There they go again. For the 1 millionth time, anti-Trumpers are horrified, aghast, stupefied.

The president’s latest offense against their sensibilities is a pointed use of his pardon power. So far, he has pardoned just five people, including Jack Johnson, the legendary black boxer whose conviction a century ago was an act of pure racism.

But four others involve recent, politically tinged cases, including that of conservative provocateur Dinesh D’Souza. Most alarming for the usual critics, the president hints that he is just getting started and cites a possible pardon of Martha Stewart, whose conviction came under James Comey, the former FBI boss and Trump’s archenemy.

Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) told reporters he worries Trump is sending a message to witnesses in special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe, adding, “In the United States of America, nobody is above the law.”

Bingo! That’s exactly the point Trump is making, though he and Warner obviously disagree on who “nobody” is.

To Warner, it’s Gen. Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort and Michael Cohen — Trump’s former aides and one of his lawyers. The first two face charges brought by Mueller, and Cohen is in the crosshairs of the Justice Department. Warner’s fear is that Trump is signaling that a pardon awaits those who are loyal to him.

Perhaps so, but to Trump, the idea that “nobody is above the law” applies just as well to Comey, his former FBI deputy Andrew McCabe and other Obama-era officials who spied on his presidential campaign and leaked classified information to the liberal media.

Trump believes Comey broke the law and cheered when McCabe was fired and referred for possible prosecution for lying to FBI investigators.

But when it comes to Comey, there’s more to the president’s anger than the suspect handling of the Hillary Clinton e-mail case or Comey’s attacks since Trump fired him. Much more.

Go back to Jan. 6, 2017, when Comey briefed Trump, then president-elect, on the infamous Russian dossier at Trump Tower.

Well, not the whole dossier. Only the salacious allegation involving Trump and prostitutes in a Russian hotel room. Asked why he didn’t tell Trump about other allegations, Comey told CNN, “Because that was the part that the leaders of the intelligence community agreed he needed to be told about because we knew it and thought it was about to become public.”

That’s a fishy evasion when you realize Comey’s briefing was immediately leaked to CNN, probably by James Clapper, then the director of national intelligence and soon — what a coincidence! — a CNN ­analyst.

It’s also not incidental that Comey told ABC News that then-President Barack Obama was part of the White House meeting on Jan. 5 where it was decided Comey would brief Trump alone on the dossier and limit it to the prostitute claim. That meeting is the same one Susan Rice cites in her bizarre memo to herself, where she insists Obama ordered that the probe be handled “by the book” and stresses he gave no orders to investigators. The truth of what happened at that meeting would answer many questions.

Meanwhile, consider the things Comey withheld from Trump that January day.

The list starts with the fact he didn’t tell the president-elect that Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee paid for the dossier, or that it was compiled by Christopher Steele, a former British spy.

Comey didn’t tell Trump the FBI had Steele on its payroll, and fired him for misleading agents about ­media contacts.

He didn’t tell Trump there was a surveillance warrant on Carter Page, a fringe player in the campaign, or that the dossier was used in the FISA court application to get the warrant.

Most incredible of all, Comey didn’t mention that the investigation into Trump’s campaign was still ­ongoing at that very moment.

Imagine that. He could have said, “Mr. President-elect, I have to tell you the investigation into possible collusion with Russia continues even as we speak.” But he didn’t.

That was no mere oversight. It was a deliberate choice, approved by Obama.

Nor did Comey tell Trump about Stefan Halper, the American professor in Great Britain recently outed as the spy who approached three members of the Trump team, trying to see if they knew anything about collusion, or trying to entrap them.

The things Comey didn’t mention are astonishing when you remember that Trump would take the oath of office in just two weeks. The new commander in chief was deliberately being kept in the dark by the outgoing administration.

So what was Comey up to with that very limited briefing? It’s possible the sole purpose was to mention the prostitutes, then give CNN the story as a way to inject the dossier into the political bloodstream and hope Trump would step aside.

Or perhaps the goal was to monitor how Trump reacted. Recall that the investigation was still secret, Page was still being surveilled and other campaign players, including Flynn, were being picked up “incidentally” on other wiretaps. Maybe Trump was, too.

In his book, Comey writes that Martha Stewart was prosecuted for lying about a stock sale to “reinforce a culture of truth-telling.”

Fair enough, but to truly “reinforce a culture of truth-telling,” those who enforce the laws must be held to at least the same standard as everyone else.

That’s the most important message Trump is sending with the pardons of people prosecuted by Comey and his cronies. Even the FBI is not above the law.

Let’s bee serious!

A Boston Globe headline on the Samantha Bee outrage: “Why the c-word is still the third rail of profanity”

Does it really need to be explained?

Hill answered our prayers

Reader Warren Goldfein includes Hillary Clinton in his prayers, in a manner of speaking. He writes: “She is part of my Thanksgiving blessings. I give thanks for my health, family, living in the greatest country in the world, and to the fact that Hillary did not become president.”

NYCHA is Blas’ mess

Reports that the city will settle a federal investigation into neglect at the New York City Housing Authority by spending at least $1 billion for repairs raise more questions than they answer.

First, who decided the nice, round amount — Manhattan federal prosecutors? What do they know about building maintenance?

Second, what happens to the $550 million and a state monitor Gov. Cuomo promised to the authority? The feds want to install their own monitor, so Cuomo’s monitor seems to be a dead issue. Is the state money also withdrawn?

Third, city officials submitted documents falsely claiming they had tested apartments for lead paint. Will anybody, including former chairwoman Shola Olatoye, be held accountable for lying in a sworn document?

The entire issue is a giant mess for one reason — because New Yorkers elected Mayor de Blasio. He talks a good game about helping the poor but when it comes to effort and competence, he’s always a no-show.

Yet only taxpayers get penalized.