Fetterman’s Surprise Social Media Move and Call for Trump’s Pardon

TMTG and Truth Social logos on screen and phone

Democratic Senator John Fetterman stirs controversy by joining Truth Social and calling for a Trump pardon.

At a Glance

Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) joined Truth Social, calling for Trump’s pardon in NY hush money case.
Fetterman argues both Trump and Hunter Biden cases are politically motivated.
He warns that weaponizing justice undermines public trust in institutions.
Fetterman also joined Bluesky, expanding his social media presence.

Fetterman’s Controversial Debut on Truth Social

In a bold move that has sent ripples through the political landscape, Senator John Fetterman (D-Pa.) has joined Truth Social, the platform launched by former President Donald Trump. Fetterman’s first post on the platform called for Trump to be pardoned in the New York hush money case, igniting a firestorm of debate and drawing significant attention to his account.

Fetterman’s decision to join Truth Social and his subsequent statements have garnered substantial engagement. His initial post received over 10,000 likes and numerous supportive comments, quickly amassing a following of 28,700 users on the platform. This number, while significant, still pales in comparison to his 860,000 followers on X (formerly Twitter).

BREAKING: Sen. John Fetterman has joined Truth Social and uses his first post to blast both the Trump "hush money" case and the the Hunter Biden case, saying both deserve pardons.

Fetterman is full of surprises, I'll give him that. pic.twitter.com/sbuDwNNVGs

— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) December 11, 2024

Fetterman’s Stance on Political Prosecutions

The Pennsylvania senator’s call for a Trump pardon stems from his belief that both the Trump hush money case and the Hunter Biden case are politically motivated. Fetterman argues that using the judiciary for partisan purposes erodes public faith in legal institutions and exacerbates political divisions.

“The Trump hush money and Hunter Biden cases were both bulls‑‑‑, and pardons are appropriate,” Fetterman stated. “Weaponizing the judiciary for blatant, partisan gain diminishes the collective faith in our institutions and sows further division.”

Implications and Reactions

Fetterman’s call for a Trump pardon has sparked discussions about the role of pardons in high-profile political cases. New York Governor Kathy Hochul (D) has the authority to pardon Trump in the state case, but given their strained relationship, such action seems unlikely.

“I think that it’s undeniable that the case against Hunter Biden was really politically motivated, but I also think it’s true that the trial in New York for Trump was political as well, too,” Fetterman explained. “In both cases, I think a pardon is appropriate, and I really think, collectively, that America’s confidence in these types of institutions has been damaged by these kinds of cases. We cannot allow these institutions to be weaponized against our political opponents.”

Fetterman is not alone in his stance. Rep. Dean Phillips (D-Minn.) has also urged Governor Hochul to pardon Trump after his conviction, arguing it would benefit the country. However, Phillips maintained a critical view of Trump, describing him as “a serial liar, cheater, and philanderer, a six-time declarer of corporate bankruptcy, an instigator of insurrection, and a convicted felon who thrives on portraying himself as a victim.”

Expanding Social Media Presence

Fetterman’s joining of Truth Social is part of a broader strategy to engage with audiences typically challenging for Democrats. In addition to Truth Social, Fetterman announced his presence on Bluesky, another alternative social media platform. This move reflects his efforts to amplify his voice and interact with a diverse array of users across various online communities.

Fetterman’s actions highlight the complex interplay between social media, political messaging, and the ongoing debate about the fairness of high-profile legal cases involving political figures. His call for pardons on both sides of the aisle underscores the growing concern about the politicization of justice and its potential impact on public trust in democratic institutions.