There have been several media hits on Ted Cruz lately over an apparent reluctance to comment on whether or not President Donald Trump can pardon himself, as he has claimed he could do.

Cruz was swarmed by reporters Monday morning on his way to the Senate, and at first, ignored the question. When asked again, he didn’t offer much in the way of an answer, which many took as hypocrisy given his past comments on Barack Obama’s use of executive power.

Just after midnight on Monday night (Tuesday morning?), Cruz took to Twitter to explain the issue and the difference between the two presidents.

On the question of whether a president can pardon himself, we're seeing an abundance of knee-jerk partisanship and dishonest journalism.

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) June 5, 2018

Virtually every Dem is saying "of course not, the president can't pardon himself (mostly because we hate Trump)." On the other hand, some Rs are saying "of course the president can."

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) June 5, 2018

If we were actually focusing on the Constitution, the answer would be more complicated. The text of the Constitution provides, the President "shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) June 5, 2018

That text has no limitation on WHOM can be pardoned (although nobody can be pardoned from impeachment or for non-federal offenses).

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) June 5, 2018

However, in the 1970s, the Department of Justice did issue a legal opinion that the president cannot pardon himself, relying on the principle that nobody can be the judge in his own case.

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) June 5, 2018

That legal principle has a long and venerable history, but it is not reflected in the constitutional text.

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) June 5, 2018

Whether the Department of Justice opinion is right is an open legal question, with scholars on both sides of the political spectrum disagreeing in good faith.

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) June 5, 2018

Skip ahead a few tweets, and he explains why it’s utterly dishonest to call him a hypocrite on the issue.

They cite a law review article I wrote saying that Obama's executive amnesty was illegal, and that the pardon power did not justify it.

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) June 5, 2018

What those attacks miss is that it is clear that (1) pardons must be retrospective (looking to crimes in the past), not prospective (pardoning future crimes), and (2) they must be addressed to specific persons, not generic categories of offenses.

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) June 5, 2018

Both are straightforward legal propositions; neither is implicated because they do not concern WHOM can be pardoned.

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) June 5, 2018

And, here he settles the debate with a final point about how frankly moot this conversation is right now.

This is not a question one should answer based on knee-jerk partisanship, as opposed to careful constitutional analysis.

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) June 5, 2018

As for me, I still haven't studied the issue at that level of detail, and I don't intend to — because this is nothing more than an academic debate.

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) June 5, 2018

At this point, none of the investigations has demonstrated any criminal conduct needing to be pardoned, as much as those who hate the president might wish otherwise.

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) June 5, 2018

And, you know what? He’s definitely right about this part. There is nothing to pardon yet. This conversation is silly, and while the President was probably a bit foolhardy to say what he did, the fact of the matter is that there is no pardon on the table right now because there is no demonstrable criminal conduct to pardon. A lot of folks won’t like hearing that, but it’s true.