This episode was originally broadcast July 6, 2019.

As the House of Representatives continues its impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump, we go back in time to the Nixon administration, when the threat of impeachment and a presidential pardon changed the course of history. We then examine the pardons system and learn why it has stopped functioning as originally intended. 

We begin our show by finding parallels between Trump and former President Richard Nixon. Special counsel Robert Mueller’s report on Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election documents instances in which pardons were offered to members of Trump’s administration to keep them from cooperating with investigators. And Trump has said he can pardon himself. Similar scenarios came into play during the Watergate scandal, and in a never-before-broadcast interview, we hear President Gerald Ford explain his decision to pardon his predecessor.

Trump has brought presidential pardons into the news by granting clemency to several controversial people, including Joe Arpaio, a former sheriff in Arizona who targeted immigrants at traffic stops. We go beyond the headlines and tell the story of a pardons system that’s completely broken down. We focus on the case of Charles “Duke” Tanner, a former boxer who is serving 30 years in federal prison after being convicted of drug trafficking. His arrest came during the war on drugs, which started in the 1980s, putting tens of thousands of black men in prison for decades. Tanner has applied for clemency twice, but his application is languishing among 13,000 others at the federal Office of the Pardon Attorney. 

We end with a look at why the mechanism for granting pardons has stopped functioning. We meet a pardons advocate and a former staff member of the pardon attorney’s office and learn that the system stalled after President Barack Obama attempted to reduce mass incarcerations from the war on drugs. The pardon attorney’s office has been without leadership for more than two years, and the Trump White House is ignoring its recommendations.


Reported and produced by Reveal’s Michael I Schiller and by Anna Hamilton. Edited by Taki Telonidis. 

Data analysis by Melissa Lewis. Our production manager is Mwende Hinojosa. Our associate producer is Najib Aminy. Original score and sound design by Jim Briggs and Fernando Arruda, who had help from Katherine Rae Mondo and Amy Mostafa.

Support for Reveal is provided by the Reva and David Logan Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the John S. And James L. Knight Foundation, the Heising-Simons Foundation and the Ethics and Excellence in Journalism Foundation.


Reveal transcripts are produced by a third-party transcription service and may contain errors. Please be aware that the official record for Reveal’s radio stories is the audio.

Al Letson:This podcast is brought to you by the St. Louis Art Museum, Featuring the outstanding exhibition Dutch Painting in the Age of Rembrandt, from the Museum of Fine Arts Boston. Plan your St. Louis Art Museum visit today at


Al Letson:From the Center for Investigative Reporting and PRX, this is Reveal. I’m Al Letson. The House of Representatives has been investigating whether President Trump attempted to influence a foreign government for his own political gain. The impeachment inquiry brings back memories of Bill Clinton and before him, Richard Nixon, who under threat of impeachment resigned and was later pardoned.


Al Letson:As it turns out, both the impeachment clause and the pardon power are from the same part of the Constitution. When it comes to presidential pardons, Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 says “and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.” Those 21 words are what this show is all about.


Al Letson:We first aired this episode a few months back and we’re revisiting it because suddenly, it has a whole new level of relevance. In today’s English, granting clemency can mean one of two things. There’s a pardon, which wipes someone’s record clean after they’ve already left prison. They get their civil rights back, the right to vote and even own a firearm. Then, there’s a commutation of sentence, where the president lets you out of prison, but you still have a criminal record.


Al Letson:President Trump has granted 15 pardons, and many of those cases have been controversial.


Audio:The president has decided to pardon Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Arizona. The court held him in criminal contempt for violating a judge’s order in a racial profiling case and for continuing to target immigrants in terms of traffic stops.


Al Letson:Trump also pardoned former soldier Michael Behenna, who was sentenced to 25 years for murdering an Iraqi after cutting off his clothes while interrogating him in the desert.


Audio:Military prosecutors says that Michael Behenna killed a suspected Al-Qaeda terrorist to avenge the deaths of two soldiers who died in a roadside bombing.


Al Letson:Trump has pardoned conservative commentators.


Audio:He has plans to grant a full pardon to conservative commentator and author Dinesh D’Souza.


Al Letson:And relied on his friends and celebrities to make his decisions.


Audio:Tonight, granting the request made by reality star Kim Kardashian, after her visit to the White House.


Audio:Today, the president commuting the sentence of Alice Johnson, a 63-year-old great-grandmother serving time-


Al Letson:Then, there’s the way Trump talks about pardons for the people around him. The word “pardon” appears in the Mueller report 63 times. It describes how pardons were discussed for Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen and former campaign chair Paul Manafort, when they were being questioned during the special counsel’s investigation. And in June of 2018-


Audio:From the president this morning-


Al Letson:… Trump even tweeted-


Audio:… that he has the, quote, “absolute right to pardon himself.” He goes on to write, “but why would I, when I’ve done nothing wrong?”


Al Letson:Bucking the system and using pardons as bargaining chips. This may feel like new territory, but it all sounds familiar to historian Ken Hughes, an expert on presidential abuses of power at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center.


Ken Hughes:Nixon was using the pardon power during Watergate and during the Watergate coverup as a tool of expanding his own political power.


Audio:The burglars broke through a fire escape door that led to the committee’s offices. [crosstalk 00:03:35]-


Audio:Democratic officials today held a series of meetings to talk about tighter security at the national headquarters there in Washington.


Al Letson:Today, we’re going to look at the pardon power and what we can learn from how the president is using it. For Ken Hughes, what’s happening today stirs up memories of Richard Nixon and Watergate.


Ken Hughes:I always try to get past the Watergate break-in as quickly as possible, because it’s just the tip of the iceberg.


Al Letson:The tip of the iceberg that ultimately revealed how Nixon was involved in political conspiracy, sabotage and obstruction of justice. A lot of the evidence came from the famous Nixon tapes.


Ken Hughes:Richard Nixon was cursed and blessed with kind of omnipresent taping in the Oval Office and various other White House locations.


Al Letson:Nixon’s secret recordings were a gold mine for the House Judiciary Committee, which used some of them to build an obstruction of justice case against the president. But Ken was convinced he could find even more examples of abuses of power, so when the National Archives released the tape in bulk, he did some digging.


