[MUSIC]

David Furst: It's The Brian Lehrer Show, on WNYC. I'm David Furst, WNYC's Weekend Edition host, filling in for Brian today. On today's show, we'll talk about the many bills Governor Hochul is considering whether to sign, as deadlines approach, and what issues are at stake. The bills address some big ones, like cannabis, climate change, and housing. Plus, later in the show, our series celebrating WNYC's centennial, 100 Years of 100 Things, looks at the history of celebrating Christmas in the city.

Including the tree in Rockefeller Center, the Rockettes at Radio City, The Nutcracker, and the rest of the reasons people have for coming in to spend a day in Manhattan with their families in December. And we'll wrap up today's show with a conversation with Radiolab's Latif Nasser and Kelly Blumenthal, from the International Astronomical Union, on their contest to name a quasi-moon.

What's a quasi-moon? You may be wondering. You'll have to stick around till the end of today's show for a mini Radiolab conversation about what's going on up in space, and no, we won't be discussing the drones flying over New Jersey at this time. First, presidential pardons have been in the spotlight lately. Yesterday, President Biden commuted the sentences of approximately 1,500 people, and pardoned 39 others.

The White House called it the largest single-day grant of clemency in modern history. Here's White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre speaking yesterday.

Karine Jean-Pierre: The president is commuting the sentences of 1,500 individuals who were placed on home confinement during the COVID-19 pandemic, and who have successfully reintegrated into their families and communities. He's also pardoning 39 individuals who were convicted of nine non-violent crimes earlier this month.

David Furst: In a much more controversial move, the president issued a blanket pardon for his son Hunter Biden, who had been found guilty of gun-related charges, and had also pleaded guilty to tax evasion. Pardons may soon be center stage again, as the second Trump administration gets underway. The president-elect says he plans to pardon people who were convicted in the January 6 insurrection on his first day in office, in fact, in his first hour back in office.

It's a promise he made again this week in an interview with Time magazine. Mix in with all of that, the fact that the Biden administration is looking into the idea of pre-pardoning people who may be targeted during a second Trump administration, and the advice from South Carolina Democratic Congressman Jim Clyburn, that Biden should pardon Trump, and there's a lot to talk about.

To help us sort through the pardon palooza, we are joined by Meryl Kornfield, politics reporter with The Washington Post, who has been covering the pardon story from multiple angles. Meryl, welcome.

Meryl Kornfield: Thank you for having me.

David Furst: Meryl, let's start with that large group of pardons from this week. Aside from the sheer number, what stands out for you about Biden commuting these sentences and issuing these pardons?

Meryl Kornfield: This comes after Biden pardoned his son, Hunter Biden, and that received backlash from both parties, including fellow Biden allies and Democrats that objected to how he pardoned his son, or the pardon itself. It's striking that these pardons came after. It also comes as criminal justice advocates are pushing for more pardons and clemency steps to be taken.

One big call coming from these advocates is to pardon people who are on federal death row, people who support those prisoners having their sentences communed, point to the fact that Trump staunchly supports capital punishment.

David Furst: Looking at these pardons this week, as far as pardons go, this was a fairly traditional use of the presidential pardon power, right? Certainly compared to issuing a blanket pardon for his son.

Meryl Kornfield: That's right. These were people who were already convicted of crimes. These were not preemptive pardons. These were also people who had gone through the process of petitioning for either a pardon or clemency. That's kind of the more formal process. They petition, those petitions are reviewed by the government and presented to the president, and in the case of his son, his son's cases, or one of the cases, was ongoing, so he hadn't yet petitioned in that same formal process that these people went through.

David Furst: I want to talk about a recent poll that The Washington Post has reported on. A YouGov poll from earlier this month found that Americans support, by a more than 3 to 1 margin, the idea of limiting the types of crimes a president can pardon, and support the idea of preventing a president from being able to pardon him or herself. It also found that most Americans support prohibiting the pardoning of family members.

Your colleague Aaron Blake wrote in an article for The Washington Post that this is a rare sign of bipartisanship these days, isn't it? There's discomfort with the idea of presidential pardons to some extent, coming from both Republicans and Democrats, right?

Meryl Kornfield: That's right. I talked with legal experts about what the president can do from here, with pardons, considering we've reported several actions, and they tell me that overall, presidents have broad discretion with pardons, they can issue preemptive pardons, and they have before, and they can pardon themselves and others close to them. That's something that is a gap between what exists in current law and what Americans' perspectives are on that.

