The pantheon of problematic presidential pardons has always cut across partisan lines.

Former President Joe Biden’s pre-emptive pardon of his son, Hunter Biden, was among the most brazen examples ever of a president putting family loyalty above presidential duty. Barack Obama’s commutation of the prison sentence of Army private and document-leaker Chelsea Manning was widely condemned as a live threat to national security. Bill Clinton’s pardon of major Democratic donor Marc Green was so suspect that it spawned a federal investigation.

As is so often the case in the Trump era, our current president has managed to take one of the most historically abused elements of presidential power and turn it up to 11. Then to 12, then to 13.

President Donald Trump’s commutation last week of the prison sentence of former U.S. congressman and prodigious fraudster George Santos is by no means this president’s most appalling abuse of clemency. But it does stand as yet another reminder that to Trump, the old Republican mantle of “law and order” means nothing — that slavish fealty to Trump’s political movement, and to himself personally, is all that matters.

Santos was the Republican political novice who shocked everyone by winning a House seat in a traditionally Democratic New York district — and who was then promptly revealed as having fabricated virtually his entire personal, educational and business history.

No, Santos wasn’t a wealthy real estate mogul. No, he didn’t work at top-flight Wall Street banking firms. No, his parents didn’t flee the Holocaust. No, his mother didn’t die as a result of the 9/11 attacks. And, yes, this compulsive fabulist did in fact embezzle campaign funds from his own donors to fund a lavish lifestyle, did commit identity theft and did fraudulently collect pandemic unemployment benefits.

After being expelled from the House on a strongly bipartisan vote, Santos pleaded guilty to defrauding his donors. He was sentenced to more than seven years in prison. Case closed.

Or it should have been. Trump on Friday commuted Santos’ sentence with what included bluntly, crassly partisan reasoning.

Don’t take our word for it. The president’s announcement on Truth Social specified that part of his rationale was that Santos “had the Courage, Conviction, and Intelligence to ALWAYS VOTE REPUBLICAN!” As if one’s party affiliation should be a factor in whether one stays incarcerated.

Presidential pardons have at times been used in noble ways: Jimmy Carter’s mass pardons of Vietnam War draft evaders come to mind, as does Obama’s mass pardon of nonviolent drug offenders. Gerald Ford’s pardon of Richard Nixon was controversial, but its stated purpose of helping America move on from the national trauma of Watergate wasn’t unreasonable.

Contrast that with Trump’s blanket pardon of the more than 1,500 supporters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Many of them physically attacked police officers and directly threatened members of Congress; all of them were attempting to prevent the peaceful transfer of presidential power.

This was undoubtedly the most deplorable abuse of presidential pardon power in America’s history.

Trump’s use of that power was typically corrupt even before that grotesque stunt. From cronies like Roger Stone, Steve Bannon and Paul Manafort to fellow shysters like former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich (a self-described “Trump-o-crat”), the lengthy list of mercy from Trump reads like a who’s-who of the worst in American politics.

Trump’s mercy extends not just to political supporters but to those who share his most dehumanizing instincts. They include former Arizona Sheriff Joseph Arpaio, best known for tormenting Latinos in his jurisdiction, and four U.S. service members convicted in relation to the killing of 14 unarmed Iraqi civilians.

In the case of Santos, Trump’s misdirected mercy will be expensive for Santos’ fraud victims. Trump’s order specifies that Santos will no longer have to make restitution — meaning he’s off the hook for some $370,000 the courts had ordered him to pay up.

A key issue in clemency for those who are clearly guilty of their crimes should be whether they are contrite. In Santos’ case, that question was answered starkly when he was asked whether he would attempt to make restitution anyway: “If it’s required of me by the law, yes,” Santos told CNN. “If it’s not, then, no.” Meaning, thanks to Trump, Santos’ victims won’t be getting one red cent.

Even some of Trump’s GOP congressional supporters are voicing disappointment at Santos’ commutation — but don’t expect more than a little grumbling. That they are willing, again and again, to accept this politicized abuse of mercy and move on should banish them forever from uttering the phrase “law and order.”

