As I've said, I don't have a particular problem with the pardon, though as others have suggested, I might have made it more specific if I were king. That said, a few random comments on some of the themes in the thread...
1. I suppose if there's a silver lining to the presidential immunity decision, which IMO goes goes a little beyond the underlying legitimate consideration, it's that it avoids the future constitutional crisis of the court having to decide whether a president can pardon themself.
2. This matter is another reminder of how I continue to find it strange how reasonably sophisticated people - including those currently in the WH - seem to be unable to distinguish between Trumpian political rhetoric and reality. It's almost ironic in that it presupposes he's always telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, which of course he is not. And even more oddly, the truth about the most extreme/ludicrous things.
3. Regarding the continuing "stacked court" theme, while I believe that Garland was treated unfairly, was a fine AG, and would have made a fine justice (having actually had him in a Medicare hospital reimbursement case years ago), McConnell took some political risk in what he did (and "won"), but politics is not always a dirty word. It is part of the structure. Beyond Garland though, (i) I'm not entirely sure what people think Trump should have done when faced with an open nomination other than nominate someone consistent with the judicial philosophy of his side, and (ii) among the conservative justices on the court, it seems to me that Trump's nominees should be the least of his opponents' concerns.
4. The pardon will reflect badly on Biden's short term legacy, but will fade into the background in importance. That said, while many political families have dynastic aspirations, i suspect his family will suffer from the usual problems associated with inherited wealth, but probably a generation sooner than most.
