Pardons, Pedophiles, Predators & Power: The Real Party Of Trump

There are moments in American history when the presidency reveals more than the character of one president. It reveals something about us.

Donald Trump’s second presidency should force America—especially Americans who describe themselves as Christians, defenders of police, protectors of children, and guardians of law and order—to confront one uncomfortable question:

What are we willing to excuse when the offender is politically useful to us?

On January 20, 2025, President Donald Trump issued a sweepingJanuary 6 clemency proclamation covering virtually everyone convicted of federal offenses connected to the attack on the United States Capitol. Fourteen named individuals received commutations, while the proclamation granted a “full, complete and unconditional pardon” to the remaining convicted January 6 defendants. The Justice Department subsequently began issuing the correspondingpardon certificates. Let us establish immediately what this means—and what it does not mean. Trump did not pardon anyone for rape, child molestation, possession of child sexual abuse material, domestic violence, or other unrelated crimes. The national crisis logo, if it had a face, would come close to this flier of this column or those pardoned by Trump for the Jan. 6 insurrection.

Those offenses were separate.
But the fact that these crimes were separate does not erase the extraordinary moral and governmental question created when one president extends mass clemency to more than 1,500 people without publicly demonstrating individualized consideration of their broader criminal histories. Who was vetted? Who reviewed the records? What did the White House know about the people it was releasing?

And most importantly:
Did political loyalty become more important than public safety?

THE RECORD WAS ALREADY THERE.

Before Trump returned to office, aCBS News investigation into January 6 defendants’ criminal histories examined federal sentencing records.

CBS found at least 159 sentenced January 6 defendants with previous criminal records.

Among them were at least:

41 people with previous violent-crime convictions

10 with prior domestic-violence convictions

five with records involving violence or threats against law enforcement

and several who had faced allegations involving sexual crimes.

Those figures existed before Trump opened the clemency door. The question, therefore, is not whether every pardoned January 6 participant was dangerous. Clearly, they were not. The question is why a president would use one enormous political pardon instead of distinguishing a nonviolent trespasser from someone convicted of beating police officers—or someone carrying an extensive, unrelated, violent history. The administration itself described the January 6 prosecutions as a “grave national injustice.” But mass clemency erased distinctions that should matter in a system that claims to value law and order.

THEN CAME THE PEDOPHILES AND SEX-CRIME CASES

This is where the story becomes even more disturbing. A comprehensive June 2026Lawfare investigation of January 6 clemency recipients identified at least 97 recipients who had been arrested for, charged with, or convicted of crimes separate from January 6 since participating in the Capitol attack.

Among those:
At least 14 had been charged with sex crimes or offenses involving child sexual-abuse material.

At least six faced domestic-violence charges. And 41 were categorized as having been charged with or convicted of violent crimes. Those categories overlap, and an arrest or criminal charge is not equivalent to a conviction. But those qualifications should not obscure what investigators actually found. One case requires almost no political interpretation. Andrew Paul Johnson was released from imprisonment as a result of Trump’s January 6 pardon. Lawfare reports that Johnson was subsequently convicted in February 2026 of five charges, including child molestation, and received life imprisonment.

Even more troubling, Lawfare reports that the criminal conduct underlying his conviction occurred both before and after his pardon. That is not a Democratic talking point. That is a criminal conviction. Another independent investigation fromCitizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington identified at least 40 pardoned January 6 participants who had subsequently been rearrested, charged, or sentenced in other criminal matters. CREW reported that 7 were charged with child-sex crimes, ranging from sexual assault to possession of child pornography, and that at least 12 allegedly committed additional offenses after receiving Trump’s pardon.

So yes, the word pedophile is uncomfortable. It should be, as those children were uncomfortable, to say the least! Child sexual abuse should never become a comfortable political conversation. But neither should we falsely call every person in that group a pedophile. What we can say is that Trump’s mass-clemency population unquestionably included individuals with separate histories or subsequent cases involving child sexual abuse, sexual violence, and child-sex material. That alone demands scrutiny.

WHAT HAPPENED TO “BACK THE BLUE”?

This administration and political movement have spent years positioning themselves as defenders of police. Yet Trump’s pardons included people convicted of attacking officers during January 6. TheAssociated Press documented the sweeping pardon of violent January 6 defendants, including people convicted of assaulting law enforcement officers. More than 100 police officers were injured during the attack, and roughly 200 defendants had pleaded guilty to assaulting law enforcement before Trump’s clemency action. Consider Peter Schwartz. CBS documented Schwartz’s lengthy criminal history, including domestic violence, threats, and prior confrontations with police. He was convicted of January 6 felonies involving attacks on officers. After Trump pardoned him, a former partner publicly expressed fear about his release. Her words should haunt every politician who claims simultaneously to protect women and support law enforcement.

CBS reported that she feared coming home one evening and finding Schwartz sitting outside her house.Read CBS News’ investigation of the victim’s concerns.

