One Out Of Sixteen Insurrectionists Pardoned Have Been Arrested For Other Crimes

The following is part of an article by Katherine Pompilio at Lawfare:

At least 97 of the more than 1,500 individuals granted clemency by President Trump for their roles in the January 6 Capitol attack have been arrested for, charged with, or convicted of crimes separate from Jan. 6 since their participation in the Jan. 6 riot.

A Lawfare study reveals that almost one in 16 insurrectionists subject to the president’s clemency order has been arrested for and charged with—and in the vast majority of cases convicted of—other crimes, at least some of which were actively enabled by the clemency actions.

The alleged crimes by Jan. 6 defendants since Jan. 6, 2021, run the gamut from relatively low-grade offenses like property damage, possession of drug paraphernalia, and trespassing to serious felonies like grand larceny, stalking, planning to assassinate law enforcement officials and prominent politicians, and defrauding government agencies. One Jan. 6 pardonee was convicted in February 2026 of child molestation and sentenced to life in prison. Another was convicted in 2025 of reckless homicide.

At least 14, meanwhile, have been charged with sex crimes or crimes related to child sexual abuse material (CSAM), and at least six have faced domestic violence charges. Others have faced charges for physical assaults, illegal firearms possession, or other violent crimes. At least 20 have been charged with driving under the influence (DUI) of alcohol or drugs or public intoxication.

Perhaps most strikingly, five recipients of presidential clemency were arrested in connection with conduct that occurred at least in part subsequent to Trump’s freeing them from prison—meaning that Trump’s clemency order on the first day of his second term may have actively facilitated criminal conduct. These include:

• Andrew Paul Johnson, who was freed from prison as a result of the pardon in 2025, was convicted of five charges, including child molestation, in February 2026, and sentenced to life in prison. The criminal conduct for which he was convicted took place both before and after his pardon.
• Zachary Alam, who was convicted of felony charges of grand larceny and burglary just months after his pardon.
• Ryan Nichols, who was charged with deadly conduct and harassment on May 10, 2026, after allegedly threatening a person with a gun in a church parking lot.

Another defendant’s charges are still pending. And still another, Enrique Tarrio, was arrested for simple assault in March 2025, but the then-interim U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia ultimately declined to bring charges.

Half Of Americans Say Trump's 2nd Term Pardons Were Inappropriate

 

These charts reflect the results of the YouGov Poll -- done between May 13th and 15th of a nationwide sample of 1,127 adults, with a 4.1 point margin of error.

Public Overwhelmingly Opposes A Pardon For Ghislaine Maxwell

The chart above reflects the results of the Economist / YouGov Poll -- done between July 25th and 28th of a nationwide sample of 1,777 adults (including 1,610 registered voters). The margin of error is 3.4 points for adults and 3.0 points for registered voters.

 

Is There A Corrupt Trump/Maxwell Deal In The Making?

The following is part of an excellent post by Jennifer Rubin:

A potential, disgusting deal between the Trump regime and Ghislaine Maxwell, a convicted colleague of Jeffrey Epstein, is gaining new attention. Maxwell was sentenced to 20 years for conspiracy to entice minors to travel to engage in illegal sex acts, conspiracy to transport minors to participate in illegal sex acts, transporting a minor to participate in illegal sex acts, sex trafficking conspiracy, and sex trafficking of a minor.

In the midst of a firestorm that Donald Trump can no longer contain regarding his refusal to release all materials concerning Epstein and his clients, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche (Trump’s former personal attorney) announced a meeting with Maxwell (whom Trump previously wished well). Maxwell is currently appealing her conviction. What could possibly be the basis for the number two person in the Justice Department to meet with the woman at the center of the criminal enterprise that now threatens to envelop Trump in a scandal like none other in his sordid career? (Interestingly, Attorney General Pam Bondi, already the object of scorn for her insistence that there is no “list” to release, has now taken a back seat.)

The prospect for such a meeting has set off alarm bells, even within the MAGA camp. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) actually got something right when she proposed that Maxwell could be “bartering for something.” Put more bluntly, Maxwell could be making a deal to pardon or shorten her sentence in exchange for exonerating Trump. This would be the height of corruption, raising the potential for impeachment and/or criminal investigation.

