A part of the conversation for a few years? It is certainly a question that has not been tested in the courts.

If a President can self-pardon, it's about the same as immunity, except for the opprobrium. And why would we need immunity if we can self-pardon?

Trumps claiming full immunity in post-presidency so in that way it isn’t the same.

before a pardon?

For an example Jimmy Carter pardoned everyone of draft dodging after the Vietnam War, regardless of whether they were charged and/or convicted.

To avoid dragging the nation through the agony we are going through now with Trump. (I don't agree with his decision, but that was the reasoning he offered.)

we shouldn't have been spared it. If we had had some kind of reckoning back then, we might not be dealing with this now. But then again of course, everything old is new again and it didn't stop SCOTUS from overturning precedent with Roe.

And most think it would have been voided. Part of a pardon requires admission of guilt, so they are only available to those convicted. It makes no legal sense for a pardon to someone not convicted of a crime. There are also guidelines for pardons. This is why the notion that Trump has issued "secret pardons" which were in people's pockets for any potential crime they might be charged with was laughable at best.

That is a common misconception that comes from misreading of dicta in the Burdick case, which was not about the implications of accepting a pardon - but about whether Burdick could claim the 5th amendment to protect against the consequences of a pardon granted (but not accepted) for the actions in questions about which he was being compelled to testify. Dicta in Burdick suggest that accepting a pardon carries an implication of guilt. But it is only dicta and is not binding on any courts. Even so, the dicta says nothing about pardons requiring an admission of guilt.

As for legal sense - it certainly makes sense. The purpose of a pardon is shields someone from the legal consequences of their actions. That goal holds true whether there has been a trial, or not.

I agree with you that the secret pardons are nonsense. But pardons actually issued in the routine course of affairs by a president are valid, whether the crimes were charged or convicted.

asshole than I thought he was.