Audio:In fact, the intention being, ha, [crosstalk 00:04:41]-


Al Letson:This is conversation 437-19. It’s hard to hear, but it’s a pardon’s bombshell. It’s 1973 and Nixon is talking to White House chief of staff, HR Haldeman. The Watergate coverup is collapsing and the president is trying to shield himself. In one part Nixon says, “There’s nothing more important than to keep me in this f-ing office.”


Audio:There’s nothing more important doing a job than to keep me in this (beep) office.


Al Letson:The ace up Nixon’s sleeve is the pardon power. Nixon tells Haldeman that if he can bury the trail connecting him to Watergate, it’s pardons all around. He says, “I don’t give up.”


Audio:I don’t give up. (beep) What comes out on you-


Al Letson:“What comes out on you, there’s going to be a total pardon.”


Audio:… there is going to be a total pardon.


Ken Hughes:Now this promise, which I found back in the 1990s when I was going through the tapes on my own, had never come to light during the Watergate hearings. It would’ve been all by itself an impeachable offense.


Al Letson:What is Nixon telling his staff and the people that may have committed illegal acts about pardons? What is he talking to them about?


Ken Hughes:The president was telling his top aides, who were also his co-conspirators in obstruction of justice, that they could commit perjury before the Senate Watergate Committee and count on a pardon from the president. He was basically abusing his pardon power, perverting his pardon power, as a get-out-of-jail-free card, a way to put himself above the law.


Ken Hughes:With Trump, we’re not going to need secret tapes to prove that he dangled the possibility of pardons over the heads of key witnesses against him.


Al Letson:That’s because this time it’s being talked about in the open. Here’s Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani being interviewed on CNN.


Audio:You said, “I think this may get cleaned up, this probe, with a few pardons.”


Audio:These things get cleaned up. Ford did it, Reagan did it, Carter did it, Clinton did it and Bush did it in political investigations.


Audio:So you’re saying after the probe is over, it may be cleaned up with any pardons.


Audio:If people are unfairly prosecuted.


Al Letson:In Richard Nixon’s case, he never got to grant those pardons. A year after that conversation with his chief of staff, his presidency was crumbling.


Ken Hughes:There had been a vote by the grand jury to characterize Nixon as an unindicted co-conspirator in obstruction of justice.


Al Letson:Dan Kobil is a professor of law at Capital University in Ohio. Dan says, “In the final days of Nixon’s presidency, White House aides are starting to think about the president’s exit strategy.” This is when Nixon goes from being the person who grants pardons to someone who could benefit from one. The first mention of a pardon for Nixon comes on August 1st when Secretary of State Al Haig calls a meeting with the vice president, Gerald Ford.


Dan Kobil:Now you have to remember this is Ford as vice president, who has no role in pardons at all, and so he’s got Haig giving him a hand-written document that says that a president can pardon prior to indictment in the federal system.


Al Letson:Haig spells out a few options, and he tells Ford that the president can pardon himself or be pardoned by his successor. Ford is surprised by this and for good reason. It’s the first time a US president has ever tested the waters of pardoning himself. But it never comes to that. Instead, on August 8, 1974:


Audio:Good evening. This is the 37th time I have spoken to you from this office.


Al Letson:Facing possible impeachment, Richard Nixon resigns.


Audio:Therefore, I shall resign the presidency, effective at noon tomorrow. Vice President Ford will be sworn in as president at that hour in this office.


Al Letson:Ford becomes president and he’s eager to put Nixon behind him.


Audio:My fellow Americans, our long national nightmare is over. Our-


Al Letson:He wants to get to work in problems his administration has inherited: unemployment, high inflation and a domestic energy crisis. But the country is still obsessed with Watergate and the public wants to know what will happen to Nixon. Almost a month into his presidency, Ford does what he never imagined doing.


Audio:Serious allegations and accusations hang like a sword over our former president’s head.


Al Letson:He pardons Nixon.


Audio:Through the pardon power conferred upon me be the Constitution, have granted and by these present do grant a full, free and absolute pardon onto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States, which he-


Al Letson:Years later as a law professor writing about clemency, Dan saw this move as the most constitutionally significant pardon in US history and he thought, wouldn’t it be cool to ask Ford why in the end he decided to do it.




Audio:Good afternoon, President Ford. This is Dan Kobil, professor at Capital Law School.


Al Letson:This is the first time this 2001 interview has ever been made public.


Audio:Yes, nice talking to you, Dan.


Audio:Nice talking to you. Thank you for agreeing to-


Al Letson:Ford says when he first came into office, he wasn’t leaning towards pardoning Nixon. Then came his first presidential press conference on August 28, 1974.


Audio:Please sit down. Good afternoon. At the outset, I have a very-


Dan Kobil:He felt that the country had a number of significant economic problems, foreign policy problems.


Audio:Would you use your pardon authority, if necessary?


Dan Kobil:And yet the only questions that the press seemed to be interested in, in his view, pertained to what will happen to Richard Nixon.


Audio:May I just follow up on Helen’s question? Are you saying, sir, that the option of a pardon for former President Nixon is still an option that you will consider, depending on what the courts will do?


Audio:Of course. I make the final decision and-


Audio:Oh, as I returned from that press conference, where I was convinced that the only way to solve the problem was to think about granting a pardon.


Audio:And that’s your first press conference where you had several pardon questions, evidently.


Audio:Many pardon questions.




Audio:And so I went back to the Oval Office and as I recall, I asked Phil Buchen-


Al Letson:Phil Buchen was a chief White House lawyer.


Audio:… to explore my authority in the first place.


Audio:Mm-hmm (affirmative).


Audio:And to report back to me because I was very frank. I was considering the possibility, providing it would achieve what I felt was necessary, getting Mr. Nixon’s problems off my desk.


Audio:So that press conference really triggered your realistic consideration of it right off the bat, huh?




Audio:Mm-hmm (affirmative).


Audio:I was dismayed that the press was so preoccupied with that, that I could visualize that every press conference that followed for the next X number of months would be the same. I thought that was unfortunate from a country’s point of view.


Al Letson:Ford was in a bind. The public wanted a resolution. Nixon was threatening to plead not guilty if he was prosecuted, promising to drag a messy trial through the courts.