It seems preposterous that anyone would believe Maxwell’s possible exoneration of Trump after getting a deal from the ethically compromised Justice Department. However, Trump may be so desperate to persuade a segment of his most deluded cult members to let up that he is willing to risk elevating the scandal.

Public Does NOT Support Pardoning The January 6th Capitol Attackers

 

The chart above reflects the results of the Monmouth University Poll -- done between December 5th and 10th of a nationwide sample of 1,006 adults, with a 3.9 point margin of error.

President Biden Pardoned His Son (And It Was Appropriate)

 

President Biden has pardoned his son, Hunter Biden, for the crimes he committed.

And it has caused a storm of criticism from both those on the right, and some on the left. Some on the left are saying it makes it look like some are above the law, and right-wingers are saying it justifies their belief that the Justice Department is using the law to do political attacks.

Both are wrong!

Hunter Biden was found guilty of lying on a government form to buy a gun - a gun that he owned for only 11 days back in 2018.

He also confessed to not paying federal taxes. Those taxes have now been paid.

Would an ordinary citizen have been charged with either of these crimes? NO! The government wants its tax money - not to punish those who have finally confessed and paid up. And they very likely would not charge a citizen who lied on a form 7 years ago and then gave up the gun after only 11 days.

Biden was charged by a Trump-appointed attorney in an effort to smear the president, and Attorney General Garland didn't want to dismiss the charges because he was afraid it would look like political favoritism. 

The charges were brought because Hunter Biden was the president's son - and no other reason. The pardon was appropriate.

The only sad part is the pardon might give Trump some cover when he pardons the insurrectionists who attacked the Capitol on January 6th. But he was going to do that anyway.

Most People Oppose Pardoning The January 6th Attackers

 

The chart above reflects the results of the Economist / YouGov Poll -- done between November 9th and 12th of a nationwide sample of 1,743 adults (including 1,557 registered voters). The margin of error is 3.3 points for both adult and registered voters.

GOP Wants Pardons For Insurrectionists - Most Others Don't

The chart above is from the CBS News / YouGov Poll -- done between January 3rd and 5th of a nationwide sample of 2,157 adults, with a 2.8 point margin of error.

A Pardon For Trump Would NOT Be Good For The U.S.

 Richard Nixon broke the law. It cost him his presidency, but he was never charged or convicted for his criminal conduct. That's because President Gerald Ford pardoned him. Ford said he did it for the good of the country -- so the country could heal and unite.

That pardon was a mistake, and it's likely the reason that Ford was not re-elected. Most Americans believe that no man is above the law -- not even a president. 

Now we have another president who has broken the law. Donald Trump committed a felony crime by intentionally taking government documents when he left the White House (many of them classified top secret). His crime actually endangered the national security of the country.

GOP officials have tried to defend him, but the indictment explaining his criminal conduct (and his admissions on audio and video tapes) have made that impossible. 

Now Republican officials are changing their tactic to defend him. They are beginning to talk about pardoning Trump. And even Trump himself (beginning to fear his conviction) is demanding that all GOP presidential candidates pledge to give him a pardon if elected.

Why would they pardon him. Candidate Nikki Haley said it would be for the good of the country since it would look bad for a former president to go to prison -- something she said only happens in banana republics. And other Republicans are beginning to say the same.

They are wrong. Pardoning a president who has committed a serious crime would NOT be good for the country. It would be disastrous!

Donald Trump got the idea that presidents were above the law when he saw the pardon of Nixon. If he was pardoned, it would just insure that all future presidents would know that could not be punished for breaking the law (because a pardon who happen if anyone tried to punish them). It would truly insure that they would believe themselves above the law.

Most Americans don't like that. They know that making anyone (even a president) above the law puts democracy in danger. A president above the law could break the law to create an authoritarian regime and thus end our fragile democracy. We cannot allow that to happen, and that means Trump should not be pardoned if convicted (which seems likely).

Pardoning Nixon was a mistake. Pardoning Trump would be disastrous!

Most People Approve Of Biden's Marijuana Pardons

These charts are from the Economist / YouGov Poll -- done between October 8th and 11th of a nationwide sample of 1,500 adults, with about a 3 point margin of error. 

