We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

After spending four years throwing allies of President-elect Donald Trump in jail, President Joe Biden’s inner circle is reportedly considering whether Biden should preemptively pardon a bunch of shady D.C. bureaucrats. But don’t hold your breath waiting for Democrats to apply their “nobody is above the law” schtick to their own people — because it was never about justice. It was just about justifying lawfare.

Politico reported on Wednesday that Biden’s senior aides are debating whether Biden could issue blanket, preemptive pardons for people like Anthony Fauci, Russia collusion hoaxer and Senator-elect Adam Schiff, and Jan. 6 Committee Vice Chairwoman Liz Cheney. Politico reported that Biden, “who was intensely focused on his son’s pardon, has not been brought into the broader pardon discussions yet, according to people familiar with the deliberations.” But as independent journalist Matt Taibbi points out, “That discussions are supposedly taking place both away from Biden’s ears and in the pages of Politico is unintentionally hilarious.”

What is the reason for these potential pardons?

“Biden’s aides are deeply concerned about a range of current and former officials who could find themselves facing inquiries and even indictments,” Politico reports. A “well-connected Democrat” claimed the potential “beneficiaries know nothing.” But as Taibbi writes, “The beneficiaries know everything,” just as Biden himself does. The story is simply being floated in the public sphere now to gauge a reaction.

Fauci’s concern about an indictment is likely due to his involvement in the cover-up of the coronavirus and his major role in lockdowns — which ushered in the era of mass mail-in balloting that contributed to extreme irregularities during the 2020 election. Fauci recently admitted to Congress that there was no scientific evidence to support the six-foot “social distancing” guidelines he advocated for. This guidance was used to justify the draconian stay-at-home orders implemented during the pandemic. While Americans were forced to close their businesses down because of Fauci’s guidance, Fauci made sure that federal agencies under his leadership were receiving hundreds of millions in pharmaceutical royalties.

There are still several big questions Fauci’s handling of the Covid pandemic that demand answers. As Taibbi wrote about a potential Fauci pardon in light of the need to uncover the full truth about Covid, “Can any political consideration possibly justify cutting off investigation of the world’s biggest mystery?”

Politico reported that one reason people like Cheney and Schiff could need a preemptive pardon is that Kash Patel is set to take over the FBI.

The left’s fear of Patel apparently stems from Patel’s exposure of the Russia collusion hoax and his dismantling of Cheney’s fabricated Jan. 6 “insurrection” narrative. Patel wrote in these pages that “a key pillar of the left’s propaganda about insurrection is to distort the truth surrounding whether Trump authorized, prior to Jan. 6, the deployment of National Guard troops to keep order on that day.”

“The main architect of this disinformation campaign is former Congresswoman Liz Cheney,” Patel wrote.

One example of that “disinformation campaign” is Cheney and the committee claiming they had “‘no evidence’ to support Trump officials’ claims the White House had communicated its desire for 10,000 National Guard troops” prior to Jan. 6, 2021. But as The Federalist’s Editor-in-Chief Mollie Hemingway exclusively reported, Cheney “suppressed evidence” showing Trump called for 10,000 National Guard troops to protect the capital on Jan. 6, 2021.

Cheney also apparently enlisted the help of Cassidy Hutchinson to spread “disinformation.” Hutchinson, Cheney’s star witness, claimed she wrote a handwritten note that “included a proposed statement for then-President Trump to issue to rioters” on Jan. 6, as The Federalist’s Tristan Justice reported. Cheney displayed the note in a Jan. 6 Committee hearing. As it turns out, the note was written by Eric Herschmann, according to independent journalist Julie Kelly. Hutchinson made other claims about Trump and the events surrounding Jan. 6 that were contradicted by alleged eyewitnesses.

Schiff has a track record of twisting and even altering evidence to smear his political opponents. Schiff doctored text messages to push the false claim that a member of Congress texted former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows to instruct then-Vice President Mike Pence to overturn the results of the 2020 election. As Federalist CEO and co-founder Sean Davis reported, “Not only did Schiff misrepresent the substance of the text message and its source, he even doctored original text messages.” The messages were obtained and reviewed by The Federalist “in their entirety.”

[READ NEXT: McCarthy Has Plenty Of Good Reasons To Boot Democrats From Committee Seats (Especially Adam Schiff)]

But as Davis noted, Schiff has a long history of fabricating evidence to hurt his political enemies. Schiff’s Russia collusion hoax committee leaked emails purportedly showing Donald Trump Jr. communicating with someone about hacked WikiLeaks documents to CNN and NBC. CNN and NBC couldn’t be bothered to do actual reporting, because if they had, the outlets would have discovered that a “random person with no connection to Trump, Jr. had found his email address and sent the information to him after the documents were already publicly available,” as Davis pointed out.

If “nobody is above the law,” why is Biden’s team scrambling to preemptively pardon his allies? Could it be because their conduct was illegal? Otherwise, why the rush to protect the likes of the corrupt Fauci, Schiff, and Cheney?

After four years of throwing Trump-aligned leaders in jail, trying to imprison Trump himself, and weaponizing the justice system — all under the guise that “nobody is above the law” — Democrats appear to have no problem placing their people above the law. It’s not that they have suddenly lost their standard — they never had one. The so-called “standard” of upholding “justice” was just a way to justify their use of lawfare against their political enemies.

Brianna Lyman is an elections correspondent at The Federalist. Brianna graduated from Fordham University with a degree in International Political Economy. Her work has been featured on Newsmax, Fox News, Fox Business and RealClearPolitics. Follow Brianna on X: @briannalyman2