Audio:President Gerald R. Ford summoned newsmen to the White House suddenly this Sunday morning and announced that he was granting a full, free and absolute pardon to former President Richard M. Nixon.


Audio:Now you’ve been quoted as calling the pardon decision “the most difficult of my life ever.”


Audio:I had a visceral feeling that the public animosity to Mr. Nixon was so great that there would be a lack of understanding and the truth is, that’s the way it turned out.




Audio:The public and many leaders, including dear friends, didn’t understand it at the time.


Dan Kobil:His very dear friend, who had been his press secretary for years, resigned when he granted the pardon to Nixon. He asked him not to resign, but the day that he did that he said, “I cannot work for you any longer,” and he resigned. That was a huge personal loss to Ford, so he got tremendous pushback I think for having granted the pardon.


Al Letson:Do you think he expected that? I mean, it’s such a controversial decision, even looking back now. I mean, did Ford understand the consequences of that decision?


Dan Kobil:He knew that there were so many people who hated Richard Nixon who would never forgive him for pardoning him. He suggested that he wanted to grant the pardon quickly, because it was like ripping a bandage off a wound. Better to do it quickly and get the pain out at once, rather than do it slowly or drag it out.


Al Letson:The outcry wasn’t because of the pardon alone.


Audio:I was criticized that I didn’t get an admission by President Nixon that he was in error and so forth.


Al Letson:But Ford didn’t look at it that way.


Dan Kobil:One of the very interesting personal facts about Ford is that he for the rest of his life kept in his wallet a page from an opinion of the Supreme Court in a case called Burdick v. United States.


Audio:I have a card in my pocket which I carry with me. Let me try to find it here.


Audio:Is that the Burdick case?


Audio:The justices found that a pardon, quote, “carries an imputation of guilt, comma, acceptance, comma, a confession of it,” end quote.


Audio:Mm-hmm (affirmative).


Audio:So whether Nixon agreed to the pardon, the fact that he accepted it is a confession.


Dan Kobil:I ultimately came away from my interview with him convinced that he had acted out of principle. He did what he believed was best for the country, as opposed to best for himself. And in fact, the fact that critics who had said that he had done the wrong thing with Nixon, in retrospect had changed their mind and said that Ford had done the right thing for the country.


Audio:Were you ever worried that maybe Nixon had done anything else that you didn’t know about that you’d be pardoning him for?


Audio:That was plenty.


Audio:That’s wonderful. You said that was enough, in other words.


Audio:That was enough. With obstruction of justice, that was ample.


Al Letson:Dan’s interview with President Ford is from 2001. Ford passed away five years later at the age of 93.


Al Letson:Fast forward to today and accusations of obstruction of justice and abuse of power are swirling around the White House. Dan says we once again have a president under investigation and talk of pardons.


Dan Kobil:I think there are a number of similarities and I think it’s a valid comparison. One of the things that Nixon’s representatives did after the Watergate break-ins is floated the possibility of a pardon. Now today, we hear about President Trump’s personal attorney discussing pardons with Michael Cohen, with Paul Manafort, clearly with a goal of keeping them quiet.


Al Letson:Like we said before, President Trump has also said he could pardon himself and he’s made clemency decisions on the likes of celebrity friends. But in doing that, he’s ignoring thousands of people who have filed for clemency and are waiting in line.


Charles Tanner:If I could talk to President Trump, I will first and foremost tell him I’m seeking this clemency based off of change, hope and the possibilities of making America great again.


Al Letson:When we come back, how the pardon system broke down. You’re listening to Reveal.


Speaker 5:Support for Reveal comes from Stanford Children’s Health and the newly expanded Moore Children’s Heart Center. Doubling in capacity, the nationally-recognized Children’s Heart Center is now able to deliver the best possible care to even more patients with heart disorders.


Speaker 5:With brighter and quieter clinic rooms, beautiful art, and innovative devices and cutting-edge technology, the patient experience is made less stressful and scary and allows kids to be kids. Stanford Children’s Health, access to excellence. Learn more at


Al Letson:Hey, hey, hey. I’ve got a brand-new podcast to recommend. It’s called Sick from WFYI and Side Effects Public Media in Indianapolis.


Al Letson:In the 1970s and ’80s, dozens of women went to an Indianapolis fertility clinic in hopes of getting pregnant. The doctor said he could help, but what happened in his office wasn’t what the women had signed up for. Reporters Lauren Bavis and Jake Harper take a hard look at the fertility industry, the doctor’s abuse of power, and the generations of lives he’s affected.


Al Letson:New episodes are out Tuesdays, starting October 15th. Subscribe wherever you get your podcast, and for more information, visit


Al Letson:From the Center for Investigative Reporting and PRX, this is Reveal. I’m Al Letson. Today, we’re talking about clemency, the power the president has to set people free from federal prison or to scrub their record clean after they’ve gotten out.


Al Letson:We first aired this show this past summer, and so far, President Trump’s granted pardons to 15 people. As we mentioned earlier, some of those cases have been controversial, like the US soldier who’d been convicted of murdering a suspected terrorist in the Iraqi desert, the cattle ranchers that inspired the armed takeover of a wildlife refuge in Oregon.


Al Letson:But there’s another story, one that’s not in the headlines at all. It’s the story of the people who haven’t been pardoned, but have gone through the official channels and applied for clemency and are waiting for answers. One of those stories begins in the ring.


Audio:… and [crosstalk] not long ago as [crosstalk 00:21:41]-


Al Letson:It’s a summer night in 2003, and the Civic Center in Hammond, Indiana is full of people. They’re here to watch the fights.


Audio:… the biggest test of his professional career. It’s a battle of Indiana. George “Honey Boy” Blades takes on the undefeated Charles “Duke” Tanner. George Blades is 28 years old [crosstalk]-


Al Letson:The battle’s being broadcast on national TV, and that’s a big deal for the up-and-coming boxers. Charles “Duke” Tanner and George “Honey Boy” Blades, both from Indiana, are meeting in the ring for the first time.


Audio:… Duke Tanner in the red trunks. He is unbeaten at 17 and O. Everywhere his entourage goes, and you can hear them chanting, “Who’s got next?” His nickname/slogan is, “I got next.” It started off in basketball [crosstalk 00:22:21]-


Al Letson:The two men enter the ring and touch gloves.