— The St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Related Articles

Virginia Democrats will try to reshape US House districts in counter to Trump’s redistricting push

What lawmakers are saying about Trump’s demolition of the East Wing

Watch those texts! Smartphones emerging as a new way for public figures to get into hot water

Deadly semitrailer crash in California renews federal criticism of immigrant truck drivers

Some furloughed workers will return to manage health insurance open enrollment as shutdown drags on

A ladder truck, an angle-grinder, a maxi-scooter and seven minutes. That appears to be all it took for thieves to nab priceless jewelry from the Louvre, the world’s most-visited museum. The vulnerability of this cornerstone of French soft power adds to the country’s sense of malaise, and fingers are being pointed over apparent security flaws.

But it speaks to something much broader, too: Criminals’ boundless hunger for gold and other precious metals and gems — not fine art — as the value of these commodities soars.

Museum raids are becoming ever more audacious as the gold price has doubled in a year — and jumped tenfold in two decades. A stampede of investors fleeing erstwhile safe assets such as government bonds is making real stuff you can keep in safes or vaults hugely desirable. The smash and grabbers are taking note. Just last month thieves used a blow torch and an angle-grinder to steal $699,000 worth of gold nuggets from the Paris Natural History Museum.

And back in November four masked men brazenly smashed display cases in the Cognacq-Jay Museum in the French capital and made off with seven 18th-century snuff boxes. Five of the seven have been recovered, according to Paris’s museum association, but people working in this corner of the art world are in a state of perpetual anxiety.

Is France a soft touch? Three heists in the space of a year does start to look careless. Louvre employees have warned about staff shortages before and they went on strike in June. But nowhere looks secure. In January robbers blew up the door to the Drents Museum in the Netherlands to loot artifacts including a gold helmet from around 450 BC.

Some thieves have started to break down stolen gold in the getaway van, ready for smelting, according to accounts from the art-dealing fraternity. A $6 million gold toilet was ripped out of England’s Blenheim Palace a few years back, ostensibly for its metal value.

The shambolic nature of the Louvre caper suggests a new level of boldness for even the lower reaches of organized crime as they look for a slice of a booming market for illicit art and antiquities, estimated at $2 billion-$6 billion.

Like cybercrime and digital currency scams, it’s all an unhappy byproduct of our increasingly cashless existence. With fewer banks to rob and less money held in shop registers, those who like to do their thieving in the real world have been turning to newly loaded cryptocurrency entrepreneurs or looking for easily lifted items like top-end watches. Art exhibits now find themselves at the more rarefied end of this unpleasant business.

This will only add to the misery of small museums, three out of five of whom say they’re worried about their future as footfall declines and costs rise. How can they fund extra security in that environment? What makes the Louvre a “slap in the face” for all museums, as art detective Christopher Marinello puts it, is that if it can happen to the grand old lady of such establishments, what hope do others have? It has already been slated to receive a lavish $900 million-plus makeover. The less exalted won’t be so lucky.

What happens next? The entire French state has been put into gear to track down the miscreants. The tiaras, brooch, necklaces and earrings from the collection of Empress Eugénie and assorted royals may be difficult to launder even if they’re broken apart and sold in hard-to-identify pieces. Security measures will be beefed up. The art community is on red alert.

But what can it do to stop the next band of chancers? Museums will need to be far more careful about crudely luring visitors with the value of their exhibits, as will collectors. Magistrates will be under pressure to hand down tough sentences to deter copycats.

And outsiders are not the only threat. The British Museum sacked a staff member in 2023 after about 2,000 treasures were reported missing, stolen or damaged. It’s all very different from the epoch-defining theft of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre a century ago, which ended up inflating its legend. With today’s Arsene Lupins having their eye squarely on shiny metals and not Da Vincis, it looks like the gold boom has made philistines of us all.

Lionel Laurent is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist writing about the future of money and the future of Europe. Previously, he was a reporter for Reuters and Forbes.

Related Articles

John M. Crisp: How do you know when you’ve become an autocracy?

