Why Did Trump Not Pardon Stone and Flynn?
The question of why President Trump did not pardon Michael Flynn and Roger Stone is a complex one, intertwining legal, political, and public perception issues. This article explores the reasoning behind Trump's decision and the potential consequences of pardoning them.
Legal and Political Considerations
The decision not to pardon Flynn and Stone stems primarily from legal and political considerations. Pardoning individuals involved in high-profile investigations can cast a shadow of suspicion over the motivations and actions of the pardoner. In the case of Flynn and Stone, pardoning them could lead to accusations of ‘abuse of power,’ which could be leveraged into an impeachment attempt. This was a risk Trump was likely to avoid, especially given his controversial presidency.
While Flynn and Stone claimed that they were guilty and deserved a pardon, the political climate at the time was polarized. Pardoning them could have been interpreted as a misguided act of mercy, especially in light of the public outcry that occurred following the pardoning of Joe Arpaio in 2017.
The Flynn Case
In the case of Michael Flynn, the Department of Justice (DOJ) under Attorney General William Barr resolved the matter before Trump could make a decision. This ensured that Flynn, who is now facing financial difficulties, would be handled by the next administration. Interestingly, Trump may pardon Flynn after the election in November, using it as a political statement against his rivals.
For Roger Stone, the situation is more ambiguous. Stone, a known troublemaker, was convicted of several charges related to his role in the 2016 election. While he hasn't yet been formally convicted, the political pressure and the politicization of the DOJ under Barr make the situation uncertain.
The Relevance of Pardons in Historical Context
Historically, pardons are significant events in the political narrative. In the case of Joe Arpaio, a federal judge had to clarify that a pardon alone does not absolve one of wrongdoing. For Stone, accepting a pardon would mean admitting guilt, which could further alienate his supporters who doubt his involvement in misconduct.
Despite the legal hurdles, Trump's decision not to pardon Flynn and Stone was also strategic. By allowing the process to continue, Trump could expose any malfeasance or bias within the FBI and DOJ. This could be beneficial for the future of his administration, as it would hold those who were involved in the investigations accountable.
Conclusion
The decision not to pardon Michael Flynn and Roger Stone was a calculated move by Trump, balancing legal, political, and public perception factors. While the process may not have been perfect, it allowed for further exposure of potential improprieties and provided a potential leverage point for future actions.