Audio:[crosstalk] his left hand [crosstalk 00:22:26]-


Al Letson:Honey Boy is smaller. He dances around at a frenetic pace. Duke looks rooted, solid in his stance. He snaps out his left jab over and over. The punches come incredibly fast.


Audio:Tanner’s snapping back Blades’ head with that jab.


Al Letson:Then Duke explodes into motion, delivering body shots and combinations.


Audio:[crosstalk] hit him with the right hand. [crosstalk] the weight of Duke Tanner.


Al Letson:Duke catches him with a solid right, then chases Blades, raining down big punches. It looks like he’s going for the knockout.


Audio:Oh, Blades looks to be in trouble. Let’s see if he can steady himself here.


Al Letson:But Blades doesn’t go down and by the ninth round, they both look gassed. They’re holding on to each other, winded, dripping with sweat. The fight goes a full 10 rounds, and in the end …


Audio:[inaudible] and your winner, Charles “Duke, I Got Next” Tanner. [crosstalk 00:23:19].


Al Letson:The decision goes to Duke.


Audio:[crosstalk 00:23:23].


Al Letson:It’s been 16 years since that fight, and Charles “Duke” Tanner has spent most of that time in federal prison.


Automated:This call is from …


Charles Tanner:Charles Tanner.


Automated:An inmate at the federal prison. This call is being recorded and is subject to monitoring. Hang up to decline the call or to accept, dial five now.


Al Letson:Hey, Duke. How you doing?


Charles Tanner:Oh, man, another blessed day, man. Another day closer to coming home.


Al Letson:A lot was going on around the time of that fight. Duke was 23 years old, a hometown hero from Gary, Indiana. He came up through the Police Athletic League’s boxing program at the Golden Gloves. He went on to a 19 and O professional career before it all came crashing down.


Charles Tanner:It was the best moment of my life, but I was also so much with trying to get my family and my friends, and I got caught up in this in a moment when I got caught up into the crime life trying to save everybody.


Al Letson:Duke was involved in drug trafficking, and he got caught in a sting by the Gang Response Investigative Team, a state and federal taskforce. They accused Duke of running a criminal organization called The Renegades that sold crack, powder cocaine, and marijuana.


Charles Tanner:I was found guilty by a jury. They gave me a life sentence for it. I had life without parole. My only way home was, I hate to say it, but my only way home before would’ve been in a casket.


Al Letson:Duke got two life sentences without the possibility of parole. Duke’s arrest back in 2004 and his two life sentences were part of America’s War on Drugs.


Audio:Drugs are menacing our society.


Al Letson:Which was launched by Ronald Reagan in the 1980s.


Audio:They’re threatening our values and undercutting our institutions. They’re killing our children.


Al Letson:Congress passed a bunch of tough on crime bills, like the Anti-Drug Abuse Act.


Audio:Last year alone, over 10,000 drug criminals were convicted, and nearly $250 million of their assets were seized by the DEA.


Al Letson:New sentences guidelines and mandatory minimums put first-time offenders away for decades, and there was nothing judges could do about it, even if they thought the sentence was too harsh. Then came the crime bill of 1994.


Audio:When this bill is law, three strikes and you’re out will be the law of the land. The penalty for killing a law enforcement officer will be death. We will have the means by [crosstalk 00:25:54]-


Al Letson:Three strikes laws added a lot of nonviolent drug offenders to the growing federal prison population. So let me sum it up. When Ronald Reagan took office, there were about 26,000 people in federal prison. Today, there are more than 180,000 and African Americans are 20 times more likely to be sentenced to life without parole for a nonviolent crime than white convicts. Mark Ostler thinks that drug sentences laws from that era were unfair.


Mark Ostler:I was a federal prosecutor in Detroit from 1995 to 2000, which meant that I did a lot of crack cases. After a while I stopped believing in the sentences that we were getting. There was the 100-to-one ratio back then between crack and powder cocaine that created incredibly long sentences for crack.


Al Letson:Mark stopped being a prosecutor and started fighting sentencing laws. He took it all the way to the Supreme Court.


Mark Ostler:Specifically, working to change that ratio of 100 to one in crack sentencing, and we won. In 2009, I won a case in the Supreme Court, United States v. Spears. The Supreme Court held that the sentencing judge could categorically reject that ratio.


Al Letson:The next year, Congress changed the law so that sentences for crack cocaine were more in line with powder cocaine, but it didn’t apply to people who had already been convicted.


Mark Ostler:That’s how I got interested in clemency, is looking for a way to make that new law apply to people who were rotting away in prison for a sentencing rule that was now gone.


Al Letson:It wasn’t just the sentencing. It was the way the drug war led to mass incarceration and how it disproportionately affected African American men. In Duke Tanner’s case, he got life, even though it was his first offense and it was nonviolent.


Al Letson:Is a guy like Charles “Duke” Tanner who the framers of the Constitution had in mind when they put together the pardon power in the first place? I mean, who do you think it was made for?


Mark Ostler:I think it was made for exceptional circumstances, either broadly or individually. It was kind of a social safety valve, in a way, that if something felt unfair, that it was a way of addressing that unfairness, whether it was one person or many.


Al Letson:The case against Duke and the Renegades was built with a cooperation of an informant who’d been caught with drugs and a gun. The man wore a wire and set up a phony drug deal. He showed up with a duffle bag and cooler filled with fake cocaine. As soon as Duke took the containers and put them in the back of his girlfriend’s Grand Am, his life changed forever.


Al Letson:All that to say for Charles “Duke” Tanner, who’s locked up in a federal prison in Pennsylvania, there’s only one person in the world who has the power to get him out today. What would you say to the president if you could talk to him directly?


Charles Tanner:If I could talk to President Trump, I would just tell him I’m seeking this clemency based off of change, hope, and the possibility of making America great again. Me, I feel still young. Even though I’m 38 years old, I’m planning on fighting again, but me, just to be able to lace the gloves up again, I want a championship of life. You know what I mean? To share that back with other kids that’s coming up and not make the mistakes that I did and do the things that I’ve done that landed me in federal prison.


