Posted on September 15, 2026
A new CBS News investigation says a growing group of lobbyists and political operators are selling access to Donald Trump’s pardon process.
These Trump pardon brokers claim they can reach the president through insiders, donors, influencers, and political allies. Their prices can reach hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars.
That does not prove Trump personally sold a pardon. It does not prove every broker can deliver one. But it does show a system where people are paying for the promise of influence.
That alone raises a serious question: Is presidential mercy becoming a luxury service for people with money?
What a presidential pardon does
A presidential pardon is an act of clemency. In plain English, it is a form of official mercy.
A pardon can forgive a federal offense or reduce its legal consequences. It can help restore certain rights and remove some federal penalties. However, it does not erase the harm suffered by victims. It also does not automatically clear crimes prosecuted by a state.
Other forms of clemency include:
- A pardon: Forgives a federal offense after conviction.
- A commutation: Reduces or ends a sentence but does not erase the conviction.
- A reprieve: Delays a sentence or punishment.
- A remission: Cancels or reduces a fine or restitution payment.
The president has broad constitutional power over federal clemency. That power is supposed to allow mercy in unusual cases. It is not supposed to create a private market for political access.
CBS recorded a $300,000 pardon pitch
CBS News used a hidden-camera operation to examine the pardon broker business.
Ammon Covino, a convicted aquarium operator, acted as a prospective client. His own pardon application had been rejected by Trump in July 2026. The Justice Department’s list of applications denied by Trump on July 10, 2026 includes Covino’s name.
Covino then contacted several people who claimed they could help him reach the White House.
In mid-August, CBS recorded Jack Burkman and Jacob Wohl meeting with Covino at the Ritz-Carlton in Tysons Corner, Virginia. They offered to pursue a pardon for $300,000.
Their pitch included claims that they could:
- Use contacts around the White House.
- Recruit MAGA influencers.
- Apply constant political pressure.
- Put Covino’s case in front of Trump.
- Pursue a pardon by October.
Burkman described the strategy as a pressure campaign from many directions. He and Wohl presented it as a different route from the normal government process.
This was their pitch. It was not a proven promise from the White House. The recorded conversation also did not prove that Trump approved a sale or knew about the meeting.
Still, the pitch is important. It shows how Trump pardon brokers market access to desperate people who want relief from federal convictions.
The wider market can reach $3 million
According to CBS News, sources said fees in the wider pardon market can reach $3 million.
That money was described as payment to brokers or lobbyists for access and advocacy. There is no proof in the cited reporting that Trump personally received the money.
The brokers may claim they are only providing legal lobbying services. A person can legally hire a lawyer or advocate. Wealthy people often pay professionals to prepare petitions, explain their cases, and contact government officials.
The ethical problem begins when the service is sold as special access to the president.
A normal lawyer may help make a strong legal argument. A broker may instead suggest that money can buy a better path to Trump. That creates the appearance that mercy is available to the highest bidder.
The difference matters:
- Paying for legal help is not the same as paying for a pardon.
- A broker’s promise is not proof of influence.
- A paid promise is not a guaranteed pardon.
- A pardon decision is still supposed to belong to the president.
The normal Justice Department process
Traditionally, people seeking a federal pardon submit clemency petitions through the Justice Department’s Office of the Pardon Attorney.
The office has supported the presidential pardon power for more than a century. Its review can consider:
- The seriousness of the offense.
- The applicant’s remorse.
- Rehabilitation after the crime.
- Time served.
- The person’s conduct after conviction.
- The applicant’s criminal record.
- The effect of clemency on victims and the public.
This process is not perfect. It can be slow. It can also reject people who believe they deserve another chance. But it is a public process with written rules and professional review.
CBS News analyzed Justice Department data and reported that about 70 percent of Trump’s second-term clemency actions did not go through the traditional DOJ route. When Jan. 6 cases were included, the figure rose to about 92 percent.
Those figures are CBS’s analysis of DOJ data. They should not be treated as an independent universal count of every clemency decision.
The numbers still raise a basic concern. If large parts of the process are being handled outside the normal review system, the public needs to know who is making recommendations and what standards are being used.
The Joseph Schwartz case
Joseph Schwartz was a nursing home operator who pleaded guilty to federal and state offenses involving taxes and Medicaid. CBS reported that he failed to pay more than $38 million in employment taxes and also faced state tax and Medicaid fraud charges.
Trump pardoned Schwartz in November 2025, about three months into his three-year prison sentence.
Months earlier, Burkman’s firm disclosed earning $960,000 from Schwartz’s case. The timing became a central part of CBS’s reporting about the pardon broker market.
Burkman said the fee was justified because he believed Schwartz had been wrongly convicted and was in poor health. The White House described the case as an example of overprosecution.
The family of Melissa Coulson saw the matter differently. Coulson’s family won a nearly $19 million wrongful-death judgment connected to a nursing home facility linked to Schwartz. They never collected the money.
Coulson criticized the pardon and said the system appeared to depend on how much a person could pay.
This case does not prove that the $960,000 bought the pardon. It does show why large fees, fast clemency, and unpaid victims create a serious appearance problem.
The Boosie Badazz dispute
Torence Hatch, known as Boosie Badazz, also became part of the CBS investigation.