Biden Pardons Those Convicted Of Marijuana Possession

President Biden has taken an important step in correcting our ridiculous marijuana laws. He pardoned anyone convicted in federal court of possessing marijuana. Here is part of how Michael D. Shear and Zolan Kanno-Youngs describes his action in The New York Times:

 President Biden on Thursday pardoned thousands of people convicted of marijuana possession under federal law and said his administration would review whether marijuana should still be in the same legal category as drugs like heroin and LSD.

The pardons will clear everyone convicted on federal charges of simple possession since it became a crime in the 1970s. Officials said full data was not available but noted that about 6,500 people were convicted of simple possession between 1992 and 2021, not counting legal permanent residents. The pardons will also affect people who were convicted under District of Columbia drug laws; officials estimated that number to be in the thousands.

The pardons will not apply to people convicted of selling or distributing marijuana. And officials said there are no people now serving time in federal prisons solely for marijuana possession. But the move will help remove obstacles for people trying to get a job, find housing, apply to college or get federal benefits.

Mr. Biden urged governors to follow his lead for people convicted on state charges of simple possession, who vastly outnumber those charged under federal laws. . . .

“Sending people to jail for possessing marijuana has upended too many lives — for conduct that is legal in many states,” Mr. Biden said on Twitter on Thursday. “That’s before you address the clear racial disparities around prosecution and conviction. Today, we begin to right these wrongs.”. . .

The pardons move the federal government more in line with the positions taken by some state governments, which have already reduced or eliminated the criminal punishments for simply possessing marijuana — punishments that for decades have sent people to prison.

Mr. Biden also said Thursday that he has asked the attorney general to review how marijuana is legally categorized, which helps determine what kind of penalties are involved.

“The federal government currently classifies marijuana as a Schedule 1 substance,” he said, “the same as heroin and LSD and more serious than fentanyl. It makes no sense.”. . .

Marijuana is already fully legal in about 20 states, and some other states have relaxed criminal penalties, according to DISA, a large drug-testing company that tracks state laws regarding marijuana. It remains fully illegal in a handful of states. The federal government will stop charging anyone with simple possession starting on Thursday, officials said.

About 7 Out Of 10 People Oppose Trump Pardoning Himself

 The chart above reflects the results of a new ABC News / Washington Post Poll -- done between January 10th and 13th of a national sample of 1,002 adults, with a 3.5 point margin of error.

Trump has said he could legally pardon himself, and has recently discussed doing that with his remaining aides. He is wrong. If a president can pardon himself, then he is above the law -- and in a democracy, no one should be above the law. It should apply to all equally.

If he tries to pardon himself, he won't be winning any new friends. About 68% of the public opposes a self-pardon.

Trump Refuses To Resign - Doesn't Trust Pence To Pardon

I have said on this blog that the smart move for Trump would be to resign, and let Pence pardon him. That is not going to happen.

I think the main reason is Trump's rampant narcissism. He cannot be seen as giving in to his enemies or being weak. But their has emerged another reason. He doesn't trust Mike Pence to pardon him!

Frankly, I don't blame him. The way he has treated Pence in the last couple of weeks could well encourage the Vice-President to withhold a pardon.

Trump tried to pressure Pence to break the law and throw out electors from states that voted against Trump. When Pence said he could not legally do that, Trump bad mouthed him to his MAGA followers. Then sent them to Capitol Hill together Pence, and the rioters could be heard chanting "Hang Pence".

Why should Pence pardon a seditionist who put his life in danger?

Here's a tiny part of how CNN.com is covering Trump's last few days in office.

Trump has been consumed by the unraveling of his presidency during his last days in office, according to people around him, which included a casual discussion among advisers recently about a possible resignation.

Trump shut the idea down almost immediately. And he has made clear to aides in separate conversations that mere mention of President Richard Nixon, the last president to resign, was banned.

He told one adviser during an expletive-laden conversation recently never to bring up the ex-president ever again. During the passing mention of resigning this week, Trump told people he couldn't count on Vice President Mike Pence to pardon him like Gerald Ford did Nixon, anyway.

Eager for a final taste of the pomp of being president, Trump has asked for a major send-off on Inauguration Day next week, according to people familiar with the matter, before one last presidential flight to Palm Beach.

But the signs of his impending departure are everywhere -- including right outside his window. Workers hung bunting Thursday that read "2021 Biden-Harris Inauguration" from temporary stands across from the White House North Portico. It was visible from his third-story residence.

