Ramaswamy Vows To Pardon Trump
2024 Republican presidential hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy announced this week that if elected he would pardon former President Donald Trump if he is convicted on charges related to the classified documents investigation.
Ramaswamy was among the first in the crowded GOP field to come to the former president’s defense.
He wrote on Twitter that there were “two tiers of justice: one for Trump, another for Biden.” The candidate said that he “never thought we’d see the day when the U.S. President deputizes the DOJ [Department of Justice] to arrest his lead rival in the middle of an election.”
He added that there were “serious legal questions about the President’s power to declassify documents and the potential illegality of the over-classification of federal documents in the first place.”
He vowed to “pardon Trump promptly” upon taking office “and to restore the rule of law in our country.”
We can’t have two tiers of justice: one for Trump, another for Biden. One for Assange, another for Manning. One for BLM/Antifa, another for peaceful protesters on Jan 6.
I never thought we’d see the day when the U.S. President deputizes the DOJ to arrest his lead rival in the…
— Vivek Ramaswamy (@VivekGRamaswamy) June 9, 2023
Ramaswamy spoke to CNN and was asked about his earlier promise to pardon the former president. He was asked if reading the federal indictment against Trump changed his mind.
“Reading that indictment and looking at the selective omissions of both fact and law, then I’m even more convinced that a pardon is the right answer here,” he said.
When asked about his reasoning, Ramaswamy called the document “deeply politicized.”
He added that the Presidential Records Act was not directly cited, which he said was the “most relevant statute to the actual, alleged crime here.”
Ramaswamy referred to both Attorney General Merrick Garland and special counsel Jack Smith, saying that the “top question actually we should be asking is what did Biden tell Merrick Garland? And what did Merrick Garland tell Jack Smith?”
The candidate further said that the “classification scheme itself was defined not by statute but by executive order, which is interesting because executive orders, appellate courts held, do not bind a U.S. president with the force of law.”
“This is selective prosecution,” he said.
Ramaswamy added that further consideration or citation of the Presidential Espionage Act was “irresponsible.”