“As Joseph Arpaio’s federal case headed toward trial this past spring, President Trump wanted to act to help the former Arizona county sheriff who had become a campaign-trail companion and a partner in their crusade against illegal immigration,” the Washington Post reports.

“The president asked Attorney General Jeff Sessions whether it would be possible for the government to drop the criminal case against Arpaio, but was advised that would be inappropriate… After talking with Sessions, Trump decided to let the case go to trial, and if Arpaio was convicted, he could grant clemency.”

“So the president waited, all the while planning to issue a pardon if Arpaio was found in contempt of court for defying a federal judge’s order to stop detaining people merely because he suspected them of being undocumented immigrants… His effort to see if the case could be dropped showed a troubling disregard for the traditional wall between the White House and the Justice Department, and taken together with similar actions could undermine respect for the rule of law, experts said.”

David Frum: “Trump has given hope to anyone implicated in his own scandals that—if they keep loyal to him—he will defy all other considerations and ignore all contrary advice to protect them. Like his presidency, Trump’s pardons will be a one-man show, conducted without regard to ethical niceties or even ordinary political calculations. That must come as reassuring news to a whole host of characters embroiled in the Russia probe.”

Bob Bauer: “An act of this kind cannot fail to affect Mueller and his team as they investigate obstruction of justice and evaluate evidence bearing on the President’s motives and respect for law. Trump will have added more telling detail to the picture prosecutors are piecing together of ‘how he operates.’ Congress may now or in the future also have occasion to conduct its own inquiry.”

“And while the president may well get away with the specific act of pardoning Arpaio, this action will not be without effect on future calls for impeachment. Unlike a pardon of himself, family members, or aides in the Russia matter, pardoning Arpaio would probably not result in the immediate demand for an impeachment inquiry. If, however, impeachment pressure increases, or a formal impeachment inquiry is launched on the basis of Russian ‘collusion,’ obstruction, or on other grounds, an Arpaio pardon in the background will be highly damaging to the President’s position. It will immeasurably strengthen the hand of those arguing that Donald Trump does not have the requisite respect for the rule of law, or an understanding of the meaning of his constitutional oath, to be entrusted with the presidency.”

“Republicans on Capitol Hill lament President Trump’s aggressive behavior toward them, but some people in the president’s orbit are urging him to up the ante even further,” The Hill reports.

“They say that, far from making nice, Trump needs to instill fear so that lawmakers do not feel at liberty to thwart him.”

Said longtime Trump confidant Roger Stone: “Most members of Congress are arrogant, and until a scalp is actually taken they are going to continue to be defiant. All he needs to do is punish one incumbent and I think you’d see a sea-change.”

“If the goal is to accomplish absolutely nothing and fundamentally destroy the Republican Party from a national perspective, I wouldn’t change a thing.”

— Josh Holmes, a former chief of staff and adviser to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), quoted by Politico about President Trump’s sustained criticism of GOP lawmakers.