Hatch said he paid Burkman and Wohl $600,000 up front while seeking a Trump pardon for a federal gun conviction. No pardon was granted.
Hatch sought a refund and filed an arbitration claim. Burkman disputed the claim. He said no final agreement was signed and argued that the dispute was based on an oral contract.
The case remains contested. It is not proof that the brokers committed a crime. It is also not proof that Hatch’s version is false.
What is clear is that Hatch paid a large sum, did not receive a pardon, and entered a legal dispute with the people who claimed they could help him.
That is the central danger of the pardon broker market. A client can lose hundreds of thousands of dollars while receiving nothing more than a promise.
What the brokers and White House said
Burkman and Wohl denied that their work was pay-to-play. They said they were lawful lobbyists who helped clients navigate Washington.
Their response deserves to be included. A denial is not proof that the concerns are false, but it is part of the record.
Brett Tolman, another person discussed in the CBS report, told Covino that he sent petitions directly to the White House. He said he did not use the traditional DOJ process.
The White House said it has a review process involving:
- White House counsel.
- The Justice Department.
- Alice Marie Johnson.
- Trump as the final decision maker.
The White House also said that people who pay to lobby for pardons are wasting their money. White House Counsel Will Scharf said Trump performs his constitutional duties in an ethically sound manner.
Those statements reject the idea that pardons are for sale. They do not answer every question raised by the investigation:
- Why are brokers claiming they can pressure the president?
- Why are some petitions sent directly to the White House?
- Who checks the claims made by paid intermediaries?
- What happens to victims?
- How can poor applicants compete with people who can pay $300,000 or $3 million?
Timeline of the pardon marketplace
- January 20, 2025: Trump grants broad clemency actions involving many Jan. 6 defendants. The actions include pardons, commutations, and dropped prosecutions, as reported by CBS News.
- November 2025: Trump pardons Joseph Schwartz after Burkman’s firm disclosed earning $960,000 from his case.
- July 10, 2026: Trump rejects Ammon Covino’s direct pardon application.
- Mid-August 2026: CBS records Burkman and Wohl pitching Covino at the Ritz-Carlton in Tysons Corner, Virginia, for $300,000.
- September 2026: CBS publishes its investigation. Lawmakers call for oversight and promise to examine the pardon broker market.
Fact check
Documented facts
- CBS recorded Burkman and Wohl pitching a $300,000 pardon effort.
- They claimed they could use contacts, influencers, and pressure on Trump.
- CBS reported that fees in the wider market can reach $3 million.
- Burkman’s firm disclosed earning $960,000 from Schwartz’s case.
- Schwartz later received a Trump pardon.
- Hatch said he paid $600,000 and did not receive a pardon.
- Hatch filed an arbitration claim.
- The White House said it has its own review process.
- Lawmakers have called for investigations.
What the investigation does not prove
- There is no proof in the cited reports that Trump personally took a fee for a pardon.
- There is no proof that every broker can deliver a pardon.
- There is no proof that every Trump pardon was corrupt.
- There is no proof that Schwartz’s fee bought his pardon.
- There is no final ruling in Hatch’s arbitration dispute.
- The brokers’ denials do not prove that the concerns are false.
Why the system matters
The issue is not only one broker, one client, or one pardon. The issue is the structure.
A person with money can hire a lawyer. But a system where brokers sell special access to the president creates the appearance that mercy belongs to people with money and connections.
Poor applicants may lack the money to hire a lobbyist. Victims may watch wealthy defendants receive relief while judgments remain unpaid. Families may conclude that the justice system has one set of rules for ordinary people and another for political insiders.
That concern belongs on any serious Trump scandals list. It also belongs in a Trump hypocrisy tracker because Trump claims to oppose a weaponized justice system while his pardon structure risks making access, influence, and personal loyalty more important than a standard review.
The latest Trump lies should not distract from the evidence here. The important facts are the recorded pitches, the reported fees, the bypassing of normal procedures, and the lack of clear public rules.
For readers following a Trump legal issues update, the central questions are simple:
- Who gets access?
- Who pays?
- What process is followed?
- What evidence is reviewed?
- How are victims treated?
- Who is held responsible if a broker makes false promises?
These questions also help explain why people dislike Trump. His movement often claims to defend ordinary citizens against a corrupt establishment. Yet this pardon market looks like another system where people with money and powerful friends can move closer to the president.
Presidential mercy should not be a luxury service
Trump has the legal power to grant clemency. He can decide that a person deserves a pardon or a reduced sentence. But the process must still be trusted.
Presidential mercy should not look like a luxury service sold through political access.
A fair pardon system should be:
- Clear and easy for ordinary applicants to understand.
- Open to poor applicants who cannot pay lobbyists.
- Based on evidence, rehabilitation, and the facts of each case.
- Transparent about outside intermediaries.
- Accountable to victims and the public.
- Reviewed under consistent standards.
Congress should investigate the brokers’ claims, the money trail, the role of political intermediaries, and the question of whether the normal DOJ review process is being bypassed.
The reporting does not prove that Trump personally sold pardons. It does show a pardon economy built around his White House. That economy deserves scrutiny before paid access becomes accepted as the normal price of presidential mercy.