David Furst: Presidents have issued preemptive pardons before?

Meryl Kornfield: Yes, it is unusual, as experts noted, but it has happened.

David Furst: Well, we just talked about a poll on how Americans feel about the presidential pardon power. Listeners, where do you land on it? Are you fine with it, but perhaps think that the Hunter Biden pardon was an overreach, or not? Do you have any questions for our guest, Meryl Kornfield, from The Washington Post, about the pardons that President Biden issued yesterday, and the possibility of these preemptive pardons, which we'll get back to soon, or anything else?

Call us or text us. 212-433-WNYC. That's 212-433-9692. Anything you have to say on pardons, call or text, 212-433-9692. What does this poll tell us, by the way, in your view, about the way Americans view presidential pardons?

Meryl Kornfield: The poll is not necessarily surprising. It also reminds me of a recent AP poll that just came out this week, that 2 in 10 Americans disapproved of the Hunter Biden pardon. I think those two polls line up to show Americans' perspectives about the limitations that pardons should have.

David Furst: Well, let's hear some clips of lawmakers. Here's a clip of Democratic Representative Jasmine Crockett, from Texas, voicing support for the President's pardon of his son.

Jasmine Crockett: Way to go, Joe. Let me be the first one to congratulate the president for deciding to do this, because at the end of the day, we know that we have a 34-count convicted felon that is about to walk into the White House, so for anyone that wants to clutch their pearls now, because he decided that he was going to pardon his son, I would say take a look in the mirror.

David Furst: Here's Virginia Congressman Jerry Connolly, also a Democrat, not having it.

Jerry Connolly: I really think we have to revisit the pardon power in the Constitution, and at the very least, I think we've got to circumscribe it so that you don't get to pardon relatives, even if you believe passionately they're innocent, or that their cause is just.

David Furst: Meryl, what about lawmakers? Where do most of them stand on pardons?

Meryl Kornfield: We've gotten a different range of answers from lawmakers that we've asked about the possibility of some pardons. We had asked Democratic lawmakers about the possibility of Biden issuing preemptive pardons to people viewed as Trump's enemies. Some Democrats supported such pardons, such as South Carolina Congressman Jim Clyburn. Others said that it could offer the appearance that those people committed crimes. That's something that, perspective-wise, people are wrestling with when it comes to pardons.

David Furst: Looking at the political will on doing something about it, is there any appetite for removing, or perhaps limiting, a president's pardon power?

Meryl Kornfield: I have not heard that from lawmakers I've talked with recently. I think that that's something that has come up at other points, but it remains to be seen. This is also, as we have to look at what we're stepping into here, looking forward, this is going to be a Republican majority in the House and Senate, giving a mandate to Trump to push forward with what he plans to do. As you mentioned at the top, he is planning on, he has said, granting pardons to people who were convicted as part of the riot on the Capitol on January 6th.

He has not said who those specific people will be. When we've asked Republican lawmakers about how they feel about that, they have said that it's up to the President to issue pardons at his discretion.

David Furst: Just to spell it out. Speaking of that power, what exactly is a president allowed to do when it comes to pardons? The Constitution says presidents can grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment. That's it? Is that the only limit?

Meryl Kornfield: That's right. You had asked earlier about preemptive pardons. There's a conception that that is not allowed. One example of that would be the Nixon pardon. I think a lot of people will remember, in that case, Nixon was not yet convicted of a crime, and the president still had the ability to pardon him, because in that case, he was saying he was doing it to unite the country.

Presidents can have varied reasons for why they decide to pardon someone. The check on the president's decision to do that is the public will, and how the public will respond in future elections.

David Furst: If you would like to join the conversation, you can call or text now. Again, the number is 212-433-WNYC. That's 212-433-9692. We're speaking with Meryl Kornfield from The Washington Post about presidential pardons. Let's hear from Kathleen, calling from Maplewood. Good morning.

Kathleen: Good morning.

David Furst: Do you have a comment on the idea of presidential pardons?

Kathleen: I do. I think that a president should not be able to pardon himself. I think that to-be President Trump should have to be tried for his crimes, especially the coup on January 6th. I have no problem if he's tried by his peers, and if he comes out innocent or guilty. If he comes out guilty, I think it's okay to pardon him, but he has to acknowledge, and he has never acknowledged his denial of who won the election in 2020.

David Furst: Well, Kathleen, thank you for your comments. And Meryl, the idea that presidents should not be able to pardon themselves, that's a pretty popular one, right?

