Read on Twitter
One of many awful stories about pardons denied in the closing days of the Trump WH. And it's why we need pardon reform. But what isn't well known outside a small group of advocates is the despicable role the White House Counsel's office played. (thread) https://www.forbes.com/sites/jacquelinebryant/2021/02/01/the-inside-story-of-a-trump-pardon-gone-wrong/?fbclid=IwAR2tSYKOXagGpQrKNpsACPgDrNJgXpGVilkzsxruMDqGm-sH-mHSEJQLuYE&sh=50b4c2045f05
After seeing the positive aspects from pardoning my friend Alice Marie Johnson, the President told a number of people inside and outside the White House that he wanted to do more. Many more.
But WHC did everything possible to delay, obfuscate, undermine or stop petitions from reaching the President's desk. Even those petitions POTUS knew about and said 'I want to do this one' were kept out of the Oval Office.
When clemency requests that did reach the President over WHC objections, Counsel's office sandbagged advocates with conjecture and innuendo.
The WHC is supposed to provide advice to the President. But counsel is also supposed to represent the client's interests, in this case, the President's. The WHC utterly failed in its responsibility in this regard.
Clearly, WHC knew it wasn't living up to its ethical obligations. At one point, an advocate who regularly spoke with Trump tweeted out that the only petitions WHC being approved were for dead people and those long out of prison.
WHC immediately called the advocate and asked him to take down the tweet. The implication was that not doing so would impact cases still under consideration.
What is not well known is that at least one of the WHC staff was a DOJ employee on detail to the White House. And it was clear that she was carrying water for the Justice Department, rather than following her client's interests, as he expressed them.
The bottom line is that WHC and DOJ colluded to prevent President Trump from doing the right thing. And they were successful in far too many righteous cases.
This illustrates the problem with DOJ's outsized influence on the pardon and clemency process. The people who prosecute should not have this much sway on a decision to correct wrongs and offer national forgiveness. It is a conflict of interest.
Yes, the Justice Department should have an opportunity to express its views. But DOJ should not be gatekeeper, either directly (with the Office of Pardon Attorney reporting to the Deputy AG) or indirectly (by placing staff in key positions relating to clemency petitions).
This is why we need a total overhaul of the pardon process.
