Since she wasn’t convicted of anything, what would there be to pardon?
And that would be aside from the
question (raised during George W. Bush’s first year in office) of a new president’s possible authority to revoke pardons of a preceding president, citing Ulysses Grant’s revocation of two pardons granted by Andrew Johnson.
” Since she wasn’t convicted of anything, what would there be to pardon?”
Great point! I’m sure they’ll try to slick something in somehow, but great point. They might’ve been to clever by half and cornered themselves by not indicting her. Oh, the irony!