‘Partisan punishment’: Gregg Jarrett, Alan Dershowitz make case for why Trump should consider pardoning Eric Adams

Legal analyst Gregg Jarrett and prominent attorney Alan Dershowitz made a case Tuesday evening on Fox News for why President-elect Donald Trump should consider pardoning Democratic New York Mayor Eric Adams if the evidence shows the mayor’s case was pure political retaliation.

In September, Adams was charged by federal prosecutors with five counts of bribery and fraud, accused of seeking and accepting improper valuable benefits from foreign businesspeople, including a Turkish government official, for nearly a decade. On “Hannity,” Fox host Sean Hannity questioned the two legal experts about Trump’s recent statement on Monday, noting he will “certainly look at” issuing a pardon for the official.

“I think he should hear evidence as to whether or not Eric Adams was investigated and prosecuted in retaliation for his political positions. And if he concludes that that’s a realistic possibility, of course, he should pardon him. Nobody should be allowed, no prosecutor should be allowed to use political considerations to decide who to prosecute,” Dershowitz said.

“Now, if there is enough evidence beyond that, that’s a different story,” Dershowitz added. “But even if there’s enough evidence, if the motivation behind going after him because there’s often enough evidence against people, but if the motivation is retaliation for a political stance, that’s exactly what the framers put the pardon power in the president’s hand to avoid.”

Hannity went on to question Jarrett about the issue, to which the legal expert called out President Joe Biden’s pardon and noted how Adams’ indictment followed his criticism of the Biden administration regarding their handling of illegal immigration.

WATCH:

“Joe Biden has now so lowered the bar on presidential pardons. Why not pardon Eric Adams? Because Adams found himself like Trump in the crosshairs of Biden’s politically driven DOJ and FBI,” Jarrett said. “This case reeks of partisan punishment against a Democrat who dared to criticize Biden’s immigration catastrophe. Only when Adams lambasted Biden and the administration, did the feds come after him.”

“Gee, is that a coincidence? Not a chance. Look at the allegations in the indictment. They do not meet the bribery standards set forth by the Supreme Court. You have to have a concrete benefit in exchange for favors,” Jarrett said. “There has to be a quid pro quo, something more than just a public official cutting through red tape. They do that all the time. That’s not unlawful.”

Prior to the general election in November, Adams called out the Democrats’ continued rhetoric against Trump, stating how he believed it was “insulting” for Democrats to label the former president as a “fascist,” as well as comparing him to former Nazi leader Adolf Hitler. During a recent interview on “The View,” Adams said that “nothing is more challenging than not being able to defend yourself in public” when asked if he would accept a pardon from the former president.

All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline, and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW

Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!