Meryl Kornfield: Yes, yes. [inaudible 00:14:01] on that. [unintelligible 00:14:03] I had said earlier, these elections, but I think, also, presidents have that on their minds. After Trump had lost the 2020 election, as we and others have reported, at the time, he was considering pardoning himself at the end of his administration, and pardoning others. He ultimately decided not to pardon himself and those involved in his effort to try to overturn the 2020 election.

We can guess that probably, the public speculation and the concern he had for Americans being upset about that decision weighed on him as he considered that.

David Furst: Let's hear a few more comments. Let's hear from James, in East Rockaway. Welcome to The Brian Lehrer Show.

James: Thank you. Yes, I personally don't have a problem with the presidential power. I don't necessarily think he should be able to pardon himself. Then again, I believe accepting a pardon is also an acceptance of guilt, so, in order to pardon himself, Trump would kind of have to admit he did it. I think the Hunter Biden pardon-- I don't see anything wrong with that. While he did do what he did, the charges were mostly political, and if he wasn't President Biden's son, he would not have been charged.

I couldn't find a single other charge from the Justice Department where they went after someone for back taxes after they already paid them back. Charging him for filling out a form on a gun years later, when he no longer even owned the gun, and wasn't a danger to society, was clearly political, and only happened since his father was president. I think it's okay for his father to pardon those, since it only happened because of him.

David Furst: Okay, James, thanks for your comments. Let's hear from Mitch, in Forest Hills. Welcome to The Brian Lehrer Show.

Mitch: Good morning. Thank you for having me. First off, I want to say that I am a convicted felon. It's been 22 years since I've been out of prison. I have to disagree vehemently with the last call. Prison is filled with people that have been prosecuted for those types of menial crimes. What I have a problem with, with Biden, is the fact that the reason that he pardoned them, that he's pardoned his son.

One, is that he said it was the DOJ and politically motivated. Well, we all know that the DOJ is very Biden-leaning, so it's his own DOJ that went after him. That's the first thing. I just don't buy it. It just doesn't make sense. The second thing is, I think that in order to get a pardon, you have to, first, let the process play out. You have to go through the appeal process. You have to let the process play out before you can give someone an appeal.

The third thing I believe is that there has to be a reason for the pardon, which means-- What happened? Is there something wrong that happened? Was there a miscarriage of justice? There has to be a better reason than just, "It's politically motivated." Well, all these crimes, all these charges, are politically motivated, let's be honest. The other thing is, I think, also, you have to look at the person and look at their life. What have they done with their life to warrant a pardon?

Quite frankly, that's one of the reasons I never applied for a pardon, because I just lead a normal life. Even though now, I am going to apply for one, because I've been helping children and doing more with my life, that I deserve a pardon. I just said I spent three and a half years in federal prison, for a white-collar crime. I took a plea. I think that more has to be done to make it a real purpose, a real reason to get a pardon, not just because the President knows you and likes you. Obviously, that's probably something very difficult to regulate.

David Furst: Well, there being a real purpose may have been the case in a lot of these pardons that we saw this week. Mitch, thank you so much for your comments. And Meryl, do you want to weigh in on some of the notions that Mitch just brought up?

Meryl Kornfield: Yes, I really appreciate Mitch sharing his life experience. That was really interesting. I think that, to his point about the presumed guilt that comes with pardon, and the kinds of crimes that should and shouldn't be pardoned. In this case, the pardons this week, were people who were convicted of their crimes, and in many, many cases, they had pled guilty before they were convicted or sentenced, and that's something to consider.

Mitch also pointed out and talked about the kinds of crimes that the president has considered. In many of these cases, these were crimes, drug offenses, for instance, that are non-violent crimes. The president, in the past, has spoken about federal marijuana charges. He also issued pardons on that front. Those are two very important topics being considered by the president and others, as they're considering these pardons.

David Furst: I'm David Furst, WNYC's Weekend Edition host, filling in for Brian today. We're going to take a quick break. We're speaking with Meryl Kornfield, politics reporter for The Washington Post. We're going to hear more of your calls and texts, and more on presidential pardon power, especially getting into this idea of preemptive pardons coming up next. Stick around.

[MUSIC]

It's The Brian Lehrer Show. I'm David Furst, filling in for Brian today. If you're just joining us, our guest is Meryl Kornfield, politics reporter for The Washington Post. We are talking about presidential pardons today. Let's get into some more specifics. Meryl, what is the latest on this idea of, potentially, us seeing some preemptive pardons from the Biden administration?