This raises an unavoidable question:
What exactly does “Back the Blue” mean if attacking the blue becomes pardonable when the attacker belongs to your political tribe? Jesus said in Matthew 7:20: “Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.” The fruit matters more than the slogan.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT CLAIMING EVERY JANUARY 6 DEFENDANT WAS A MONSTER

Intellectual honesty requires another distinction. Some January 6 defendants committed relatively minor offenses. Others committed violence. Some had virtually no serious prior record. Others had extraordinary criminal histories. One reason Trump’s blanket clemency deserves examination is precisely that it treated very different defendants under essentially one political umbrella.

The Justice Department’s ownofficial clemency record confirms the extraordinary scope of presidential pardon activity beginning January 20, 2025. A pardon may be constitutionally permissible. That does not make every pardon wise. And it certainly does not make presidential clemency morally immune from criticism.

WHAT HAPPENED TO CHRISTIAN ACCOUNTABILITY?

Here is where this issue becomes personally troubling to me as both a historian and Christian. Millions of Christians helped place Trump back in office. Many did so while campaigning on morality, protecting children, opposing sexual exploitation, defending police, and restoring traditional values. So where is the outrage when the evidence becomes politically inconvenient?

Proverbs 17:15 warns:
“He that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, even they both are abomination to the Lord.”

That scripture does not contain a Republican exemption. It does not contain a Democratic exemption. It does not contain a MAGA exemption. Christianity cannot become Christ-I-anity—putting our preferred political personality in the center and moving Christ somewhere to the side.

If sexual abuse is evil when committed by your political opponent, it remains evil when committed by someone who marched for your candidate. If beating police is criminal when someone on the political left does it, beating police does not become patriotism because the offender wears a Trump hat. If protecting children matters, it must matter regardless of whose name appears on the ballot.

Isaiah 5:20 warns: “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil.”

AND WOMEN SHOULD BE ASKING QUESTIONS

This conversation cannot ignore the women who support this political movement. That does not mean women are responsible for men's crimes. They are not. But Republican women, Democratic women, independent women, and MAGA women should all demand answers when sweeping presidential power intersects with documented histories of domestic violence, sexual assault, and child exploitation. Political loyalty should never require a woman to silence her moral judgment. Neither should religion. Neither should race. Neither should party. Neither should power.

PRESIDENTIAL POWER WITHOUT PRESIDENTIAL DISCERNMENT

Trump had the constitutional authority to grant these pardons. That is not the real dispute. The more serious historical question is how that extraordinary authority was exercised. Were the files individually reviewed? Were victims consulted? Were violent histories considered? Were law enforcement officers who had been assaulted considered? Were domestic-violence records reviewed? Were sex-offense histories reviewed? Was there any serious risk assessment? CBS reported that the White House would not say whether Schwartz’s individual case had been reviewed before his pardon. That should trouble conservatives just as much as liberals. Presidential mercy without discernment can become presidential recklessness.

THE FACTS ARE WORSE THAN THE INTERNET RUMORS

Social media contains lists claiming that Trump pardoned dozens of rapists and pedophiles. Some of those lists contain legitimate cases. Others mix names, allegations, convictions, and unrelated offenses together. We should not do that. The truth is powerful enough. We do not need fake numbers. We do not need invented defendants. We do not need to label someone guilty when that person has merely been charged. We need evidence. The documented record establishes that Trump extended sweeping January 6 clemency to more than 1,500 people; some possessed serious violent criminal histories; some had separate sexual-offense histories; and subsequent research found recipients charged with child-sex crimes and possession of child sexual abuse material; and some recipients allegedly committed additional serious crimes after receiving clemency. Those facts are serious enough.

THE SECOND ELECTION TOLD US SOMETHING DIFFERENT

During Trump's first presidential campaign, America had excuses. People said they did not know what kind of president he would become. Then came four years of governing. Then January 6. Then criminal prosecutions. Then another campaign. Then another election. Then the pardons. The second time around, Americans possessed information unavailable in 2016. That makes this moment historically different. This story is therefore about much more than pardons, pedophiles, predators, and power. It is about what happens when tribal politics becomes so powerful that Americans begin excusing conduct they would condemn instantly if someone from the opposing party did the same thing.

For the record, even after being pardoned by the president, these offenders (80% white males) were involved in other tragedies that dealt with violence- or sex-related crimes. My question is still the same: why are they so angry? Whether it’s MAGA or the GOP, it concerns whether protecting children matters more than protecting political identity. Whether supporting police matters more than supporting a politician. Whether Christianity follows Jesus or simply borrows His name during election season. And whether presidential power exists to administer justice—or erase consequences for political allies. The first election told America who Donald Trump was. The second may ultimately tell history who we were.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Edmond W. Davis is a social historian and one of the world's top Tuskegee Airmen authorities. Davis is a media strategist and professor. Davis founded the country’s only National HBCU Black Wall Street Career Fest. A native of Philadelphia, PA, Davis is committed to cultural empowerment and educational equity through storytelling and civic engagement. In 2026, Davis was a grand marshal at the 38th Annual African American History Month Celebration Parade. His life is told in the award-winning 2023 short documentary ‘FROM GRIND TO GROWTH: The Edmond W. Davis Story. Davis played the courthouse jailroom deputy on the NBC TV miniseries Bluff City Law.