Al Letson:So tell me how many times have you applied for presidential clemency?


Charles Tanner:All right. I applied on October of 2014, and I did a new one just this October of 2018 that’s pending right now.


Al Letson:There’s a system that’s been in place for 125 years to process clemency requests like Duke’s. It’s called the Pardon Attorney’s Office, and it’s a part of the Department of Justice. They make recommendations to the White House. It’s where Duke’s application went first. Sam Morrison is a lawyer who worked in that office for 13 years.


Sam Morrison:It’s a matter of trying to look at the whole person.


Al Letson:Sam used to review applications. Now he represents clients trying to get clemency.


Sam Morrison:The criteria in general would be things like, one, what is the nature of the offense? How serious was it? Was there a victim? How long ago did it occur? What, if any, other criminal record does the applicant have? What is their reputation in the community, to the extent that we could determine that? All those things go into the mix.


Al Letson:Duke seems to fit the criteria. He’s a nonviolent first-time offender. He’s completed over a thousand hours of educational programs and mentored other prisoners. Duke’s got 81,000 signatures on a petition and a letter of support from the mayor of his hometown, Gary, Indiana. He’s already served nearly 15 years. All these factors should work in his favor with the lawyers of the Department of Justice.


Sam Morrison:Because if you can convince them that you are not a risk to recidivate and that you have the right attitude, that you accept responsibility for what you did, and so on, and they give you a favorable recommendation, well, that’s all the president typically is going to know about the case. So, you’re very likely to get a pardon. Trump, of course, has been different.


Sam Morrison:Trump has been a bit of a departure from the norm in the last 50, 60 years, at least. None of the pardons or commutations that he’s granted thus far have gone through the normal advisory process.


Al Letson:In other words, President Trump has never granted clemency based on advice from the Pardon Attorney’s office. Instead, listening to celebrities and friends. If you go to the Department of Justice’s website and count the clemency petitions that are waiting for answers, there are more than 13,000 of them waiting for a yes or no.


Al Letson:Trump inherited most of that backlog from the Obama Administration, and in a few minutes we’re going to explain how that happened. But for now, what you need to know is that this is a record-breaking number, a crazy number.


Al Letson:When President Reagan took office, only about 500 people were waiting for an answer on their clemency request. Now we’re over 13,000. What does that mean for the people behind bars who are waiting?


Charles Tanner:One of my favorite quotes in here’s that great people are created by great mistakes and they are learned from, not from great success that’s gloated upon. You know what I mean? I have repented, and I have done everything that my sentencing judge told me to do when he gave me a death sentence. I’ve done it, and he’d remove them. What is it that we sitting in here for, just rotting away wasting tax money, when we can be out working and doing the things that we’re supposed to be doing?


Charles Tanner:I’m asking for the president to give me a clemency and commute my sentence and let me go home, you know what I mean? And be a productive citizen. That’s the best way that I see fit for me.


Al Letson:In 2016, Duke’s sentence was reduced to 30 years after changes were made to the federal sentencing guidelines, but Duke still has nearly 12 years of that sentence left to serve. For Duke and thousands of others locked up in federal prison, the chance of presidential clemency provides a ray of hope.


Charles Tanner:I have to sleep in at nights, but I stay in prayer. You know what I mean? Actually, right now I’m fasting right now anyway, so we’re just praying. We’re just praying and waiting. I got…


Al Letson:Just like that, his phone call was cut off. Praying and waiting. There’s not much else he can do at this point, but there are other people who are trying to do something.


Amy Povah:I’ve got so many who have double life sentences, life sentences, for a first offense, and that should be the biggest red flag of all for a society. Clemency is really the only thing that can correct a huge problem on a big scale.


Al Letson:You’re listening to Reveal. From the Center for Investigative Reporting and PRX, this is Reveal. I’m Al Letson.


Al Letson:Right now, 13,000 people are waiting to hear if President Trump will grant them clemency. One of them is Charles “Duke” Tanner, a former pro boxer who’s serving a 30-year drug sentence in federal prison. A lot of people are rooting for Duke, including Amy Povah.


Amy Povah:We’ve sent in the clemency petition, as you know, and then the supplemental where all of the [crosstalk 00:35:28]-


Al Letson:She’s on the phone with Duke right now. He calls her often from prison. Amy helped Duke file his most recent application for clemency.


Amy Povah:So you’re anticipating a big return of Duke Tanner, heavyweight boxer, back in the ring.


Charles Tanner:Yes, yes, for sure. Only thing is I’m going to be different weight class.


Amy Povah:Well, I better have a front row seat.


Charles Tanner:Oh, you come on. You’re going to be the one walking out with me when I come out, when we come out.


Amy Povah:Wow. Well, I can’t wait.


Al Letson:We’re inside Amy’s dining room on an overcast day in Malibu, California. It’s her makeshift office covered with stacks of paper, boxes full of letters from prisoners and their supporters.


Al Letson:Amy runs a volunteer nonprofit called the Can-Do Clemency Foundation. She started it to help women serving life sentences for nonviolent drug crimes. Now she’s helping men get clemency, too, nonviolent drug offenders like Duke.


Al Letson:Over the years, she’s helped a lot of people. She’s worked with them to fill out petitions, collect letters of support. She’s even held vigils in front of the White House.


Amy Povah:Josephine Ledesma. she is an absolute sweetheart. She volunteers in the chapel. She’s serving life without parole.


Al Letson:Amy’s standing in front of the White House holding a big blowup photo of a woman named Josephine Ledesma. Amy calls her Josie. In the picture, Josie is wearing a maroon cap and gown from one of the many programs she completed in prison.


Amy Povah:She’s already served over 20 years. She’s been in since 1992. It’s time to reunite her. Her children were small when she went into prison. Now they’re all grown, and they have families.


Al Letson:Now, her kids have kids. Josie’s got 10 grandchildren. Just like Duke, Josie was sentenced to life in prison for drug trafficking. It was her first offense, a nonviolent crime. Josie and Duke are two of the dozens of people Amy is working with to get clemency.


Amy Povah:I’ve got so many who have double life sentences, life sentences, for a first offense, and that should be the biggest red flag of all for a society. Clemency is really the only thing that can correct a huge problem on a big scale.