Meryl Kornfield: The Biden senior aides have been talking about preemptive pardons. We've asked the White House directly, as you might see in videos of the press briefings, about the potential of preemptive pardon. Publicly, they are not saying more, privately, they're talking about pardons, possibly for Anthony Fauci, who helped coordinate the country's Covid response.

General Mark Milley, who was the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and has been very critical of Trump, has called him a fascist. Senator Adam Schiff, former representative from California, who had led one of the impeachment efforts against Trump, and former Congresswoman Liz Cheney, also another major critic of Trump's. They're considering these pardons as a way of trying to address that the Trump administration might go after these people.

Trump and especially his choice for FBI director, Kash Patel, has talked about retribution against Trump's adversaries. The Biden People are concerned that that would mean that the Trump administration would go after those who have investigated the former president for crimes.

David Furst: Right. The concern is, as President-elect Trump has said things like members of the House January 6th committee should be jailed. How would a preemptive pardon even work? Do you just issue a blanket pardon? This person has a get-out-of-jail free card?

Meryl Kornfield: That's something that we don't know exactly, what these pardons might look like. The White House lawyers, as they discuss this, are probably, based off of legal experts I've talked with, calculating what would a Trump administration prosecute these people with? That's not really known, especially when those who are potentially going to be joining the administration have talked about broadly wielding prosecutorial powers in a way like maybe we haven't seen before.

We don't really know what that might look like, in terms of criminal prosecutions. There's been accusations against some of these people that have been unsubstantiated. One often repeated claim by Kash Patel, the pick for FBI director, was that the January 6th committee hid documents. There's no evidence of that. That's something that potentially could be an aim of Patel's FBI, but we just don't know what they might do.

That's what the Biden administration is likely wrestling with. How do you issue a pardon for some unknown crime? That could most likely be said [unintelligible 00:24:07]. [crosstalk]

David Furst: For some non-crime.

Meryl Kornfield: Yes, or non-crime. Yes. That could look like some blanket pardon, as you said.

David Furst: Can you talk about the reaction, Meryl? What have people been saying, who would potentially stand to benefit? People who would potentially get one of these pardons?

Meryl Kornfield: When I reached out to Adam Schiff's spokesman, she pointed me to comments that he has made recently, where he has said that he doesn't like the idea of these preemptive pardons. Cheney, Fauci, and Milley did not respond to us when we asked about their thoughts on that. It's unclear. One consideration about pardons is they have to be accepted by the person who's receiving the pardon. Would these people accept the pardons, is a whole other question.

David Furst: Yes. Well, let's hear some more calls, if you want to join the conversation. 212-433-9692. Robert, in Manhattan, good morning. Welcome to The Brian Lehrer Show.

Robert: Hey, good morning. Like your topic. That's why I called in. I wanted to offer something possibly even more radical than a pardon, in the culture we have in the justice system. That is how a conviction stays with someone far after they've served time in prison. Europe has something called the right to be forgotten law. So that when someone has done their time in prison, that's it.

The information is no, no longer available, and they go on to start a new life. Obviously, with politicians, because they're in the public domain, it may not work that way, but journalism can help in that regard, and not subscribe to the theory that there is no present and no future, and only a past. I know it's a radical idea. We seem to be, across the political spectrum, drunk with the power to punish, and thirsty for a way for people to redeem themselves. Just an idea I wanted to throw out there. [crosstalk]

David Furst: Robert, thank you so much. Thank you very much for sharing those interesting thoughts. We have some different thoughts from Pamela, calling from Putnam Valley. Welcome.

Pamela: Hi. Thank you for taking my call. This whole thing is a mess. From somebody who's had [inaudible 00:27:03] judicial system, going to jail, to the presidency, I don't think that a felon-- When I was a child, I was always told that if you were a felon, you couldn't run for president, but apparently, that changed, and apparently, we just keep changing the laws to suit whoever is in power.

It just feels like [unintelligible 00:27:24], you're going to pardon all those people who were doing the insurrection. He was convicted of 34 felonies and he was allowed to run for president? This country is a mess. Something needs to be done. In some ways, I agree with the previous caller that once you serve your time, it should be forgotten, but on the other hand, I don't think that somebody who tried to overpower the government should get away with it, and be able to run for president. [crosstalk]

David Furst: There's some things you're not willing to forget.

