Staff Reports
Former President Biden’s hasty departure from the White House was marred by a flurry of dubious preemptive pardons, leaving many to scratch their heads and wonder what kind of deals he was cooking up on his way out. Biden’s insistence that these pardons were not admissions of guilt is almost as convincing as a used car salesman claiming their model has “only a few minor issues.” Among the recipients were not just some of his family members, but also notable figures like Anthony Fauci and Gen. Mark Milley. It seems the pardons were being tossed around like party favors at a Democrat convention, just minutes before President Trump took office.
While some Democrats were busy fluffing their pillows for a cozy night’s sleep, Rachel Vindman, spouse of the infamous retired Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, was having none of it. She took to social media to vent her incredulity that her husband, the key witness in the first impeachment saga against Trump, didn’t receive any such blanket of protection. One has to wonder if Biden genuinely forgot to extend a pardon—or if he simply knew better.
They are discovering the hard way that "there is no honor among thieves". https://t.co/QHnGVfXCrH
— Bob 🇺🇸❤️🙏#45 (@BobFighter_45) January 21, 2025
Rachel’s emotional rant stems from the notion that her family, involved in the anti-Trump drama, deserved a pat on the back in the form of immunity from prosecution. What’s striking here is that while she laments the lack of a pardon, countless Americans wonder what exactly her family needs forgiveness for. A little subterfuge, perhaps? The notion that a well-coached witness could ever merit acknowledgment instead of accountability would make even the most devoted Democrat cringe.
Vindman’s infamous whistleblowing episode unfolded as a textbook case of insubordination. Rather than following military protocol and consulting his superiors about President Trump’s July phone call with Ukraine’s Zelensky, Vindman decided to play hero with partisan attorneys at his side. How ironic that this self-proclaimed patriot chose to flout military chain of command rather than honor it! Just like a kid who thinks they can dodge homework by lying about having a stomachache, Vindman cast aside duty for personal political ambition.
Criticism of the Vindman narrative does not lack in vigor. The constitutional principle was clear in that no analyst, especially one in uniform, possesses the authority to usurp the foreign policy decisions of the duly elected commander-in-chief. An expert in military decorum should have known better than to undermine a president who was acting within his constitutional rights. Yet here we are, knee-deep in the aftermath of Vindman’s ideological escapade, while Rachel Vindman wonders why her cafeteria passes for forgiveness were overlooked.
So the question lingers: If the Vindmans did absolutely nothing wrong, as passionately asserted by Rachel, then why the clamoring for a pardon? It seems self-evident that looking for clemency only leads to further questions about their actions. The Vindmans want their tickets to the pardon party, but clearly, not everyone gets to join the VIP list. One can almost picture the fragmented scheming taking place while simply enjoying popcorn on the sidelines of political theater.
