The previous leader of the United States, Donald Trump, along with many aligned members of the GOP, appears to be constructing a narrative for the 2024 elections. This narrative fundamentally proposes that Democrats are purposely permitting violent offenders to walk freely in society. To build this air of fear, they repeatedly use what they term the ‘Willie Horton strategy.’ This strategy involves focusing on select harrowing incidents, particularly those involving immigrant perpetrators, as a way to imprint that Democrats lack interest in Americans’ safety.
However, for the audience to accept this narrative, they’d have to overlook a significant irony. On the 6th of January, 2021, Trump himself was accused of inciting violence against his own citizens. He further promised to liberate those implicated if he manages to secure an electoral victory. Given these circumstances, his authority and credibility in matters of crime remain questionable.
An investigative piece by Legum further explains a complex situation surrounding the release of Davidson, a man sentenced for severe crimes. His release had been controversial due to the brutal nature of his offense and the unusual route his release took. Notably, commutation requests typically go through the Office of the Pardon Attorney. Previous pleas for commutation in 2013 and 2017 via the typical channels saw Davidson’s requests denied.
As Trump’s term was nearing its end, Davidson deviated from the traditional path. Instead of turning to the Office of the Pardon Attorney, he appealed directly to Trump for his release. It seems his appeal found traction due to Davidson’s lawyer, Betty Schein, who had strong ties to Trump’s administration.
In an additional twist, backing for Davidson’s release came from Alice Johnson, a woman who had previously been behind bars. Johnson’s own sentence had been commuted by Trump, a decision influenced greatly by celebrity Kim Kardashian drawing attention to her case within the Trump administration.
Instances of circumventing normal processes were not confined to Davidson’s case. Jonathan Braun, a man with a notorious criminal past of drug trafficking and aggressive loan sharking, also gained release via a final-minute commutation from Trump in 2021. However, his freedom didn’t last long. Recently, Braun was arrested and now faces allegations of domestic violence, including accusations of assaulting his wife and father-in-law over several incidents that occurred in July and August.
Although Braun pleaded not guilty to these charges, his lawyer confirmed they would be addressed in court. It’s important to note these instances of Trump’s administration bypassing typical proceedings to release known violent individuals. In some cases, these individuals are alleged to have committed violent acts once more post-release. This could be seen as an indicator of potential misuse of the commutation process in the future.
Yet, despite the questionable circumstances around these releases, responses from conservative media differ greatly when compared to accusations made towards liberals. It’s unlikely these stories will command headlines in conservative outlets. Indeed, the feedback from Trump’s campaign to Legum’s investigation was lukewarm at best.
Their statement simply read, ‘President Trump believes anyone convicted of a crime should spend time behind bars.’ Viewed within the context of questionable pardons and commutations, the hypocrisy of this statement is hard to ignore. But there may be a complex web of reasons that underpin the less-than-convincing nature of such declarations.
Each case offers glimpses of a potential future under similar leadership, where bypassing normal official channels might become more commonplace for those with the right connections. The repercussions of such decisions ripple through our society, perhaps leading to repeats of crimes and undermining faith in the justice system.
The former administration circumvented standard procedures more than once for high-profile, potentially dangerous individuals. This has already led to repeated instances of violence, serving as a stark warning for possible future manipulation of executive pardon and commutation powers.
An apparent milieu of favoritism, where those with connections to high places have access to nonstandard channels, pervades these scenarios. This favoritism can have dire consequences when it intersects with the criminal justice system, leading to the release of individuals who pose potential threats to public safety.
The lack of a widespread outcry in conservative circles despite such behavior presents a striking contrast. Dialling down the coverage for actions that are potentially against public interest lends to the perception of biased narrative control.
Lastly, inconsiderate remarks like ‘President Trump believes anyone convicted of a crime should spend time behind bars,’ lose their intended gravity when juxtaposed with questionable past actions. This unbalanced rhetoric does not inspire confidence in a consistent approach to crime and justice, throwing light on the need to critically evaluate the narratives we’re presented with.