Bearing in mind that my “law degree” comes from Tijuana Tech using a mail-in coupon on a cereal box-top, I’d like to take a swing at this “unlimited power to pardon” claim our so-called “President” is making.  As I read it (“it” being the Constitution of the United States), the President has the power to pardon, except in Cases of Impeachment.  I think so because that’s exactly what it says in Article II, Section 2, paragraph 1.

Now, according to my scorecard, a case could be made that our so-called “President” could stand accused of Obstruction of Justice and violation of the Emoluments Clause.  (Article I, Section 9, paragraph 8 where it says “No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”)

See how I didn’t mention collusion there?  I’m not sure anybody will ever be able to prove collusion.  It’s not like anybody associated with Trump is going to simply release proof of collusion for all to see, right?  Personally, the reason I think Trump is so obsequious to Putin is because Trump has business holdings in Russia Putin can threaten.  But short of someone voluntarily releasing 3 of the 4 incriminating pages of documents demonstrating at least conspiracy to collude…well, it’s always true that what we “know” and what we can “prove” are not necessarily the same thing…

I’m pretty sure violation of the Emoluments Clause is an impeachable offense.  I’m certain Obstruction of Justice is an impeachable offense.  Historically, that’s been the “kicker” in both of the impeachment cases Congress has tried.  I’ve read that Nixon considered pardoning himself based on that “unlimited power” but, in the end, chose to trade the Oval Office to Gerald Ford in exchange for a Pardon…

One of the things I know is that our Founders were pretty concerned about Monarchs and Monarchy.  They were SO concerned that their first attempt at “government” – the one that failed, the weak central government, power to the states model – didn’t even include an administrative head.  “Let us just let Congress do it”, they thought to  themselves, though they spelled it funny…

But, after the Articles of Confederation crashed and burned and they had to start again from scratch, they acknowledged there should be a central administrative authority to handle certain things and as a check to Congress.  But they were STILL afraid of Monarchs and Monarchy, having just fought a war to fend off such a government.  So, they set up the Presidency, gave him a few “powers” – including Reprieves and Pardons – and tried to leave it at that.  It’s only been through decades of maneuvers, manipulations, and interpretations that the President has become as powerful as he has.

But if he enjoys the unlimited power to Pardon himself in any circumstance, he becomes the Monarch the founders feared.  He could shoot Jeff Sessions in the face at point-blank range on TV and simply look into the camera and declare “I Pardon myself” and there’s nothing anybody could do about it?  (True, if it was Sessions, it’s possible nobody would much care but I STILL don’t want him to have that authority…)  It seems to me that if the President CAN Pardon himself, we’ve NEVER lived in a Constitutional Republic.  We’ve been living in a Monarchy this whole time.  It’s just that nobody ever realized it before…

I’ll tell you this: I don’t want to live in a Monarchy…