In a scathing discussion that has ignited fierce debate across political circles, journalist Matt Taibbi delivered what many are calling a devastating truth bomb about former Rep. Liz Cheney and others who received preemptive pardons from President Joe Biden. Speaking on former Fox News host Tucker Carlson’s podcast, Taibbi argued that Biden’s sweeping pardons for Dr. Anthony Fauci, Liz Cheney, and members of Biden’s family could backfire dramatically, exposing them to future legal jeopardy.

According to Taibbi, these pardons—intended to protect political figures from prosecution—are, in fact, a strategic miscalculation. “The thing is, about these pardons, they’re a mistake. If you want to know what’s happening, they just made it a lot easier for us to find out,” Taibbi asserted. He warned that once a pardon is issued, recipients lose their right to invoke the Fifth Amendment when testifying before grand juries or congressional committees.

“Once the pardon’s delivered, the person can’t plead the Fifth,” Taibbi explained. “If they are brought before a grand jury or a congressional committee, they have no choice but to answer—no more hiding behind silence.” Taibbi’s comments come amid long-standing allegations that figures like Liz Cheney perpetuated the so-called “Russian collusion hoax” during President Trump’s first term—a narrative that numerous investigations have debunked.

I. The Pardon Controversy: A Double-Edged Sword

Taibbi’s perspective is clear: Biden’s preemptive pardons were a political shield designed to prevent legal scrutiny, but in doing so, they inadvertently lower the barriers for future investigations. He highlighted that while these pardons were meant to protect individuals for their work on the Democratic-led January 6 Committee, they do not cover any potential charges that might arise from related misconduct.

“Why would you issue a pardon unless there’s something really bad there?” Taibbi said. “It’s as if you’re handing investigators a giant roadmap to uncover the truth.” His remarks suggest that these pardons, far from silencing criticism, could instead expose a wealth of evidence linking Cheney and others to actions that may have harmed national interests.

Legal experts Taibbi spoke with agree that the pardons are problematic. Federal litigation attorney Jesse Binnall noted on X (formerly Twitter), “The pardons are actually great news for anyone seeking to see these individuals prosecuted. No one who is just pardoned can refuse to testify by invoking the Fifth Amendment.” Binnall emphasized that this means if Congress subpoenas them, they will be forced to reveal details that might have been hidden behind legal immunity, potentially opening the door to criminal accountability.

Retired U.S. Army officer, lawyer, and author Kurt Schlichter chimed in with a provocative suggestion: “The depositions and actual testimony must take place outside of Washington DC. DC is so biased it will never convict Democrats when they commit perjury. Take this show on the road,” he wrote, echoing a growing sentiment among conservatives that the current legal and political environment is stacked in favor of Democratic figures.

II. The Fallout from Cheney’s Pardon and Political Rhetoric

The controversy doesn’t stop with Cheney. Former President Trump himself recently addressed Biden’s decision to pardon Cheney and other high-profile figures. Speaking from the Oval Office while signing executive orders, Trump questioned, “Why are we trying to help a guy like Milley? Why are we helping Liz Cheney? She’s a disaster—a crying lunatic.” These remarks, though brash, resonate deeply with Trump supporters who view the pardons as a betrayal of justice and a symbol of Democratic overreach.

Trump’s criticisms tap into a broader narrative of accountability. His comments suggest that not only do these pardons protect individuals who might have engaged in criminal conduct, but they also set a dangerous precedent that undermines the very foundations of legal and political accountability. By shielding Cheney and others from potential prosecution, critics argue, the pardons send a message that partisan loyalty trumps the rule of law.

In a statement reflecting his own conflicted position on the matter, Cheney said, “I continue to believe that giving pardons to a committee that did such important work to uphold the law was unnecessary and, because it sets a bad example, foolish.” While Cheney’s words acknowledge the controversy, they also hint at the underlying tensions within the party about balancing accountability with political strategy.

III. A History of Political Fallout: The Long Shadow of the Russia Collusion Hoax

The accusations against Cheney are not new. For years, she has been one of the most prominent voices in the push to establish a narrative around Russian collusion during President Trump’s first term. Despite numerous investigations—including those led by independent prosecutors and former FBI director Robert Mueller—no conclusive evidence has ever emerged to support the claim that Trump was a Russian asset. Instead, critics argue that this narrative was manufactured to derail Trump’s presidency and to sway public opinion.