Allison Schrager: The era of the illiquid millionaire is here

Nafees Alam: The post-Trump GOP — potentially the party of the sensible center

Bret Stephens: Why Mamdani frightens Jews like me

Ross Douthat: Amy Coney Barrett is looking beyond the Trump era

Katie Abraham is my daughter. I tragically lost her to a drunken driver on Jan. 19, when she was 20 years old. She loved — and was loved by — so many people. With her magnetic energy, Katie was the person people wanted to be around. She was the friend people turned to and the teammate who made every practice fun and inspiring.

Losing a child unlocked a pain I never knew existed. Losing a child to a crime adds to the depths of despair. Having my child’s legacy be associated with a politically charged and controversial operation instead of the positivity and light she contributed to those within her community is simply unbearable.

When you search my daughter’s name, you won’t find much about who she was. You will find how she is associated with the federal immigration enforcement campaign “Operation Midway Blitz.”

I have not spoken out since it began, but as Katie’s mother, I can no longer stay silent. The Department of Homeland Security said its immigration enforcement operation in Chicago is named in Katie’s honor. But Katie would not have wanted this.

Since she was young, Katie was intuitive, full of compassion and empathy, and able to see the big picture beyond her years. When she was 15, she was attacked by a German shepherd we were fostering. After a few weeks of healing, Katie expressed to me that she was glad we were fostering instead of a family with young children, who would have been hurt more severely than she had been. This is just one example of the many ways she was always looking out for others and saw the positive in all situations.

With this compassion and empathy in mind, Katie would not want to be associated with an operation in which kids witness their parents being taken into custody on their way to or from school. She wouldn’t support scaring kids with the use of military efforts in their neighborhoods or in their apartment buildings.

She would not have wanted to be associated with a campaign that targets Chicago — a city she not only loved but felt safe in. Since she was in middle school, she and I took hundreds of drives through the city’s neighborhoods. On those drives, we’d talk about music, life, her future and her thoughts on current events — you name it, we talked about it. I will always cherish those drives because we not only saw what Chicago had to offer, but Katie and I really bonded on those drives. I learned who she was becoming with each passing drive — week after week, month after month, year after year.

Whether or not you agree with Operation Midway Blitz is not the story I am here to write. I am here to tell the story of who Katie was. Katie avoided confrontation and tension. She had never spoken out on a political agenda; she was not an activist. She did not choose to be thrust into this political spotlight to advance an operation she knew nothing about.

A complex factor is that Katie’s father and his wife agreed to use Katie’s name in support of Operation Midway Blitz. I want to acknowledge the depths of her dad’s grief. I will never fault or question someone in the way they grieve.

Some may wonder: Why now? Frankly, I hoped it would go away. I learned my daughter’s name was being used this way when I was inundated by texts and phone calls from friends and family, and I have been struggling with it ever since. I hoped her name wouldn’t be associated with this operation in perpetuity. Being a grieving mother is difficult enough without being in the spotlight. But with each passing day, concerns about Operation Midway Blitz continue to mount. Katie would not want to be associated with this, taking place in a city she celebrated and felt safe in — it just isn’t consistent with who she was.

Association with the operation’s actions is not a positive reflection of who she was. I taught Katie to advocate for herself, and as heartbreaking as it is, Katie is no longer here to advocate for herself because of a crime that took place 150 miles from Chicago. She cannot advocate for herself and stand up to say “I am not a political pawn.” So I am here for her.

Katie Abraham is my daughter, and I am reclaiming her legacy.

Denise Lorence is a native of Illinois, where her daughter Katie Abraham grew up and attended elementary school and Glenbrook South High School. Katie was a student at Ohio University at the time of her death when she was visiting friends in Urbana on Jan. 19.

Related Articles

John M. Crisp: How do you know when you’ve become an autocracy?

Allison Schrager: The era of the illiquid millionaire is here

Nafees Alam: The post-Trump GOP — potentially the party of the sensible center

Bret Stephens: Why Mamdani frightens Jews like me

Ross Douthat: Amy Coney Barrett is looking beyond the Trump era

INGLEWOOD, Calif. — You might not be able to find a game in which the Vikings have looked this bad since hiring head coach Kevin O’Connell.