Pamela: Right. I don't know, I just think that this has to be thought out a lot better than it is. I think that all these people, it's like it's a free for all in this country, if you have money and if you have power. The poor people will wind up going to jail, and a lot of times, it's not even fair. If your choice is, "Look, I spent a year in jail because I didn't have the money to pay for bail, or I plead guilty just to get out," and they'll give me time served, and I'll have a mark on my record.

The next time you get caught for something, you've already got a mark on your record, and you pleaded guilty to something just because you didn't have the finances. [crosstalk]

David Furst: Pam--

Pamela: There's such a-- I'll let you go. [laughs]

David Furst: Well, Pamela-- No, thank you so much for calling, and thank you very much for your thoughts. We're talking about presidential pardons here on The Brian Lehrer Show. Let's take another call. This is TK, in the Bronx. Welcome, TK. Do I have your name right?

TK: Yes, sir. Good morning.

David Furst: Good morning.

TK: I'm flustered. I'm sorry. Let me get it together. Your previous caller, she's following the vein of my thought. Okay? This is what I'm saying about the Democratic Party. You cannot be Republican light. Be who you say you are. If you're the beacon, be the beacon. If you're going to stand tall, stand tall. If you're about rights and if you're about freedoms, then be about that, but if you're about the dollar, then you're Republican light, because we already know they're about the dollar. That's what that lady was just saying.

That's what's corrupting the whole country. The feeling of, if you got the money, and you got the power, then you got the light, you got the green light, you got the way. It's wrong, and it's why this thing is unraveling right in front of our eyes. It's unraveling. I wanted to say, I'm very disappointed in President Biden. Okay, you're going to pardon your son? All right, fine, because he's a political football. That's what he's trying to say. His son is getting kicked around like a political football.

Okay, well, what about the political prisoners we have in this country, this country that's supposed to be about freedoms and rights? Let Leonard Peltier out. He's an old man. Let Mumia out. He's an old man. Let everybody that is in jail for rights and for freedoms, that tried to find a way and couldn't find a way because they didn't have some political machine backing them up, some people that they could pay off to have lunches with a senator or a congressman. That's the way it goes now, and we all know it. It's disgusting.

David Furst: Well, thank you so much for sharing your thoughts, TK, today on The Brian Lehrer Show. Meryl, a lot of different ideas about presidential pardons. What do you make of some of these comments?

Meryl Kornfield: Yes. Before I was covering pardons the last few weeks, I was actually on the campaign trail, following the presidential candidates, and talked with voters in battleground states about their thoughts on the candidates. I know we're focused on Biden here, but speaking of how Democrats felt about the Democratic candidate, Vice President Harris, that was something that I had heard from some voters, about, as TK said at the top of his comments, if you're going to be a Democrat, be a Democrat.

Some of them were a bit frustrated that she had not stood by some of her more progressive comments that she made in 2019, when she was running as a presidential candidate, and wanted to see her own those more progressive policy ideas, especially when it came to criminal justice. At the same time, how much that actually impacted what we saw in the election results, I think Democrats are still wrestling with.

Blueprint did a poll on why voters who didn't vote for Harris, didn't-- why didn't they vote for her, and the main reason, as probably many viewers expect, or listeners expect to hear, it was the economy. Second was immigration. They thought that Trump could handle those two issues better. The third actually was that they thought that she might be too liberal, specifically on social issues. Yes, it's unclear if that was actually what caused Harris to lose, but it was definitely a concern that was voiced by voters that I spoke with.

David Furst: We have another question for you here. This is a text coming through. You can call or text 212-433-9692. We are here with Meryl Kornfield, politics reporter for The Washington Post. A text here saying, "Why did Biden pardon Michael Conahan, who was accused of cash for kids scandal? He was paid $2.1 million in bribes for giving juveniles longer sentences and funneling them to for-profit detention centers." This person says, "Here for the 1,500 commutations, though."

On that reference to Conahan, I think technically, his sentence may have been commuted. Is that something you are familiar with?

Meryl Kornfield: Yes, actually, that specific case, I did reach out to the White House to ask them, why was he one of the people who received clemency? I didn't get an answer. I asked this morning, and I'm waiting to hear back. What they did say broadly about all of these clemency cases was that these were people who were placed on home confinement during the pandemic, and had reintegrated themselves with their families and communities.

