As Donald Trump inches closer to the Oval Office, much has been said about how he will unwind himself from the dealings he’s made in his glass office about 200 miles north in Trump Tower. A number of Democrats have called for the president-elect to start addressing potential conflicts of interests by selling his new D.C. hotel, the building from which he is leasing from the federal government (the lease explicitly states that it cannot be held by an elected official). More broadly, ethics experts and lawmakers have said that Trump’s plan to turn over his global real-estate business to his two sons, Donald Jr. and Eric, creates a different set of issues. Many have suggested that the only true way to avoid such ethical questions is for Trump to divest from the Trump Organization entirely.

Newt Gingrich, former House Speaker and current Trump booster, has a different plan. He acknowledges that his billionaire buddy may have a tough time unravelling himself from his multi-billion-dollar business. “It’s a very real problem,” Gingrich said in an NPR interview on Monday. “I don’t think this is something minor. I think certainly in an age that people are convinced that government corruption is widespread both in the U.S. and around the world, you can’t just shrug and walk off from it.” His solution, though, is perhaps the very definition of government corruption. He advised that should the president-elect run up against issues with ethics laws, he should just change those laws in order to suit him, using his presidential pardon powers to absolve a multitude of potential sins.

“In the case of the president, he has a broad ability to organize the White House the way he wants to. He also has, frankly, the power of the pardon,” he said. “It’s a totally open power. He could simply say, ‘Look, I want them to be my advisers. I pardon them if anyone finds them to have behaved against the rules. Period. Technically, under the Constitution, he has that level of authority.”

Aside from the fact that this is a completely unreasonable and unethical reading of the U.S. Constitution—and one that Gingrich’s co-guest on NPR noted would make him closer to a king than a U.S. president—the problem with Gingrich’s take is also that it assumes conflicts of interests could arise in the future. The fact of the matter is that they’ve already begun.

ThinkProgress reported on Monday that the Embassy of Kuwait allegedly canceled a contract it had signed with the Four Seasons for an event it usually holds at the Georgetown hotel after it received pressure from the Trump Organization to move it to the aforementioned Trump International Hotel, just a few blocks down Pennsylvania Avenue from the White House. The embassy canceled with the Four Seasons, ThinkProgress noted, just after The Washington Post ran a story about the hotel hosting diplomats for an event at which it was actively encouraging diplomats to patronize the hotel. “Believe me, all the delegations will go there, ” one diplomat told the Post. A couple weeks later, Politico reported that Bahrain was planning to host a reception at Trump’s hotel in early December. The Republic of Azerbaijan decided to co-host a Hanukkah party there, as well.

Not all conflicts center around the 263-room hotel, though it may seem like a hotbed for them. Further south, in Texas, the Center for Public Integrity reported, a nonprofit run by Donald Jr. and Eric is offering access to the president-elect in exchange for million-dollar donations to conservation charities. Donors have the opportunity to win a private reception and photo opportunity with Trump and a multi-day hunting or fishing expedition with his two sons, according to the report. That’s a conflict very much in line with the kind of trouble the Trump children already ran into last week, when Eric and Ivanka caught heat for auctioning off a coffee date with the eldest Trump daughter to benefit St. Jude’s. (The auction was pulled after The New York Times noted that several bidders were using the opportunity to gain access to the incoming First Daughter for their own individual benefit.)