There were no redeeming qualities to how the Vikings played in the 37-10 loss to the Los Angeles Chargers on Thursday night at SoFi Stadium.

The struggles spanned offense, defense, and specials teams, which explains why the game was never competitive. As the final seconds ticked off the clock, everybody on the Vikings looked like they would’ve rather been anywhere else.

Here are some takeaways from arguably the most embarrassing loss O’Connell has experienced as the man in charge.

Why was Carson Wentz still in the game late?

Never mind that quarterback Carson Wentz is working through a significantly injured left shoulder. He still took countless hits throughout the game. Some of that had to do with him failing to protect himself in certain situations. Some of that had to do with a depleted offensive line not giving him enough time in the pocket. Though he showed a lot of toughness by continuously peeling himself off the turf, Wentz probably shouldn’t have been allowed to play as long as he did. It was on O’Connell to save Wentz from himself. Instead, he continued to play through an immense amount of pain, and he wasn’t very effective completing 15 of 27 passes for 144 yards, a touchdown, and an interception.

Why didn’t Max Brosmer get a chance?

There’s an argument to be made that quarterback Max Brosmer should’ve seen more playing time than he did. Though he got some tick in the final minutes, completing 3 of 4 passes for 13 yards, Brosmer had no impact on the game itself. Maybe he could’ve if he got in earlier. The offense was struggling for prolonged stretches with Wentz at the helm. It might’ve been worth seeing if Brosmer gave the Vikings a better chance to win. Asked why he didn’t play Brosmer when the game was still within reach, O’Connell noted that he didn’t want to put the undrafted free agent in a bad spot so early in his career having to play behind a depleted offensive line.

Why did Christian Darrisaw leave early?

The process of getting left tackle Christian Darrisaw feeling 100 percent is still ongoing. It doesn’t seem like he’s reached a place where he can log a heavy workload in consecutive games. To his credit, he gave it a shot for the Vikings, playing a couple of series before exiting the game for good. He clearly wasn’t feeling like himself in his limited snaps. The loss of Darrisaw was even more significant when considering the Vikings were also without right tackle Brian O’Neill. He recently returned from a sprained medial collateral ligament and couldn’t get his body ready to go on short rest.

Why wasn’t the defense able to make stops?

The easiest answer to that question is quarterback Justin Herbert looked like a man on a mission for the Chargers. When he wasn’t using his right arm to carve up the Vikings, especially in the middle of the field, he was gaining chunks of yardage with his legs. The exotic scheme that defensive coordinator Brian Flores runs has garnered a reputation of being able to confuse signal callers. That wasn’t the case for Herbert as he picked apart the defense seemingly at will. It also helped that whenever Herbert needed a break he could hand off to running back Kimani Vidal. He finished with 23 carries for 117 yards and a touchdown. It wasn’t a good look for the Vikings on defense as they surrendered more than 400 yards of total offense.

Why does it feel like this season is on the brink?

After falling below .500 for the first time this season, the Vikings are about to find out if they’re made of right stuff. They are in desperate need of a win and have tough games against the Detroit Lions and Baltimore Ravens coming up on their schedule. If the Vikings are going to turn it around, they have to start by upsetting either the Lions or the Ravens at a minimum. If the Vikings lose the next couple of games, they can start thinking about a high pick in the 2026 NFL Draft. The fate of the franchise suddenly rests on the shoulders of quarterback J.J. McCarthy as long as he’s healthy enough to start under center. He’s a beacon of hope right now with a lot of darkness surrounding the Vikings.

Related Articles

Frederick: J.J. McCarthy has to be answer to Vikings’ current mess … or else

Vikings get embarrassed in blowout loss to Chargers in primetime

Aaron Jones activated from IR. What does his return mean for the Vikings?

Carson Wentz can’t stand Thursday Night Football. How’d the Vikings handle the short week?

Vikings at Chargers: What to know ahead of Week 8 matchup