People who committed fraud pardoned by trump

1. Who on the pardon list committed fraud — the confirmed names

Among the clemency recipients identified in public reporting are well‑known white‑collar defendants: serial fraudster Jason Galanis, who was sentenced for a multi‑million dollar scheme, was pardoned after cooperating with Republican investigations ^[2]; Ross Ulbricht, convicted in the Silk Road narcotics marketplace case and ordered to pay roughly $184 million in restitution, was pardoned ^[2]; former Representative George Santos, who pleaded guilty to wire fraud, identity theft and related counts and served only months before having his sentence commuted, was granted relief ^{[3] [4]}; and a set of healthcare executives and doctors previously convicted in large‑scale Medicare fraud schemes were among earlier Trump clemencies documented during his first presidency ^[5]. The White House also announced individual pardons of persons with convictions for various frauds—Todd Boulanger, Stephen Odzer and Tommaso Buti are explicitly named in the administration’s clemency statement as having pleaded guilty to fraud or bank‑fraud‑related offenses ^[6].

2. Scope and scale: how many fraudsters and the financial fallout

Reporting and official tallies show the clemency program is large in scope—more than 1,600 executive clemency grants by mid‑2025, including a mass proclamation covering nearly 1,600 Jan. 6 defendants and many other individual pardons and commutations that encompass fraud and corruption convictions ^{[1] [7]}. House Judiciary Democrats quantified an estimated impact on victims and taxpayers, asserting the pardons could wipe out approximately $1.3 billion in restitution and fines owed to victims and the government, a figure cited in their staff memo and press release ^[2].

3. Controversies, legal collateral effects and selective examples

Clemency has triggered secondary legal and regulatory consequences: in some cases pardons reportedly led to the dropping of pending SEC civil enforcement actions tied to the same conduct ^[1]. Critics, including editorial pieces and watchdog groups, argue the pardons favor political allies, wealthy defendants and repeat offenders and undermine victims’ rights ^{[8] [3]}. The administration’s choices have also drawn state‑level and international complications—fact‑checking organizations have corrected viral claims that certain high‑profile defendants (for example, Esformes) were pardoned when they were not, underscoring confusion and misinformation around the sprawling list ^[9].

4. Political context and patterns in clemency decisions

Watchdogs and Congressional Democrats contend the pattern reflects deal‑making and political reciprocity—examples cited include pardons of political allies and individuals who cooperated with Republican probes, as well as pardons of corrupt politicians and corporate actors, which critics say signals tolerance for corruption ^{[3] [2]}. Supporters and the White House frame many grants as correcting prosecutorial excess or restoring fairness in individual cases, and the DOJ’s public list of clemency grants portrays selected beneficiaries with testimonials and endorsements ^{[6] [10]}.

5. Looking forward: enforcement, new policy claims and unanswered questions

The administration has simultaneously announced a new DOJ division for national fraud enforcement, signaling a public posture of combating fraud even as it issues high‑profile clemencies for fraudsters—an apparent policy tension that remains unresolved in reporting ^[11]. Many concrete questions remain open in the public record: the precise list of every fraud‑convicted clemency recipient and the legal mechanics for how pardons interact with parallel civil or state proceedings are documented unevenly across sources and subject to correction and legal challenge ^{[1] [9]}.