By Mike Bibb

Several weeks ago, I wrote an article about a billboard in Tombstone prominently displaying a large Trump campaign placard on which the phrase "The Reckoning!" was boldly inscribed (The Beat, Jan. 7, 2025).

It would appear that time has arrived.

Now that Donald John Trump is once again the President of the United States — and only has four years to clean up the mess Joe Biden left behind — perhaps he should begin by having his new Department of Justice looking into the malfeasance and intentional misapplication of law into many of Joe's DOJ shenanigans.

Especially, Joe's own blatant misuse of power he flagrantly waved in our faces as Marine One taxied him out of Washington for the last time: Thousands of Executive Orders, pardons and commutations of prison sentences he handed out during his final minutes as President — including to friends, political associates and members of his own family.

"Hail Caesar, the emperor has no clothes!" the crowds could finally exclaim, as the cat was busily covering up his own poop while helicopter propellers whirled overhead.

I've mentioned previously, I'm certainly no scholar of law or pretend to be. To the contrary, the English language sometimes seems confusing, especially when used in the field of juris prudence and courtrooms.

However, when a U.S. President believes he has the unencumbered authority to apply, or use the law as he pleases, then I begin to question the validity of his assumptions.

He might be elected to the most prominent position in government, but he does not have the Constitutional prerogative to create law because he wants to, whenever he desires.

The President is one-third of a legislative process requiring his participation to enact law.

Our founders were well aware of the tendency of kings and rulers to pass edicts and proclamations for their own benefit. It's a system of governance dating back to the days of the ancient Egyptian Pharaohs (kings). Or before.

They were also cognizant of the abuses and dangers involved in such organizations. Kings and Queens may invoke a sense of protection and tranquility, but usually at the expense of individual sovereignty.

A President can, however, issue Executive Orders to aid in the implementation of law or assist in bureaucratic management.

He can also pardon certain individuals and federal employees he feels have been inappropriately treated by the legal system.

One of the more famous cases was when President Gerald Ford pardoned former President Richard Nixon after Nixon had resigned the Presidency because of the Watergate scandal (Aug. 9, 1974).

Fearing political and social unrest, Ford excused Nixon — preventing further escalation of public hostilities in an era already burdened by discontent with the Vietnam War.

Even though both men were publicly elected to office, they were federal employees, subject to the jurisdiction of the federal government.

Ford's Executive Order pardoning Nixon did not involve family ties. Rather out of necessity for the good of the country.

I'm not sure how "The good of the country" applies to the many thousands of pardons Joe signed. Especially, when they concern himself, friends and family members.

Apparently, after Congress exposed the apparent corruption of Joe Biden, going back to his days as a U.S. Senator, with documentation and witness testimony of his participation in various scams he and several members of his family were participating in, it would seem Joe's plethora of pardons were made more out of an urgency to shield his family from future prosecution than a desire to ensure justice.

Pardoning death-row inmates, political friends and fellow administration officials were only a diversion to his primary concern: Protect the family.

Like an organized crime boss, Joe had already exempted his son, Hunter, from felony gun and income tax violations involving millions of unreported dollars. Taking it a step further, pardoning additional family members — who were probably entangled in the scandals — is the expected progression of the process.

To Joe's thinking, keeping this clutter out of the courts and public exposure has to be dealt with in the most expeditious manner possible.

Hence, last-minute Executive Orders pardoning everyone involved, or could become involved, was his exit strategy.

Joe's previously pathetic pleading that he would never grant absolution to Hunter for his crimes was shown to be a complete lie, magnified into an even greater falsehood by doing the very same thing thousands of times over.

In the end, Joe would leave office with the not-so-glorious distinction of signing more Presidential Pardons than any prior President. Or several combined.

How is such blatant misbehavior condoned by law? Where is it written and adjudicated that a President has the unlimited authority to forgive and forget whomever he pleases?

Is such behavior really lawful? Can an individual be pardoned for a crime they haven't been indicted and convicted of? If so, what's the point in having laws if someone higher up the food chain can alter or ignore those laws?

More importantly, can a President change or modify the law whenever he feels like it by simply issuing a declaration?

Perhaps, Trump's DOJ will finally look into the matter.

Maybe — just, maybe — justice is about to descend upon the Joe Biden Administration and family. Maybe, they'll get a taste of their own medicine. Maybe, someone associated with this screwed-up outfit will finally experience what it feels like to be incarcerated within the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

Sort of a long-awaited Reckoning!