Amy Povah:People come out of prison every single day who have committed murder or arson or bank robbery or all kinds of different crimes, who get less time than a lot of people serving life for pot. And they’ve got more time than somebody who has priors and has raped and even killed somebody.


Al Letson:Most of the people she’s helping are in prison because of the War on Drugs. When it started in the 1980s, about 30,000 people were in federal prisons. By President Obama’s first year in office, that number had ballooned to more than 200,000. Obama saw this as a problem, so in 2014 he started something called the Clemency Project.


Audio:It does not make sense for a nonviolent drug offender to be getting 20 years, 30 years, and in some cases life imprisonment.


Al Letson:The Clemency Project was designed to get nonviolent first-time drug offenders out of prison after they paid their debt to society.


Audio:It is my strong belief that by exercising these presidential powers, I have the chance to show people what a second chance can look like.


Al Letson:Under the program, Obama did let a lot of people out of prison. He gave out 1,715 commutations of sentence, compared to George W. Bush who only gave out 11. But even with the Clemency Project, a lot of people who met the criteria were not released.


Amy Povah:Very early on, I started seeing perfect candidates getting denied, women who were first offenders who were minor participants, and right then I was just like, oh, this is not going well.


Sam Morrison:It was kind of hit or miss.


Al Letson:That’s Sam Morrison, who we heard from earlier. He worked in the Pardon Attorney’s Office from 1997 to 2010.


Sam Morrison:He granted, it was 1,700 and something commutations. That’s a big number. But not in comparison to the size of federal prison population, it’s not a big number. He could easily have granted 20,000, not 1,700. It’s a drop in the bucket, compared to the number of people who on the face of it qualify.


Al Letson:One of the cases that was rejected was the boxer, Charles “Duke” Tanner.


Charles Tanner:I had been down 10 years. I had clear conduct. It was a nonviolent crime, my first arrest in my life, so my case manager was like, “Hey, this is you. Let’s push for this.” So we put it in, and September of ’16, I got denied. They didn’t give me a reason why. They just said, “Denied, and you have one year to follow up.” Now, my only co-defendant who went to trial with me got granted clemency, so it was a big pill to swallow for me on that one.


Al Letson:Why do you think you were denied if your co-defendant actually got it?


Charles Tanner:I don’t know. Actually, my co-defendant, he wasn’t a first-time offender, but he got it, and he’s home now, thankfully. I mean, I watched a lot of people get it, and they didn’t fit all of the points, but they got granted clemency somehow.


Al Letson:The chaos of Clemency Project 2014, who got help and who didn’t, it was frustrating for a lot of people, including the Pardon Attorney at the time, Deborah Leff. She resigned in 2016. She wrote a letter saying her office was underfunded and understaffed, and that the White House lawyers weren’t taking her recommendations. There hasn’t been a Pardon Attorney since she left, just a string of acting Pardon Attorneys that inherited the backlog.


Sam Morrison:She simply wasn’t given the resources to do what she ostensibly was supposed to be doing, so she got frustrated and said, “I’m not going to do this anymore.”


Al Letson:Sam Morrison says those acting Pardon Attorneys are still making recommendations, but the White House isn’t paying attention. If the White House is ignoring the recommendations of the Pardon Attorney’s office, what’s the point of having one? I mean, are we just burning taxpayer money? They wouldn’t give us an interview. It’s kind of a black box.


Sam Morrison:Yeah. That’s intentional. They want it to be a black box, but, I mean, you’re right. If he’s going to ignore them, then it’s kind of a pointless exercise.


Al Letson:Right now, we’re just a little north of 13,000 petitions that the Justice Department is sending in to the White House. So what does that mean? I mean, are these petitions just sitting in a drawer somewhere in the White House? Is anything going to happen to move through all of these petitions?


Sam Morrison:It doesn’t mean that they’re all yet at the White House. Those cases are all going to be at one stage or another of the investigation process. Eventually, a recommendation will be written in each one, and it will make its way to the White House, but it doesn’t mean they’re all there yet.


Sam Morrison:I can’t tell you and the Justice Department won’t tell you where all those cases are at any particular time. So, we don’t know how many of those are at the White House right now.


Al Letson:Amy Povah knows what it’s like to ask for clemency and to wait while a petition works its way through the system. That’s because as a young woman, she was sentenced to 24 years in federal prison for conspiracy to traffic narcotics.


Amy Povah:With conspiracy, even if you don’t sell it, even if you don’t import it, if you’re associated with somebody who does, the conspiracy law, that’s the trigger word.


Al Letson:In Amy’s case, her ex-husband ran an ecstasy operation, manufacturing million of pills of the party drug. Now, he was caught in the early ’90s and cooperated with law enforcement, and he only got four years in prison. Amy, on the other hand, was not directly involved with the drug business, but after her husband was arrested, she collected some of the drug money. She did not cooperate with the FBI and got sentenced to 24 years.


Al Letson:Amy was sent to FCI Dublin, a federal prison in Northern California. She remembers a phone call with her mother not long after she got there.


Amy Povah:I wasn’t expecting to break down, but I just completely broke down. And then my mom was like, “What? What’s the matter? What’s the matter?” because I was crying. I just remember almost screaming. I was like, “I’m in prison.”


Al Letson:After nine years behind bars, Amy gets called into her case manager’s office. As she makes her way through the prison, she fears the worst.


Amy Povah:So I just kept thinking, oh, my god, what could’ve gone wrong? Maybe Mom and Dad, maybe something’s wrong with them.


Al Letson:Her case manager was frazzled.


Amy Povah:She said, “I need you to sit down. I’ve got to set you up on probation. I’ve got to do this. I’ve got to do that. I got to make an airplane reservation for you.” And I said, “Why?” She just looked at me and she said, “You’re going home,” those three words.


Amy Povah:I was just like, “What?” Finally, she said, “You received clemency, and I have to have you out of here by 5:00.” So, she kept telling me to sit down, and I would sit down, and then I would pop out of my chair like a jack-in-the-box.


Al Letson:Amy’s sentence was commuted by President Bill Clinton in 2000. She had put in an application a few years earlier. And after nearly a decade, Amy was suddenly free.


