Trump indicates he may pardon some Jan. 6 defendants should he return to office

…Speaking to a Faith and Freedom Coalition conference in Nashville, Trump said "and if I become president someday, if I decide to do it, I will be looking at them very very seriously for pardons," per the Epoch Times.

“They’ve been treated very unfairly," he said, without specifying individuals. The former president further decried the federal government's treatment of those facing charges related to the incident, saying they had “their lives totally destroyed and [that they are] being treated worse than terrorists and murderers despite most being charged with parading through the Capitol.”

The issue of potential pardons for Jan. 6 participants is not entirely new as the committee previously alleged that Pennsylvania GOP Rep. Scott Perry sought a pardon from Trump for potential wrongdoing on Jan. 6 which Perry called a "shameless and soulless lie."

Trump's comments came on the same day that former White House advisor Peter Navarro pleaded not guilty to contempt charges for defying a subpoena from the House committee investigating the Capitol Riot….










Read more: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/all-things-trump/trump-indicates-he-may-pardon-some-jan-6-defendants-should-he










There are enough victims here of the democrat regime to warrant a pardon for their very minor roles in that day. The double standard between how they were treated compared to 2020 rioters in the same city is alone enough reason to pardon many not charged with vandalism or violence. The DC jail for political prisoners is another grounds for Trump to end this for so many.

 

The criminal POS 45 dangling (and giving) pardons for the "fall guys" and the one in the past that "didn't inform on him". John Eastman wanted a pardon but you know why he did not get one? It would stop him from taking the 5th and compel his testimony on face jail time. Why is Trump operating like a Mafia boss??? Think hard and long.

 

There is nothing that this unselect committee or the justice department are doing that is legitimate. Thus future pardons are warranted in many cases.

 

How much does Trump sell pardons for. Asking for a friend.

 

Trump was the leader of this movement against American democracy.

Why would ANYONE be surprised that he would pardon those who followed his leadership???

 

Just curious -
When the Republican party succeeds in ending democracy ...

... what would you choose to replace it with?

 

thought Trump claimed to be tough on crime.... guess not

is he doing this to try to keep some quiet, hoping to get a Pardon?

 

They are preserving the democracy we once had all along until Jan 20 last year. They will simply return our constitutional republic that is being stolen from us.

 

He is tough on actual crime. Those that engaged in violent property destruction or assault will not be pardoned. Democrats let violent felons in our cities off easier than what is happening to “trespassers” and “paraders” That wrong must be addressed

 

They have clearly shown who it is that was involved and that their objective was to terminate the election process - plus kill the VP!!

Now, as a matter of his CAMPAIGN, Trump declares those to be pardonable actions!!!

There were elected officials taking part in the assault!

Jan 6 was treason. It was an assault on the fundamentals of our US system government. It was insurrection.

And, Trump LIKES that - as a CAMPAIGN issue!!!

Who are Republicans? And, what the HELL do they stand for that could possibly lead them to supporting a direct physical assault on our government?

 

That is totally false.

Insurgency isn't support.

And, the many charges that the election was stolen were proven false over and over and over again.

 

NO.

You can NOT compare property crime to an insurgency against the democracy of the United States, supported by elected officials.

This was treason, not property destruction.

 

A womanizer, a financial cheat, and a corrupt politician all rolled into one as a spokesperson for a Christian faith speech.

The comedy just writes itself.

 

So much idle and randomly wild speculation here…

 

The only insurgents were at the White House trying to lay siege to and enter the White House the prior May 30-June 1

 

There was no insurrection or insurgency. Period.

 

I'd lauagh.

But, this is America, and the Trump led insurgency was a direct and nearly successful armed and lethal assault on American democracy.

 

Trump led no such thing. It was capitol police and federal law enforcement that mismanaged a manageable crowd and let an unorganized mob mentality take over to aid the few far out groups that they knew were there to cause trouble. Trump didn’t cause that as he was still speaking a mile and a half away when it all started.

 

More laughable nonsense.

The fact that the capitol could have been more strongly defended has NOTHING AT ALL to do with the motivation or intent of the insurgents.

Plus, it had nothing to do with the fact that there were elected Republicans among the insurgents, helping to break into the building and track down Pence, the election procedures, and Pelosi.

Besides, it's crystal clear that Trump was not interested in that defense.

Your comment on where Trump was is like suggesting the US had no roll in Europe in WWII, because the president was thousands of miles away. Evidence shows that Trump was fully informed and capable of supporting the defense.

 

Why are you defensive about Trump's involvement in the assault on our democracy???

Did you want that insurgency to be successful in ending our democracy, or NOT?

If not, why would you support the Republican effort to do so?

If so, why are you defensive about that effort??

What side are you on???

 

All protesters had to do was to follow orders from law enforcement. Why did they not listen to police officers?

 

There was no insurgent mob. That was never the intent of 90% of those present. They got swept up in a mob mentality after under cover/ informants and proud boys/oathkeepers ringleaders instigated them. This was a situation that proper crowd control on the part of security and capitol police could have nipped in the bud early but did not. Other than the relatively few oath keepers and proud boys present there never was any intent whatsoever for what happened to happen.

 

The mob mentality was VERY real, and they had a plan that was consistent with Trump and coordinated across the insurgents who came from all over the county.

In fact, it included elected Republicans.

If Trump had wanted the building to be secure, he could have done that. The committee shows that his moves actually weakened the defense in preparation for the assault.

 

Trump was never involved in any assault on democracy.

There is no Republican effort to do what you suggest.

I never supported anyone entering the capitol and have always been critical of those who led in that.
I’m not defensive about punishing those who attacked capitol police or did violent property damage or real vandalism there. I’m simply denying that Trump played any role at all in the episode.
I’m on the side of preserving our Constitutional Republic and the constitution as written and originally intended and enumerated and amended.

 

You mean like when the police let them orderly file into the capitol through the doors?