It turns out that Joe Biden’s own Department of Justice warned against his last-minute sweeping pardons of violent offenders.

Just before leaving office, Biden (through autopen) notoriously granted clemency to thousands of criminals — including a child murderer and a cop killer.

In a newly-released email obtained by Ed Martin, a top Justice Department official warned that the pardons were “highly problematic.”

See here:

When Joe Biden granted clemency to 2,500 criminals, he said it was only for people convicted of non-violent offenses.

This was a total lie — and the DOJ called him out on it!

ADVERTISEMENT

In fact, the Justice official red flagged a handful of specific pardons granted to violent offenders.

In case that’s hard to read, here’s the full text from that section of the email:

One other important note – in communication about the commutations, the White House has described those
who received commutations as people convicted of non-violent drug offenses. I think you should stop saying that because it is untrue or at least misleading. As you know, even with the exceedingly limited review we were permitted to do of the individuals we believed you might be considering for commutation action, we initially
identified 19 that were highly problematic. That was based only upon running your initial priority list against the
list of those who had submitted clemency petitions (a small percentage of the overall total). Even in that number, we identified violent offenders, including those who committed acts of violence during the offense of conviction, or who otherwise have a history of violence such that it is misleading to suggest that they are non-violent drug offenders. 16 of those 19 received grants of clemency from the President. Pardon separately highlighted for you dozens more highly problematic candidates; despite the flags raised, most of these individuals also received grants of clemency. There are likely many more problematic cases in the ones we have not yet been able to review. Unfortunately and despite repeated requests and warnings, we were not afforded a reasonable opportunity to vet and provide input on those you were considering. And as you know, we only were provided the actual warrants and information on those for whom the President was granting clemency minutes before you posted the list online.

We also note that there was no consideration given to victim input in these cases involving violent crimes. In the cases of Terrence Richardson and Ferrone Claiborne, who were included in the clemency grants, the Department has received voluminous objections to clemency from the family of the victim, public officials, and local and national law enforcement organizations. Richardson and Claiborne were sentenced to life
imprisonment for drug trafficking offenses during which a police officer was killed.
Among those who received commutations that we previously highlighted as problematic are Russell McIntosh, who has a history of violent crimes, including having shot to death a woman who had threatened to expose his drug business to the authorities and her two-year-old child. McIntosh pleaded guilty to state charges related to murder. It also includes Calvin Odom and Terance Young, who were denied clemency in 2016 because trial
testimony revealed that on one occasion during the course of the conspiracy, a defendant responded to a female participant’s desire to leave the conspiracy by putting a gun in her mouth and ordering her to keep working for him. Evidence also revealed that in December 1994, while conducting drug business in Shreveport, a defendant accidentally shot a child who was present when he struggled with another drug trafficker during an attempted robbery. Also receiving commutation, and previously highlighted as problematic, is Robert Gillins who from 1989 to 1994 led a cocaine and crack distribution organization that operated in multiple cities. The organization used violence to accomplish its aims. For example, in August 1991, petitioner and others assaulted and beat a coconspirator and held him at gunpoint for the loss of $180,000 of the drug organization’s money. In April 1992, Gillins shot an informant who provided information on a member of the drug organization.

And there is Steven Fowler who received a commutation despite that his petition was denied in 2023 as a result of violent conduct. He ordered his employee to commit several violent attacks, and ultimately received a sentence within the guideline range likely applicable today. Fowler employed an enforcer who admitted to shooting at least five people who owed Fowler money and firing guns at many more. In one incident, the
enforcer burned the face and forearms of a suspected informant with a butane torch while petitioner and others
looked on. Jason Best was denied clemency in 2023, but now received a commutation, despite that he recently
received a reduction from the district court to a term within his current guideline range, has a criminal history
that includes his recklessly causing the death of a minor child, and showed poor prison adjustment. Best and his
codefendant were involved in a shooting in which they caused the death of a young child asleep in his home. Plaze Anderson, for whom we had recommended denial of clemency, received a commutation. Anderson was
a high-ranking member of the Gangster Disciples gang and was personally involved in two murders, and an
attempted murder and kidnapping, and threatened his girlfriend with a weapon. He also obstructed justice by contacting codefendants to influence their decision-making. He has a criminal history involving statutory rape of a 17-year-old and participating in a shooting that struck an occupied vehicle. Not to mention numerous inmates who have engaged in brutal acts of violence while incarcerated.

We also have started to hear from the U.S. Attorney community about concerns relating to some of the clemency grants. For example, the Acting U.S. Attorney in Connecticut informed us that Adrian Peeler, who had no pending clemency application, was sentenced many years ago to 35 years of imprisonment for a federal drug offense, but that term was imposed to run consecutively to a 25-year state sentence for conspiracy to
commit murder (which resulted in the murder of an 8-year-old witness and his mother). The family of those victims has been very involved in opposing Mr. Peeler’s motion for compassionate release and other relief over the years and will be extremely upset to learn of this development. Had we been provided a reasonable opportunity to vet the list and to engage in a process to flag problematic cases, we could have brought this to your attention prior to the President granting clemency.

I have no idea if the President was aware of these backgrounds when making clemency decisions, the Department was largely excluded from the process, which we otherwise opposed. The President of course has the constitutional power to use his clemency power as he chooses. But I do not think it is close to accurate to
describe all the clemency recipients as those convicted of non-violent drug offenses. At minimum, such a statement is highly misleading, based on the history and backgrounds of the few we know about and have highlighted previously and above. For those reasons, I don’t think characterizing clemency grants as relating to non-violent drug offenses should be repeated.

These are the kinds of people that were pardoned underneath the Biden regime.

I have to wonder: who actually made the call on this insanity?

ADVERTISEMENT

The Washington Times has more details on the new revelations:

Associate Deputy Attorney General Bradley Weinsheimer criticized “highly problematic” language used in a single warrant, signed by the autopen, that pardoned hundreds of criminals in the final days of the Biden administration, according to a Jan. 18 email reviewed by The Washington Times.

Mr. Weinsheimer, writing to top Biden administration attorneys two days before Mr. Biden left office, said the wording of the pardoned offenses was too vague and could render the commutations ineffective. The lack of specificity could also result in commutations “in circumstances, including for crimes of violence, that was not intended,” he said.

He also noted that the Justice Department was blocked from playing any role in vetting the candidates for clemency. He said the White House granted some pardons despite “voluminous objections” from the victims’ families.

The Justice Department released the Weinsheimer email to the legal watchdog group Oversight Project amid the Trump administration’s investigation of the Biden White House’s heavy use of the autopen. It shows for the first time that top career lawyers at the Justice Department objected to the volume and scope of the last-minute pardons and questioned their legality.

The mechanical signature was used to sign off on three warrants granting clemency to thousands of criminals on behalf of Mr. Biden, 82, who issued more pardons than any other president.

Among those granted clemency were dozens of violent criminals whom the Justice Department deemed “highly problematic.” They included Russell McIntosh, who fatally shot a woman and her 2-year-old child after she threatened to expose his drug business. Others who received commutations were violent gang leaders and people convicted of crimes involving killings, kidnapping and rape.

McIntosh and most of the other violent offenders pardoned by Mr. Biden have been released from prison and now freely walk the streets.

In summary, even Biden’s own DOJ knew what was happening was illegal.

ADVERTISEMENT

All of these pardons should be rendered void and the violent criminals who were released should be thrown back in jail.

The House Oversight Committee is launching an investigation with the aim of doing just that:

If you want to read the newly-released emails in their entirety, a copy is available right here.

This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.
 

Join The Conversation. Leave a Comment.