I'd asked for more details about what that looked like, specifically in his case, and I'm waiting to hear back. Also, I did want to say, a couple callers ago had said something that I just wanted to correct the record on. She said laws have changed, that have allowed a convicted felon to now become president, when that wasn't the case before. Just to say, the Constitution did not have any restrictions on whether a person could be a convicted felon and run for president.

The rules on running for president, based off of the Constitution, are, you just have to be 35 and older, a natural-born US resident, and have lived in the United States for 14 years. Founding fathers did not have any, or write anything in the Constitution that made us think that they knew that, many years later, Trump would be convicted of hush money payments, falsifying records related to hush money payments, in a New York case.

David Furst: Well, thank you for that. And Meryl, you brought up earlier, Kash Patel. This week, FBI Director Christopher Wray announced that he will resign at the end of the Biden administration. That potentially clears the way for Trump's pick, Kash Patel, to receive the nomination, and perhaps serve as the new FBI directive director. Patel has made statements that he would seek retribution against political opponents and media who were critical of Trump.

I just want to ask you, in the face of an FBI director like this, if Biden were to issue these preemptive pardons and if they were accepted, would they stand up? What would stop, for example, a new FBI director, like Kash Patel, from just declaring those preemptive pardons-- declaring that they are not valid?

Meryl Kornfield: The courts would probably-- this is just the President's discretion, to issue pardons. There's a long history of court cases that would back that up, that would protect those that have been pardoned from prosecution against what they were pardoned for.

David Furst: I want to focus on the courts for a second here. Yesterday, The Washington Post editorial board said that Biden should rule out this idea of preemptive pardons, saying they would be unnecessary, and they would imply guilt where there is none. The board continued that alternate protections remain available. For example, you're bringing up the court's existing free speech protections. Can you talk about how those protections may or may not hold up in a second Trump administration?

Meryl Kornfield: For instance, one of Kash Patel's assertions, as he's spoken on podcasts ahead of the announcement that he would become FBI director, I'm sure he will be asked about this in the Senate confirmation hearings, was-- He has said that the reporters who had reported on Trump's loss in 2020 should be prosecuted. There are protections for reporters in the First Amendment regarding free press, and also protections against libel, if that was the charge-- I don't know.

Again, we don't know how prosecutions might look, that [unintelligible 00:38:15] be a civil case, but reporting on fact, is protected speech.

David Furst: Let's try to get to another call. 212-433-9692. Bill, in Saranac Lake. Welcome to The Brian Lehrer Show.

Bill: Hi. What amazes me, as far as the reporting on this subject, is that people talk about a lot of the stuff as if it's unprecedented, but for example, President Lincoln and President Andrew Jackson, with a stroke of a pen, pardoned thousands of confederates who were guilty of treason, rebellion, war crimes, murder, and they all got off scot-free. All that they had to do was sign an oath of allegiance to the federal government.

The idea that you can't give blanket pardons-- it wasn't even specified who was getting a pardon, anybody that just wanted to take the oath got the pardon. You just walked right up to the-- signed the oath, and boom, you had the pardon. This is not unprecedented. It was not specified, what crimes that they had committed. They committed all kinds of crimes and war crimes. Even in those days, we had war crimes, and they all got off.

Saying that this has never happened, blanket pardons has never happened, except for Richard Nixon, just as-- The American Civil War really did happen. It's not something that happened in Greek and Roman times.

David Furst: Bill, thank you for the history lesson. Thanks so much for joining us today on The Brian Lehrer Show. Meryl, what about that? There's nothing new under the sun.

Meryl Kornfield: Yes, that's a good point. There's a great piece that one of my colleagues wrote about this very subject. You should check out Gillian Brockell's story about the history of presidents issuing preemptive pardons. There's some fun tidbits to learn about George Washington's pardons, and others, so if readers are interested in learning more about the history of that, I definitely recommend checking out that story.

David Furst: Before we wrap up, what is next for the Biden administration? Is the president likely to issue more pardons before leaving office?

Meryl Kornfield: That is what the White House has said. We don't yet know what those pardons might look like. The press secretary got a few questions on that, many questions on that front at the press briefing yesterday, and we asked about-- would there be categories of pardons, what that could look like. She didn't provide more answers, but the White House did say they are still continuing to review petitions for pardons and clemency, and to expect more announcements soon.

David Furst: To expect more announcements soon. Okay. Meryl Kornfield, politics reporter with The Washington Post. Thanks for joining us on The Brian Lehrer Show today.

Meryl Kornfield: Thank you so much.

 

Copyright © 2024 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.