Amy Povah:It says, “To all to whom these presents shall come greeting.” It’s so formal [crosstalk 00:45:47]-


Al Letson:She’s reading from actual signed clemency document. It’s what you’d expect from such a grand declaration of freedom: faded cream-colored paper, signature in black ink, a gold seal.


Al Letson:Presidential clemency petitions are something Amy’s gotten very familiar with over the years, both in prison and after she was freed as an advocate for other people trying to get one. Amy thinks Duke Tanner has a strong case for clemency. They talk a lot, sometimes twice a day.


Charles Tanner:Yeah, for Trump to give it to me, it’ll shock the world up.


Amy Povah:Well, not to mention the fact that [crosstalk 00:46:24]-


Al Letson:It’s Thursday afternoon, and there is a lot going on at Amy’s.


Amy Povah:You’re not going to believe this. Oh, but now he’s got … I shouldn’t have taken your call, because Josie’s arriving.


Al Letson:Their phone call is interrupted. Amy’s got a visitor. She heads to the back door and walks down a few steps.


Josie Ledesma:Oh, my goodness. Look at you.


Amy Povah:Look at you. Oh, my god. We made it.


Josie Ledesma:We made it. You’re so right. Oh, my goodness. [crosstalk 00:47:00]-


Al Letson:It’s Josie Ledesma, the woman Amy was trying to get out of prison at that White House vigil. The last time they saw each other, they were serving time together in federal prison. That was 19 years ago.


Josie Ledesma:Gosh.


Amy Povah:Here, go ahead, sweetie.


Josie Ledesma:This is beautiful. Oh, my goodness.


Amy Povah:Wasn’t it fun to be able to drive now?


Josie Ledesma:Yes, especially out here. I’m like, “Oh, my god.” I didn’t know this existed.” It’s gorgeous.


Amy Povah:Well, you’re welcome any time.


Josie Ledesma:Thank you.


Al Letson:Josie was released by President Obama after 24 years behind bars.


Amy Povah:Oh, god.


Josie Ledesma:It’s so nice to see you.


Amy Povah:What a journey.


Josie Ledesma:Yes, definitely. Definitely.


Al Letson:They walk out to Amy’s front yard, with its sweeping views of the Pacific. A manmade waterfall runs along the steep driveway. Amy’s yard is filled with bright purple and pink flowers. On the flowers, there are hundreds of orange and black and white butterflies. As the women walk, the butterflies flutter off their flowers into the air.


Josie Ledesma:That is beautiful.


Amy Povah:Yeah, see? [inaudible 00:48:04].


Josie Ledesma:Oh, my goodness.


Amy Povah:Even when you’re in prison, you see a butterfly you can’t help but fixate on it.


Josie Ledesma:Yeah.


Amy Povah:Because it’s just-


Josie Ledesma:It’s true. It’s very, very true. Oh, gosh, this is gorgeous. I love this.


Al Letson:The two women walk inside and sit at Amy’s kitchen table. Posters with faces of prisoners lean against the wall. Amy and Josie are two of the lucky ones. Most people who apply don’t get clemency.


Josie Ledesma:It’s awesome to be home, to be out, to be able to drive and feel the air hit my face and be able to just see freedom. But one of my pains is that I still have people in there that I love, sisters, people that I grew up with that are still in there. I got a chance to come home. I think they deserve a chance to come home also.


Al Letson:A chance to come home. That’s what Amy and Josie want for nonviolent prisoners of the War on Drugs, people like Duke. His son Charles III was just two years old when Duke got locked up. Now he’s close to graduating from high school.


Audio:Hello, President Trump. I would like to ask you to please release my dad from prison.


Al Letson:This is a video that Duke’s son made and posted to you YouTube.


Audio:I know that he made a huge mistake, and he really looks back on his mistake and regrets it. I feel like he would never do it again. My dad’s been in my life ever since I was young, and we have a good relationship. He’s been helping me every step of the way. He helps me and my friends. He taught me right from wrong. I would just please want you to release my father from prison. Thank you.


Al Letson:What has it been like being apart from him and not being able to be there as he grows up?


Charles Tanner:Oh, that’s the worst thing that I lost, physical being there for him, to teach him how to tie his shoes, to teach him how to drive, to see him in his sports and just teaching how to be a man. But I didn’t let prison stop it. I used every tool that we have, as far as the phone, the email, letters, visits, to enrich his mind, which we have a beautiful relationship.


Charles Tanner:But to be there with him and to get him ready to send off to college and become a real man, I need to be there in his presence to show him, even though I showed him so much from inside these walls.


Al Letson:Right now, there are two paths to what Duke and his son are asking for. Path one, you know the president or someone who does, and he writes out a clemency warrant, and you are free of your crime.


Al Letson:Path two, you send in an application to the Pardon Attorney’s Office, a long and complicated process on a good day. Only for the past few years, that process has ground to a screeching halt. As a result, the constitutional power of the pardon is only being used for a small, select few, while the many wait.


Al Letson:Our lead producer for this week’s show is Michael I. Schiller. The Nixon/Ford segment was produced by Anna Hamilton. Taki Telonidis edited the show. Thanks to Melissa Lewis for help with the data, to associate producer, Najib Aminy, and to our production assistant, Amy Mustafa. Our production manager is Mwende Hinojosa.


Al Letson:Original score and sound design is by the dynamic duo, J-Breezy and Fernando, my man, yo, Arruda. They had help from Catherine Raymondo. Our CEO is Christa Scharfenberg. Matt Thompson is our editor-in-chief. Our executive producer is Kevin Sullivan. Our theme music is by Camerado-Lightning.


Al Letson:Support for Reveal is provided by the Reva and David Logan Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Jonathan Logan Family Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Heising-Simons Foundation, and the Ethics and Excellence in Journalism Foundation.


Al Letson:Reveal is a co-production of the Center for Investigative Reporting and PRX. I’m Al Letson, and remember, there is always more to the story.


Audio:From PRX.


Michael I Schiller is a senior reporter and producer for Reveal. His Emmy Award-winning work spans animation, radio and documentary film.

“The Dead Unknown,” a video series he directed about the crisis of America's unidentified dead, earned a national News and Documentary Emmy Award, national Edward R. Murrow Award and national Society of Professional Journalists Sigma Delta Chi Award.