Inside the building, Trump has been weathering a second impeachment and growing isolation from his onetime allies in sullen desolation. He has grown more and more worried about what legal or financial calamities may await him when he is no longer president, people who have spoken to him said, fueled by warnings from lawyers and advisers. He is weighing pardons, including for himself and his family, as he attempts to muster a legal team for another impeachment trial. And he is resentful of Republicans who he feels abandoned him in his hour of need, including the GOP leaders of the House and Senate.

Aides have pleaded with Trump to deliver some type of farewell address, either live or taped, that would tick through his accomplishments in office. But he has appeared disinterested and noncommittal.

The Smart Move For Trump Would Be To Resign

I know that Donald Trump is not very smart. I know that he is a raging narcissist. And I know that he is desperately trying to hold on to power. Those things together make it very unlikely that he would resign his office.

But he should. Not because it would be the best thing for the country. He doesn't care about this country or its citizens (except for a few family members and some rich friends). But because it would be in his own best interest.

Trump is in some serious legal trouble. I'm not talking about his Russia problems (although that could still bounce back on him), but his more recent actions -- things he has done after losing the election to Joe Biden. Specifically, trying to pressure election officials and legislatures into overturning the will of the voters, and urging his supporters to attack the Capitol to force lawmakers into keeping him in power (promoting a coup).

These are serious charges, and unless he is given a pardon, could result in years in a federal prison.

It is reported that he is considering many pardons for his family and aides to be announced a day or two before leaving office -- and that one of those pardons would be for himself. That's not going to work.

A self-pardon would be immediately challenged in Court, and likely be voided. Allowing a president to pardon himself would mean he was above the law. No one is above the law in this country. While the president is powerful, and cannot be arrested or charged with a crime while in office (according to a ridiculous Department of Justice ruling), it would be unconstitutional to allow him to be above the law after leaving office.

A self-pardon could also bounce back on him. By pardoning himself, he would be admitting that he thinks he has broken one or more laws -- and that could be used against him at a trial.

He does need a pardon, but there's only one way to get one that wouldn't be overturned by the Supreme Court. He would have to resign, and hope Pence would give him one (like Ford pardoned Nixon). Of course this would mean mending his fences with Pence -- after condemning him for not breaking the law to keep Trump in power, and urging a mob of supporters to go after Pence.

He brought Pence to the White House on Monday, and aides said the two men had a pleasant talk. This makes me think he is trying to get back in good with Pence -- in case he needs him for a pardon.

Will Trump resign? Would Pence pardon him if he did? I don't know, but it is the only path Trump has to get what he needs -- a pardon. We'll have to wait and see if he has enough sense to realize that.

Do Americans Care About The Lives Of Innocent Iraqis?

(The image above, from Karim Kadim/AP, is of Nisour Square, where innocent Iraqi citizens were murdered by Blackwater mercenaries.)

The following is part of a thought-provoking article by Sinan Antoon in The Washington Post. Sadly, he points out that Americans don't seem to care about the innocent Iraqi victims of violence -- much of it from American soldiers and mercenaries. 

We know too well by now where President Trump stands when innocent civilians are harmed or slaughtered. He has repeatedly stood firmly on the side of perpetrators — applauding, defending and, if necessary, vindicating them. Whether the perpetrator is a neo-Nazi in Charlottesville, a police officer in Minneapolis, or a Blackwater mercenary in Baghdad.

It was despicable, but not surprising at all, that Trump this week pardonedthe four mercenaries who were convicted of slaughtering 14 Iraqi civilians in Nisour Square in Baghdad in 2007. This is not the first time Trump has pardoned individuals convicted of war crimes in Iraq. A year ago, he pardoned Edward Gallagher, a Navy Seal convicted of committing horrendous war crimes in Mosul. Trump later welcomed Gallagher and his wife to Mar-a-Lago.

In Trump’s world, men of a certain race, in uniform or not, carrying weapons and eager to use lethal force as they see fit to reimpose order on a chaotic world, are merely “doing their jobs.” Those on the other side of the barrel are painted as thugs or barbarians. Erik Prince, the founder of Blackwater (now Academi), has called Iraqis “barbarians.” Impunity for pulling the trigger is to be expected. The perpetrators become the victims and the focal point of empathy and understanding.

