Maddow Blog | Why Lindsey Graham’s message about special counsel Jack Smith matters
Those hoping to see Donald Trump held criminally liable — again — for his alleged wrongdoing will have to lower their expectations. As my MSNBC colleague Jordan Rubin explained, the Republican’s election victory will effectively doom prosecutors’ ongoing cases against him.
Similarly, NBC News reported in the election’s wake that Justice Department officials “have been evaluating how to wind down the two federal criminal cases” before Trump takes office, “to comply with longstanding department policy that a sitting president can’t be prosecuted.”
Time will tell whether special counsel Jack Smith steps down ahead of Inauguration Day — the president-elect has already vowed to fire (and possibly deport) the prosecutor — but either way, it would appear his cases will not proceed, their merits notwithstanding.
It was against this backdrop that Sen. Lindsey Graham sent a message of sorts to Smith by way of social media the morning after Election Day. The South Carolina Republican wrote:
To Jack Smith and your team: It is time to look forward to a new chapter in your legal careers as these politically motivated charges against President Trump hit a wall. The Supreme Court substantially rejected what you were trying to do, and after tonight, it’s clear the American people are tired of lawfare. Bring these cases to an end. The American people deserve a refund.
So, a few things.
First, as the sycophantic senator probably knows, there’s literally zero evidence to suggest that Smith’s cases are “politically motivated.”
Second, if Graham believes the Supreme Court’s ruling — written entirely by Republican-appointed justices — immunizing presidents from accountability is worth celebrating, I’d encourage him to take another look.
But even if we put these relevant details aside, it’s also worth appreciating what a departure this is from a position Graham took in the recent past.
In 2017, for example, as Trump wanted to oust then-special counsel Robert Mueller, it was Graham who told reporters that if the then-president got rid of the then-special counsel, it “could be the beginning of the end of the Trump presidency.”
The South Carolinian added that the system needed “a check and balance here,” and the senator even endorsed legislation that would prevent a president from acting unilaterally to remove a special counsel.
Months later, Graham also said that it would be “corrupt” for Trump to oust a special counsel investigating him, adding that a president stopping an investigation without cause “would be a constitutional crisis.”
To be sure, there’s one relevant detail that’s different — Mueller didn’t indict Trump, and Smith did — but Graham’s evolution on this speaks volumes about his partisan perspective.
This post updates our related earlier coverage.
This article was originally published on MSNBC.com