For conservatives like Bongino and Taibbi, the pardons handed out by Biden are emblematic of a broader trend of protecting political operatives who allegedly manipulated the justice system for partisan gain. “We had the FBI, DoJ, Congress, and even foreign governments collaborate to fabricate a story that could have done serious long-term harm to our international relations,” Taibbi asserted. His relentless focus on the “Russia collusion hoax” is an effort to ensure that those who perpetuated that narrative are held accountable—regardless of their political affiliation.

This ongoing debate over accountability has far-reaching implications. If the pardons are eventually shown to shield individuals from testifying about their past actions, it could lead to a major legal and political reckoning. Taibbi’s insistence that these pardons make it “a lot easier for us to find out” suggests that he expects further revelations to come to light—revelations that could potentially alter the course of future investigations into the actions of Democratic officials.

IV. The Implications for Future Political Accountability

The discussion over Biden’s preemptive pardons is emblematic of a larger crisis of accountability in American politics. On one side, there are those who argue that pardons are a necessary tool to protect public servants from politically motivated prosecutions. On the other, critics contend that such pardons shield individuals from the consequences of their actions, thereby eroding public trust in the justice system.

Federal litigation attorney Jesse Binnall has been particularly vocal on this point. By eliminating the ability to invoke the Fifth Amendment, these pardons may force public figures to testify under oath in a variety of legal proceedings—thereby exposing potential wrongdoing that might otherwise remain hidden. Binnall’s perspective is echoed by many conservative legal analysts, who see the pardons as a double-edged sword that, while intended to protect, may ultimately lead to greater transparency and accountability.

This debate is not purely legal—it has profound political ramifications. As voters become increasingly disillusioned with what they perceive as a lack of accountability among their elected officials, the fallout from these pardons could influence upcoming elections. If the narrative that Democratic leaders have been shielded from prosecution by preemptive pardons takes hold, it may galvanize conservative support and fuel a broader demand for reform within the justice system.

Furthermore, the calls from figures like Kurt Schlichter to conduct depositions and testimonies outside of Washington, D.C., highlight concerns about the impartiality of the current legal system. For conservatives, the idea of relocating legal proceedings to a “less biased” venue is both a practical suggestion and a symbolic gesture—a statement that justice should not be swayed by partisan influence.

V. What Lies Ahead: The Road to Accountability

As the dust settles on these explosive statements, the future of political accountability in America remains uncertain. The ongoing legal and political battles surrounding Biden’s pardons and the enduring controversy over the Russia collusion hoax are likely to continue dominating the news cycle for the foreseeable future.

For now, the focus remains on ensuring that those who have manipulated the truth for political gain are not allowed to escape scrutiny. Dan Bongino, along with other conservative commentators and legal experts, is signaling that the pursuit of accountability is far from over. “You don’t get to change the course of electoral politics by making up a story and hijacking the justice system,” Bongino declared. His unwavering stance suggests that, in the coming days, more revelations may emerge that could further expose the extent of the alleged cover-up.

Should these revelations materialize, they could have a seismic impact on the political landscape. The prospect of holding prominent figures accountable—even those who have long been insulated by pardons—represents a bold shift in how political misconduct is addressed. It challenges the notion that political power can shield individuals from the consequences of their actions, and it may pave the way for a new era of transparency and responsibility in American governance.

VI. Conclusion: A Critical Moment for Political Accountability

The explosive statements by Matt Taibbi on Tucker Carlson’s podcast have set off a chain reaction that could reshape the narrative around political accountability. By focusing on Biden’s preemptive pardons and their potential to backfire, Taibbi has highlighted a critical flaw in the current system—a flaw that, if left unaddressed, could undermine public trust in the justice system and the political process.

For conservatives, the call is clear: the time has come to reexamine the actions of those who have perpetuated the Russia collusion hoax, and to hold them accountable for the lasting damage they may have caused. Whether it’s through forced testimony, renewed legal investigations, or even the potential for future prosecutions, the pursuit of accountability is poised to become a defining issue in American politics.

As the debate rages on and further evidence is scrutinized, the nation will be watching closely. The fate of prominent figures like Liz Cheney—and the broader implications of Biden’s pardons—will undoubtedly influence the direction of political discourse in the years ahead. In an era where every word is amplified by digital media and every action is under intense scrutiny, the quest for accountability is more important than ever.

Only time will tell whether these efforts will lead to a significant shift in how political misconduct is addressed. For now, the message is clear: no one, regardless of their power or position, is above the law. And as conservatives continue to press for truth and accountability, they are determined to ensure that the American people see justice done—even if it means exposing and prosecuting those who have long operated under a veil of impunity.