The massacre at Nisour Square took place in the context of the Iraq War. And it is not an aberration, but one in a long list of massacres of innocent Iraqi civilians. From the massacre of 24 civilians in Haditha in 2005, to the gang rape and murder of 14-year-old Abeer Qassim al-Janabi and the murder of her family in Mahmudiyah in 2006, to killing an estimated 45 people at a wedding party at Mukaradeeb in 2004. These and other massacres were courtesy of uniformed soldiers, not mercenaries. . . .

It is facile to condemn Trump, but do the lives of Iraqi civilians matter as much, or at all, for most of those who will condemn this pardon? Iraqi lives certainly didn’t matter at all for the George W. Bush-era hawks who beat the drums of the war and supported it, and who have since rebranded themselves as part of the resistance in the Trump era. Iraqi lives didn’t matter for all the liberal pundits and scribes who joined the war chorus as they, too, parroted variations on the official narrative before and during the war from their platforms. . . .

Whether visible or invisible, waged under a Republican or a Democratic administration, the war’s civilian casualties remain, for all intents and purposes, invisible. Those that briefly make a rare appearance, every now and then, quickly disappear into the vast landscape of American amnesia — a landscape already crowded with other bodies, indigenous and Black, that rarely seem to matter.

The architects, authors and chief perpetrators of the Iraq wars were pardoned in the public eye years ago. Their public appearances in the Trump era are unencumbered by the memory of their catastrophic decisions and actions, instead stirring liberal nostalgia for more “civil” and “normal” times. . . .

Amid the anger and shock over Trump’s latest pardon of war criminals, let’s not forget that there is already plenty of impunity to go around, as well as generous pardons, not only for those who pulled triggers killing innocent Iraqis, but for those who pulled the discursive triggers, too.

Voters Say It's Inappropriate For Trump To Pardon Family

 The word is that Donald Trump is thinking about issuing pre-emptive pardons for his family. But most voters don't like the idea. They think it would be inappropriate. Only Republicans like the idea. The general public (including Democrats and Independents) don't.

The chart is from a recent Politico / Morning Consult Poll -- done between December 4th and 6th of a national sample of 1,990 registered voters, with a 2 point margin of error.

Can Trump Pardon Himself? The Answer Is NO!

There's been a lot of talk about Trump's issuing of pardons lately. That's valid. He has already used the pardon for Michael Flynn, and aides say he is preparing to issue a lot of pardons before leaving office -- including pardons for his family.

But the craziest talk has been about Trump issuing a pardon for himself. Some of the cable news talking heads seem to think that is a possibility, and may be legal. They point to a previous assertion by Trump that he does have that right.

Well, Trump is wrong, and so are those individuals who think he might be able to get away with doing that.

Here's what former federal appeals court judge J. Michael Luttig had to say about that possibility in The Washington Post: 

The pardon clause’s language is broad indeed, unambiguously allowing the president to pardon seemingly any other person convicted for any federal criminal offense. But its language does not unambiguously include the president himself. Had the Framers intended to give the president such broad power, we would expect them to have clearly said so. After all, the new nation was in the process of rejecting a monarchical government in favor of a democratic republic.

Instead, the words they chose to confer the pardon power on the president contemplate his granting of reprieves and pardons only to persons other than himself. The word ‘grant’ connotes a gift, bestowal, conferral or transfer by one person to another — not to himself. That would have been the understanding of this word at the time of the Constitution’s drafting, and it is how the term ‘grant’ was understood and is used elsewhere in the Constitution. 

Public Says Trump Was Just Pandering With His Pardon Of Suffragette Susan B. Anthony

On the 100th anniversary of the ratification of the amendment that gave women the right to vote in the United States, Donald Trump signed a pardon for suffragette Susan B. Anthony (who had been arrested and fined for voting in a presidential election in 1872).

This brings up the question -- was Trump genuine in his pardon of Anthony, or was he just pandering in an attempt to get women's votes. The public was clear in their verdict. They know that Trump is in deep trouble with women voters, and a clear majority say he was just pandering. About 54% say he was pandering, while less than half that number (24%) say he was genuine. And that was the verdict of every demographic group -- except Republicans.

In perhaps the most important group for this question (women), the verdict was even wider -- 57% said he was pandering, while only 23% said he was genuine. It doesn't look like Trump helped himself with this bit of political theater.

