www.newsbusters.org
Pardon Me: Trump Grants Clemency to Chrisleys, CNN Sees Conspiracy
On Tuesday night’s installment of The Source with Kaitlan Collins, conspiracy theories were in no short supply regarding the recent actions of President Trump to pardon reality TV stars Todd and Julie Chrisley, saying they were politically motivated to “protect” donors and supporters of the President.
The discussion centered on the Chrisleys, who were convicted of bank fraud and tax evasion in 2022, and suffered an arguably harsher sentence than most for their crimes. President Trump announced their pardons on May 27, 2025, with quick criticism from the left to follow.
“But only months into the President's second term, we're seeing a pattern take shape as he uses the one authority that no court or Congress can check to help high profile friends, supporters, and donors,” Collins said.
During the show, Collins showed a plethora of clips from various sources showcasing the Chrisley’s daughter, Savannah, advocating for her parent’s release, stating that she believes her parents were painted in too harsh a light simply because of their conservative beliefs and support of Trump. Savannah stated that comparing her family to the Trumps during their trial made the process political, and resulted in a harsher sentence than necessary.
Afterwards, Collins began her discussion with her panel of “expert sources”, including CNN’s Elliot Williams, Semafor’s Shelby Talcott, and Reuters’ Jeff Mason.
Williams quickly attempted to question the ethical implications of pardoning the Chrisley’s non-violent crimes, stating that: “The jury seemed to think that they were guilty. The appeals court that looked at the case thereafter seemed to think that they were guilty. So this idea that individuals were singled out and treated unfairly by the criminal justice system is just simply ludicrous."
However, the panelists, including Semafor’s Shelby Talcott and Reuters' Jeff Mason, suggested that the pardons might be part of a broader pattern of Trump using his clemency power to assist high-profile supporters and donors.
Talcott remarked that the President "feels sort of unleashed" and may be using pardons to reward allies, while Mason noted that the Chrisleys' daughter had previously spoken at the Republican National Convention, and drew a parallel between her family's legal battles and Trump's own.
Despite these discussions, there is no substantiated evidence linking the pardons to political donations or campaign support, and there is no criteria to be eligible to receive a presidential pardon.
For Mason’s part, he threw skepticism at another pardon from Trump’s first term. “The one thing that was striking to me was seeing that video with Alice Johnson standing next to him, because her case was certainly much different, with the exception that her case was championed by another reality TV star, Kim Kardashian,” he noted, failing to mention that Johnson’s pardon had bipartisan support.
Johnson had served 20+ years in prison for a non-violent drug crime.
This criticism raises an interesting point of contention. While Democrats tend to often advocate for leniency toward non-violent offenders, their criticism of Trump's recent actions highlight an interesting double standard. For instance, the Democratic Party has supported various initiatives aimed at reducing sentences for non-violent offenders, like California's Proposition 57, supported by Democratic lawmakers, which allows parole consideration for nonviolent felons and changes policies on juvenile prosecution.
The left’s criticism of President Trump's pardon of the Chrisleys, as highlighted on The Source, suggest that the opposition doesn’t come from true conviction or belief, but rather is just another way to contradict the actions of Trump, undermine his effectiveness as President, and spread baseless conspiracy theories to fit their agenda.
The full transcript is below. Click "expand" to read.
CNNs The Source with Kaitlan Collins
May 27, 2025
9:02:39 PM EST
(...)
KAITLAN COLLINS: Now, any leader who occupies the Oval Office has the power to pardon whomever they want, and many of them certainly have. But only months into the President's second term, we're seeing a pattern take shape as he uses the one authority that no court or Congress can check to help high profile friends, supporters, and donors.
Shortly before the White House confirmed that the President was pardoning the Chrisleys, he also pardoned former Virginia Sheriff, Scott Jenkins, an announcement that came just hours before the long-time Trump supporter was expected to report to prison for conspiracy, fraud, and bribery. The President argued that Sheriff Jenkins and his family, quote, "have been dragged through hell by a corrupt and weaponized Biden Justice Department."
