The pardons, which also included former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley and members of the January 6 Committee, ignited immediate controversy. Detractors, including notable allies of Trump, contended that the pardons would not prevent the recipients from being compelled to testify under oath if summoned by a Congress controlled by Republicans. Legal analyst Jesse Binnall emphasized that those pardoned could still encounter legal risks if they were to commit perjury during any future testimonies.
“The pardons are actually great news,” Binnall remarked on X, previously known as Twitter. “No one who was just pardoned will be able to refuse to testify in a civil, criminal, or congressional proceeding based upon the 5th Amendment.” He further noted that the primary challenge would be to ensure impartial proceedings outside of Washington, D.C., which he described as a “biased venue.”
Some critics, including retired U.S. Army officer and attorney Kurt Schlichter, shared Binnall’s apprehensions regarding the fairness of judicial outcomes in the capital. Schlichter suggested that relocating depositions and testimonies to locations outside of Washington could mitigate the perceived liberal bias.
Trump himself responded during his inaugural day activities, denouncing Biden’s pardons and specifically targeting Cheney. “Liz Cheney is a disaster,” Trump stated to reporters from the Oval Office. “She’s a crying lunatic… and very, very guilty of bad crimes.”
Legal scholars have emphasized that presidential pardons are subject to certain limitations. In a comprehensive discussion on X, former Arizona legislative candidate Josh Barnett clarified that President Biden’s pardons would only apply to offenses that were explicitly identified or understood at the time of issuance. Barnett indicated that this could allow for the possibility of new charges, such as treason, if such acts were committed or uncovered after the pardons were granted.
“A pardon generally provides forgiveness for a specific offense or group of offenses committed prior to the issuance of the pardon,” Barnett stated. “If an individual is convicted of treason after having received a pardon for earlier crimes, that pardon does not cover the new offense.”
The debate surrounding Milley’s pardon has intensified the controversy. Milley, who faced backlash from Trump for allegedly reaching out to his Chinese counterpart during the concluding days of Trump’s first term, has been accused by some conservatives of jeopardizing national security. Critics contend that while Milley’s pardon may protect him from certain actions, it would not apply to any substantiated allegations of treason.
Biden’s final actions as president highlight the ongoing division within American politics, as both Democrats and Republicans prepare for intensifying confrontations regarding accountability and governance. Rather than alleviating tensions, the pardons have paved the way for increased scrutiny and legal challenges in the forthcoming months.
