trump can constantly refer to taking actions to correct for all that “the corrupt Biden administration left behind, which got XXX pardons”.
Now we see the consequences of a true criminal government. No limit to the number of pardons Biden can issue. Expect hundreds. We have a government that can break its own laws, and then immunize itself from the consequences even if it loses power.
Lets face it, millions voted for Biden despite his checked record. How does someone who never had real job with only a government salary become so wealthy? Well as Honoré de Balzac famously said:
“Behind every great fortune, there lies a crime.”
The actual quote is more nuanced, but this version gets the point across and especially applies to Biden. Yet many millions voted for him, How can the voters be so stupid as to elect an obvious demented criminal? A question too deep to go into here. Are the Europeans any better? I don’t know as I don’t live there, and lack fluency in foreign languages. I suspect they are actually worse. To wit, UK, Germany who have been invaded and taken over by Islam. Good thing Charles Martel is not around to see what’s happened to France after victory at the Battle of Tours.
Sorry, democracy is a bad system, which our founders well understood and that’s why they built in so many anti-democratic safeguards. Yet failure was inevitable as is now obvious.
I disagree with your assertion that Democracy is a bad system. Humans are imperfect, so any system can be circumvented or corrupted by corrupt people. The mistake in any system would be not issuing consequences to people who engage in corruption. The only real defense against corruption is vigilance and the perception that punishment for corruption will be swift and sure. To maintain that perception, the lawlessness and corruption that riddled the Biden administration must be punished.
Ah yes, Ed Markey, one of the DUMBEST members of the US Senate, what a surprise.
“To a battle of wits, he comes unarmed”.
Waxman-Markey is still in my head.
It will further cement the dark history that we have been living through, a time when America haters tried to bring down the system with intolerant, criminal and perverse actions, abusing the government, until finally they went too fat, were exposed, and their house of cards destroyed.
Democrats really need to think hard about the slippery slope they would create with broad brush blanket pardons of government officials.
All future presidential administrations could get away with all manner of bad behavior knowing that their president can protect everyone with blanket pardons.
This danger has always existed. Our system of government was devised for honorable men, not such as control it now. It is capable of being perverted by those dishonorable enough to pervert it.
Please tell us what crimes they are being pardoned for, Mr Biden. lol
Remember, the court system exists for the protection of the defendants and their rights. Without a fair system to arbitrate disputes and resolutions and to punish crime, the citizenry will take it upon themselves. If you put an large group of people beyond the reach of the court system, you are also removing the protection the court system gives them. In short, pardoning a group of people who harmed millions is how you get vigilantes.
then the Dems may get to see what a
REAL insurrection looks like ….
they may not like it.
Actually, for some if it were to happen, it would amount to little benefit (statute of limitations on crimes bars prosecution), but what it doesn’t prevent is a full and exhaustive release of the information in a way that would only allow Fauci and others to sue for defamation, a civil action whose only defense is truth. And it would amount to them having to prove that the information wasn’t true and it would also amount to endless repetitions of the so-called “lies” they would be trying to refute.
“Jen Rubin: “Trump has sort of broken the mold once again. And so Biden needs to break the mold once again.”
Break the mold?
Joe can’t even plug up the toilet.
“wouldn’t it be something for Biden, despite the bad blood between him and Trump, to go on a mini-revenge tour against the Democrats who turned against him in July by essentially wiping Trump’s slate clean?”
I like the idea I read elsewhere better — Joe pardons everybody except the cabal who pushed him out of office. Starting with Pelosi.
Taxpayer deeply offended at blanket pardon assassinates Hunter, Nancy, whomever.
Trump DOJ sweeps killer out of state jurisdiction into federal, like they did to the Ruby Ridge murderer.
Trump pardons killer.
Trump smiles for cameras and says, “It turns out that these presidential pardons are really flexible things. Did you know that they come standard with two edges?”.
Can anyone state why Liz Cheney would need a pardon?
Her J6 committee “work.”
Why not pardon all blacks, lbgtxyz’s, liberal women, big city mayors, all Dem Congressmen? They are guilty of something and we all know it.
The silver lining here is pardons don’t remove civil liability. Just about every crime has a civil corollary. Trump’s DOJ can wipe out the Biden Crime Family financially.
If Adam Schiffheaad accepts a pardon, then he should be expelled from the senate as unfit to serve. (Being an admitted criminal and all)
At the very least, no security clearances at all.
First of all, accepting a pardon is NOT an admission of guilt.
Second, even if he were guilty, that is not grounds for expelling him.
Third, expelling a member takes a 2/3 vote. Dems will still have 47 senators and there is no possible way that 14 of them would vote to expel him without a conviction for a crime, or at least clear evidence that he had committed one. (Or even with such evidence.)
The Biden administration knows how corrupt and immoral these three reprobates are and will protect them just as he did for his degenerate son. The biggest admission of corruption will come when Biden pardons himself from all the crimes he knows he committed–only he’ll have to make sure he’s covered from the day he stepped into the Senate to now. I’m surprised he doesn’t administer blanket pardons to the entire Democrat party. Most could use it.
This is a perfect example of why Presidential Pardons should not be permitted. Why should people who violate the law or abuse their Oath of Office be permitted to walk away and not be held accountable for their actions. Preemptive pardons are a clear admission of guilt in my view..
If you think the pardon power should be abolished feel free to ask one of your congressmen to propose a constitutional amendment. If you think 2/3 of each house, plus both houses of 38 state legislatures, would vote for such a thing, you’re out of your mind.
QUESTION: Even Fauci is given a pardon, can he be impeached to take away his government pension?
Impeachment can only remove the target from office, and also prohibit that person from holding any other office. It could only cause loss of pension if the removal from office caused the person to not serve long enough to vest the pension.
If you don’t want presidents to issue blanket pardons then don’t elect criminal imbeciles to the office.