And tonight, The New York Times is reporting that last month's pardon of Paul Walczak and a tax crimes case came after his mother attended a $1 million per person fundraising dinner for the President at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida.
My legal source to start us off tonight is CNN legal analyst Elliot Williams, who's joined here by my deeply sourced White House insiders, Semafor’s Shelby Talcott and Reuters' Jeff Mason. It's so great to have you all here on our new set tonight. So thank you for joining us.
Elliot, I want to get your take, though, because what we heard from the President there in the Oval Office was he was saying that they were unfairly treated, the Chrisleys were, and that is in part why he's– he's pardoning them. We heard that from a White House spokesperson tonight who also just told us before we came on air that's why, based on what you know, is that description accurate?
ELLIOT WILLIAMS: Well, before we begin, we were talking beforehand about who'd get to be the first to speak on the new set. And look, I win– I win the contest.
JEFF MASON: Elliot wins!
COLLINS: I mean technically, its me–
WILLIAMS: No, the first–
COLLINS: – You’re the first guest.
WILLIAMS: The first non-Kaitlan. Lucky person–
COLLINS: – It is honored.
WILLIAMS: No, no. Were they treated unfairly? It seemed–
COLLINS: – Was this in line? Was this typical?
WILLIAMS: No! No! But here's the thing. Like a jury seemed to think that they were guilty. The appeals court that looked at the case thereafter seemed to think that they were guilty. So this idea that individuals were singled out and treated unfairly by the criminal justice system is just simply ludicrous.
Now, again, I want to be clear, as you mentioned in-- in the tease here, the President has every power and every right to pardon who he wishes. That's– Article Two of the Constitution makes that quite clear. But the idea that these folks were singled out in some way, nothing in the record seems to indicate that in any way.
COLLINS: Yeah. I don't think it's that surprising, though, Jeff and Shelby, to see that this happened. I mean, she was– the Chrisleys were certainly on the President's radar from having Savannah Chrisley speak at the convention, their daughter, to doing interviews that– that obviously the President, she knows, is watching here when it comes to this in terms of what this looks like. And she also was part of a team Trump women's tour, where she was essentially, you know, out there certainly supporting him, but also trying to draw a comparison between her family and how Trump himself has been treated.
MASON: I think that was very clever. I mean, listening to her interview with Laura Trump really made me think, well, that's the way to do it, you know, if you've got the connection and you're able to draw a parallel between what you are experiencing and your family and what the President and his family have experienced, which is something that President Trump complains about a lot, feeling like he was falsely or unfairly persecuted, then you're going to get some sympathy. And you also have that reality TV connection.
The one thing that was striking to me was seeing that video with Alice Johnson standing next to him, because her case was certainly much different, with the exception that her case was championed by another reality TV star, Kim Kardashian.
COLLINS: Yeah, that's a good point. What are you hearing, Shelby, and just seeing in the pattern of how the President is using his pardon power so early on in this term? Sometimes, Presidents wait until later on to use their more controversial pardons that come out.
SHELBY TALCOTT: Yeah, I think this term around, the President, in all aspects, feels sort of unleashed. He feels like he can do whatever he wants, for multiple reasons. I remember when– one of the big things I remember when Trump first got into office, was his aides talking about the Biden pardons at the end of President Biden's term and how he pardoned his family, and they felt like that gave them sort of a pass to sort of do whatever they wanted with these pardons, and we're seeing that.
And I also think, to Jeff's point, about the, sort of, weaponization of the DOJ argument, we've seen Trump say that with multiple people that he's pardoned. So there's a clear line with Trump believing that these people have– have had these cases that have been weaponized with the DOJ, just like we heard him say on the campaign trail over the past few years, his argument that his own cases were weaponized by the DOJ.
(...)