His 2015 animated documentary short film “The Box,” about youth solitary confinement, was honored with a video journalism award from the Society of Professional Journalists’ Northern California chapter, a San Francisco International Film Festival Golden Gate Award and a New Orleans Film Festival special jury prize, and it was nominated for a national News and Documentary Emmy for new approaches.

Schiller was one the producers of the pilot episode of the Peabody Award-winning Reveal radio show and podcast. He continues to regularly produce audio documentaries for the weekly public radio show, which airs on over 450 stations nationwide. Schiller is based in Reveal's Emeryville, California, office.

Taki Telonidis is an interim executive producer for Reveal. Previously, he was the media producer for the Western Folklife Center, where he created more than 100 radio features for NPR’s "All Things Considered," "Weekend Edition" and other news magazines. He has produced and directed three public television specials, including "Healing the Warrior’s Heart," a one-hour documentary that explores how the ancient spiritual traditions of our nation’s first warriors, Native Americans, are helping today’s veterans diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. Telonidis also was senior content editor for NPR’s "State of the Re:Union." Before moving to the West, he worked for NPR in Washington, where he was senior producer of "Weekend All Things Considered" between 1994 and 1998. His television and radio work has garnered a George Foster Peabody Award, three Rocky Mountain Emmy Awards and the Overseas Press Club Award for breaking news. Telonidis is based in Salt Lake City.

Melissa Lewis is a data reporter for Reveal. Prior to joining Reveal, she was a data editor at The Oregonian, a data engineer at Simple and a data analyst at Periscopic. She is an organizer for the Portland chapter of the Asian American Journalists Association. Lewis is based in Oregon.

Mwende Hinojosa is a former production manager for Reveal. Prior to joining Reveal, she was the training strategist and innovation manager for the Bay Area Video Coalition, a nonprofit media arts center in San Francisco. At BAVC, she provided resources and support to students training in video, motion graphics, web and graphic design and managed a community for creative freelancers called Gig Union. She has produced segments for public radio stations KUSP, KQED, KALW and KUOW; videos and short documentaries for nonprofits; interactive panel discussions; and immersive storytelling experiences for tech companies. .

Jim Briggs III is the senior sound designer, engineer and composer for Reveal. He supervises post-production and composes original music for the public radio show and podcast. He also leads Reveal's efforts in composition for data sonification and live performances.

Prior to joining Reveal in 2014, Briggs mixed and recorded for clients such as WNYC Studios, NPR, the CBC and American Public Media. Credits include “Marketplace,” “Selected Shorts,” “Death, Sex & Money,” “The Longest Shortest Time,” NPR’s “Ask Me Another,” “Radiolab,” “Freakonomics Radio” and “Soundcheck.” He also was the sound re-recording mixer and sound editor for several PBS television documentaries, including “American Experience: Walt Whitman,” the 2012 Tea Party documentary "Town Hall" and “The Supreme Court” miniseries. His music credits include albums by R.E.M., Paul Simon and Kelly Clarkson.

Briggs' work with Reveal has been recognized with an Emmy Award (2016) and two Alfred I. duPont-Columbia University Awards (2018, 2019). Previously, he was part of the team that won the Dart Award for Excellence in Coverage of Trauma for its work on WNYC’s hourlong documentary special “Living 9/11.” He has taught sound, radio and music production at The New School and Eugene Lang College and has a master's degree in media studies from The New School. Briggs is based in Reveal's Emeryville, California, office.

Fernando Arruda is a sound designer, engineer and composer for Reveal. As a multi-instrumentalist, he contributes to the original music, editing and mixing of the weekly public radio show and podcast. He has held four O-1 visas for individuals with extraordinary abilities. His work has been recognized with Peabody, duPont-Columbia, Edward R. Murrow, Gerald Loeb, Third Coast and Association of Music Producers awards, as well as Emmy and Pulitzer nominations. Prior to joining Reveal, Arruda toured as an international DJ and taught music technology at Dubspot and ESRA International Film School. He worked at Antfood, a creative audio studio for media and TV ads, and co-founded a film-scoring boutique called the Manhattan Composers Collective. He worked with clients such as Marvel, MasterClass and Samsung and ad agencies such as Framestore, Trollbäck+Company, BUCK and Vice. Arruda releases experimental music under the alias FJAZZ and has performed with many jazz, classical and pop ensembles, such as SFJAZZ Monday Night Band, Art&Sax quartet, Krychek, Dark Inc. and the New York Arabic Orchestra. His credits in the podcast and radio world include NPR’s “51 Percent,” WNYC’s “Bad Feminist Happy Hour” and its live broadcast of Orson Welles’ “The Hitchhiker,” Wondery’s “Detective Trapp,” MSNBC’s “Why Is This Happening?” and NBC’s “Born to Rule,” to name a few. Arruda also has a wide catalog of composed music for theatrical, orchestral and chamber music formats, some of which has premiered worldwide. He holds a master’s degree in film scoring and composition from NYU Steinhardt. The original music he makes with Jim Briggs for Reveal can be found on Bandcamp.

Najib Aminy is a producer for Reveal. Previously, he was an editor at Flipboard, a news aggregation startup, and helped guide the company’s editorial and curation practices and policies. Before that, he spent time reporting for newspapers such as Newsday and The Indianapolis Star. He is the host and producer of an independent podcast, "Some Noise," which is based out of Oakland, California, and was featured by Apple, The Guardian and The Paris Review. He is a lifelong New York Knicks fan, has a soon-to-be-named kitten and is a product of Stony Brook University’s School of Journalism. Aminy is based in Reveal’s Emeryville, California, office.

Amy Mostafa (she/they) was the production manager for Reveal. She is a UC Berkeley School of Journalism alum, where she focused on audio and data journalism as a Dean's Merit Fellow and an ISF Scholar. She has reported on science, health and the environment in Anchorage for Alaska Public Media and on city government in Berkeley and San Francisco for KQED. Her work also has appeared on NPR, KALW and KALX. Mostafa holds a bachelor's degree in English literature and public policy. She has most recently reported on housing and aging in the Bay Area. She is based in Reveal’s Emeryville, California, office.