[kemiller2002]

I'm curious about the same thing, unless maybe he's gambling that it won't be completely tied to Russia. I suppose it could be that if it is something damaging, he can release the information and use it politically, and if not he'll try and keep it secret. This is a total guess though.

[dragonwriter]

> I'm curious about the same thing, unless maybe he's gambling that it won't be completely tied to Russia.

Pardon offers are in no way binding or enforceable, so no actual gambling is involved. You just don't follow through unless you get the answer you want, as well as making very clear (such as by spending multiple years building a particular public narrative which the defendant actively participated in around your preferred answer) what the expected answer is so that, regardless of what the true answer is, the defendant knows what answer gets them free of the charges.

[microcolonel]

> I suppose it could be that if it is something damaging, he can release the information and use it politically, and if not he'll try and keep it secret.

This is in a British court, and the President is not empowered to gag the courts anyway (except sort of I guess, at the highly-constitutionally-questionable national security trials)