He's thoroughly wrong, and I wonder how it is he has a law degree.
The argument is, basically, (a) Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg brought felony charges against Dumpster for falsifying business records in furtherance of other crimes; (b) absent the "in furtherance of other crimes," the charges would be misdemeanors for which the statute of limitations has expired; (c) the "other crimes" are all violations of federal campaign finance laws; (d) a President can pardon any federal crimes, including federal campaign finance crimes; (e) a Presidential pardon makes it as if the original crime had never been committed, as far as the law is concerned; (f) viz, a Presidential pardon of campaign finance crimes would eliminate the "in furtherance of other crimes" aspect of the felony charges, making them misdemeanors for which the statute of limitations has expired and the charges could not be brought.
So there are obvious critical points here: is the only "other crime" a violation of federal campaign finance laws (or other federal laws); even if the "it never happened" interpretation of the effect of a Presidential pardon holds water -- a dubious assumption -- is New York State bound by it; and even if New York State is bound by it, does it not matter that the intent
behind the falsification of business records was to facilitate violating federal campaign finance laws ... even if such violations "never happened" in the eyes of the law?
The first truck to drive through this nonsense is that a violation of the New York State law against fraud was also "furthered" by the falsified business records, by way of deceiving voters about the moral character of a candidate for political office.
Anyway, Ramaswamy is clearly just trying to get himself some attention, and the WSJ is assisting him in that pursuit, probably out of their own interest in promoting the notion that the Trumpublican Party is fully welcoming to WOGs.