Trump‘s Pardons and the Erosion of Democratic Norms
Recent actions by former President Donald Trump, including the pardons granted to Rudolph giuliani and others involved in efforts to overturn the 2020 election, represent a continued attempt to undermine faith in the democratic process and rewrite the narrative surrounding the January 6th Capitol attack.These clemency decisions, alongside the earlier pardon of over 1,500 individuals who participated in the January 6th events, signal a pattern of elevating those accused of wrongdoing while concurrently discrediting the biden Administration.
Karoline Leavitt, Trump’s press secretary, framed the pardons as rectifying a political persecution, stating that the recipients were “great Americans” who were “put through hell” for “challenging an election, which is the cornerstone of democracy.” Leavitt further asserted that prosecution for challenging election results is a tactic employed in “communist Venezuela,” not the United States, and that Trump is ending such “communist tactics.”
This rhetoric was echoed in a statement released alongside the pardons by Edward Martin,Trump’s appointed Pardon Attorney. Martin argued that the tradition of secure and trustworthy elections, as envisioned by the nation’s founders, “died in 2020.” he alleges that for the first time in American history,state and local officials exploited exceptions in absentee voting and signature verification procedures to conduct a ”fully remote presidential election,” while the media failed to report on alleged unlawful actions that deprived the country of a “free and fair election.”
Martin’s statement extensively details unsubstantiated claims of voting irregularities in multiple states – Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Georgia, New Mexico, and Nevada – and criticizes the Biden Justice Department for not investigating these claims. He also defends the Trump campaign’s efforts to submit “contingent electors,” reframing the controversial scheme as a legitimate exercise of federal constitutional obligations. Martin concludes by arguing that a pardon is “appropriate and fully serves the interest of justice” to exonerate those involved in these actions.
Though, this “justice,” as defined by Martin and championed by Trump, appears to prioritize political loyalty over factual accuracy. The pardons and accompanying statements represent a concerted effort to reshape the past record and portray actions widely considered an insurrection as legitimate challenges to a flawed election.
This approach poses a meaningful threat to democratic principles. The hope remains that informed citizens will recognize this effort for what it is – a distortion of truth - and prevent it from successfully rewriting the events of 2020.