The chart above reflects the results of a YouGov Poll -- done on August 19th of 5,141 adults.

Trump To Desecrate Memorial Day And Dishonor Our Troops By Pardoning War Criminals On This Sacred Holiday

Memorial Day is supposed to be a holiday that honors the brave soldiers who gave their lives to defend this country throughout its history. It should be a solemn occasion with the emphasis on those soldiers -- not politicians.

Sadly, Donald Trump is planning to desecrate this important holiday. He is planning to pardon several war criminals -- members of the military who have committed acts that no civilized country can accept. This would dishonor the brave troops who gave their lives doing the right thing, and it would endanger the troops now serving our country.

Here is part of an op-ed on this travesty by retired Lt General Lawrence D. Nicholson and former State Department Official J. Kael Weston (from the New York Times). They tell us why Trump's plan would be a terrible mistake:

President Trump's consideration of pardons for several service members accused of war crimes is disturbing. It would send the wrong signal to United States troops under his command, undercut the country’s well-established military justice system and call into question America’s longstanding commitment to human rights and the rule of law.

Horrific if not illegal conduct would be condoned at the highest level, setting a new and very dark precedent and detracting attention from the honorable actions of millions of United States service members.

Over many years of service leading and advising Marines in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan, we worked closely together to ensure everyone in the command understood not just the legal aspects of the law of armed conflict but also the reasoning behind them. We also stressed how, especially in a counterinsurgency environment, our daily actions, not just our words, made an impact for good or bad with the local population.

As a rifle company commander in Helmand Province, Afghanistan, stated, “Every day, we are hunting and helping” — hunting the enemy, and helping the people who ultimately will determine the success or failure of our campaign.

Combat — grueling, exhausting and deadly — demands extraordinary teamwork, exacting discipline and a bedrock of ethical and moral clarity. Leaders’ solemn obligation is to equip their teams with tools and training to win the fight while never losing their moral compass. The most successful combat units we witnessed were fierce on the battlefield but also well trained and highly disciplined in carrying out their responsibilities with prisoners of war, detainees and civilians.

We spent a lot time making sure that was adhered to during occasions as violent as epic battles in Falluja, Iraq, and in Helmand. Holding our troops to a high standard is not an easy task. It requires a thorough approach at the tactical level and small-unit combat leadership dedicated to upholding strict rules of engagement. If abuses or crimes take place, the Uniform Code of Military Justice provides defendants with representation and due process. That system, established in 1950, has been tested over many decades — and it works.

Presidential pardons for service members accused or convicted of war crimes could erode confidence in this well-documented legal process and lead to an atmosphere where battlefield criminal conduct might become more common. The result of this presidential prerogative would not easily be corrected in the near term, and it would be in direct conflict with the military chains of command. Junior ranks across the services could interpret these pardons as a commander in chief’s indifference toward illegal actions, including the reported killings by a SEAL operator of a young Iraqi girl and an unarmed old Iraqi man.

We write from extensive personal experience — over a decade between us in specific and complex combat zone leadership roles. During our time in Falluja, a Marine was ordered to confinement in Anbar Province after a civilian had been killed at nighttime in questionable circumstances. In Helmand, the governor of the province and other provincial religious and tribal leaders would press us on incidents in which United States military operations resulted in civilian deaths. These Iraqis and Afghans wanted to believe the Americans could be trusted to follow up, especially behind closed doors and in courtrooms.

Maintaining our moral standing in war is among the greatest challenges for any service member, particularly for those who see friends die. It is the adherence to law in wartime that defines us as Americans and keeps civilians and our own troops safe.

Presidential pardons for military members accused of war crimes would be a tremendous disservice to these troops who remain our best unofficial ambassadors in outposts around the world. If the current commander in chief pardons service members accused or convicted of war crimes, we risk having our own citizens, and perhaps even our most trusted allies around the world, note the lowering of standards on the explicit order of the American president himself.

Second Poll Shows Public Opposes A Manafort Pardon

A few days ago, I showed you a Morning Consult Poll that showed 60% of Americans opposed Trump giving Paul Manafort a pardon. Now a second poll verifies that. It shows 62% oppose a pardon, while only 15% support it.

The chart shows the results of a new Rasmussen Poll -- done on August 22nd and 23rd of a national sample of 1,000 likely voters, with a 3 point margin of error.