A federal judge criticized the Justice Department's changing stance on whether a presidential pardon for a man involved in the Capitol riot extends to his conviction for illegally possessing guns at his residence. The judge questioned why the department altered its initial decision that the pardon did not cover the firearms convictions of the individual in question.
The judge expressed concern over the shifting interpretation of the pardon, emphasizing the need for consistency in its application. The Justice Department's assertion that the pardon encompasses crimes related to illegal items discovered during searches linked to the Capitol riot cases was deemed 'extraordinary' by the judge.
