Trump’s pardons expose the left’s vast lawfare machine

On Sunday night, the Oversight Project announced the culmination of a long effort: President Trump’s pardons for the so-called “alternate electors” and their affiliates who faced state-level prosecution for their role in the 2020 election.

Credit belongs to President Trump and Pardon Attorney Ed Martin for seeing this process through — and for having the political will and moral memory to leave no MAGA supporter behind. These pardons are the result of over a year of focused work by the Oversight Project. And because the corporate left-wing media has predictably denounced them for their politics, prudence, and legal effect, it’s worth explaining the pardons’ justification and impact.

Participation in a constitutional process is not a crime. Operation Arctic Frost and its imitators will not define the future of American justice. These pardons will.

First, terminology matters. “Contingent electors” is the correct phrase. “Alternate electors” or “fake electors” are loaded terms invented by the press to imply criminality.

In reality, these electors prepared slates to be submitted to Congress while investigations and legal challenges into the 2020 presidential election were still pending. Their purpose was simple: to preserve flexibility should fraud or irregularities be confirmed.

The 2020 election was unlike any in modern history. Under the pretext of COVID-19, officials across multiple states expanded mail-in voting without the safeguards required by law. Signature verification, chain-of-custody rules, and registration requirements were ignored. Courts refused to hear evidence, dismissing cases on procedural grounds rather than the merits.

And somehow, we were told that the vice president and Congress — bodies that have historically played a role in adjudicating electoral disputes — no longer had any role to play. As a result, President Biden’s victory will forever carry an asterisk in the history books.

Debunking modern myths

The notion that elections can only be challenged in court is a modern myth. Since the founding, Congress has played a central role in resolving disputed elections, as have state legislatures empowered to ensure the integrity of their own processes — including, when necessary, selecting electors directly.

The list of precedents is long.

• In 1797, John Adams, as president of the Senate, allowed time for objections to Vermont’s votes.
• In 1801, Thomas Jefferson counted Georgia’s contested votes — for himself.
• In 1857, a snowstorm kept Wisconsin’s electors from voting, but their ballots were counted anyway.
• In 1876, during the Hayes-Tilden standoff, Congress created a commission to adjudicate dueling slates from four states.
• In 1961, Hawaii submitted a contingent slate while its results were still being certified.
• In 2005, both chambers of Congress debated and ultimately rejected objections to Ohio’s votes.
• And as recently as 2017, multiple House members objected to electors from several states, though they lacked Senate co-sponsors.

This long record makes clear that the use of contingent electors is not criminal — it is, in fact, perfectly constitutional.

From constitutional to criminal

So why are good-faith contingent electors from 2020 now facing state prosecutions and financial ruin? The answer is weaponization.

During the Biden years, the federal government, blue-state prosecutors, and activist networks have coordinated to transform lawful political activity into criminal conduct. The same machinery that pursued President Trump through endless investigations was turned on ordinary citizens whose only “crime” was preserving constitutional options.

Operation Arctic Frost — the campaign of “map, harass, and isolate” tactics aimed at Trump allies — illustrates this perfectly. It was designed to intimidate lawyers, donors, and officials who supported Trump’s legal challenges, freezing them out of professional and financial life. The contingent electors were swept up in that same apparatus: coordinated prosecutions, media smears, and punitive lawfare intended to silence dissent.

RELATED: Biden FBI’s Arctic Frost surveillance of lawmakers could cost the government

Photo by SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images

From Fani Willis’ politically motivated prosecutions in Georgia to Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s efforts to organize partisan coalitions against perceived “threats,” the coordination has been unmistakable. Government, activist, and media arms all moved together with one goal: to erase the America First movement and criminalize its constitutional exercise of power.

That is the true definition of weaponization — using the law to destroy political opposition.

The legal case for Trump’s pardons

Critics claim the president cannot pardon state-level offenses. But that view collapses under constitutional scrutiny. States cannot prosecute conduct that falls under federal authority once it has been pardoned.

The selection of electors is a hybrid function — both state and federal — but the contingent electors acted in service of a federal purpose: the certification of the presidency. By issuing these pardons, the federal government has declared that these individuals acted lawfully, in good faith, and consistent with historic precedent.

If the federal government deems their actions lawful, how can states claim they committed crimes? That’s a question any fair court — or any fair jury — should be able to answer easily.

If these pardons are treated honestly, the state cases will collapse. More important, this should reassure every American committed to election integrity that defending the Constitution will never again be treated as a criminal act.

RELATED: The bureaucracy strikes back — and we’re striking harder

Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

Now what?

The toll on those targeted has been immense. Many have endured years of legal harassment, public vilification, and financial ruin simply for acting according to their constitutional duty.

The Oversight Project is exploring every possible avenue to secure restitution for those harmed — whether through private support, legislative action, or further executive remedies. These pardons mark the first step in correcting the record and restoring faith in the justice system.

They are not merely acts of mercy; they are acts of correction. They affirm that Americans who act to preserve election integrity, often at great personal cost, were right to do so.

The message is clear: Participation in a constitutional process is not a crime. Operation Arctic Frost and its imitators will not define the future of American justice. These pardons will.