Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

U.S. News

Rachel Maddow Slams SCOTUS Over Trump Immunity Decision

This article was originally published at Publications approved for syndication have permission to republish this article, such as Microsoft News, Yahoo News, Newsbreak, UltimateNewswire and others. To learn more about syndication opportunities, visit About Us.

Rachel Maddow strongly criticized the Supreme Court’s decision to hear arguments on Donald Trump’s claim of presidential immunity in April, calling the delay tactics “BS” intended to help Trump politically.

Maddow argued on MSNBC that the precedent of Richard Nixon being pardoned for crimes committed as president disproves any notion that a former president has total immunity.

She said the delay until after the 2024 election is plainly meant to aid Trump, and that even non-lawyers can see through this “dilatory tactic” given American history and the Nixon pardon justification.

Maddow said the Court “knows it, and they don’t care that we know” they are acting in a partisan manner rather than legitimately considering an open legal question.

“They know it, and they don’t care that we know,” Maddow said.

She expressed concern this type of “flagrant” behavior could undermine the Court’s future legitimacy.

“The cravenness of the court is evident in what they are doing with the pacing here… putting this off for seven weeks, sitting on it for two weeks for no reason, obviously pushing all of the cases that they can push, pushing them to the point where Trump will be standing for election before any of us have heard the verdicts in any of those cases,” Maddow said.

“Got it? It’s the timing but it’s also the idea that the immunity thing is an open question,” she added. “Right. Is it really? Presidential immunity an open question? Because what’s the most famous pardon in American history? Gerald Ford pardoning Richard Nixon once he had resigned and was a former president.”

“Why did Gerald Ford pardon Richard Nixon? Quote, ‘as a result of certain acts or omissions occurring before his resignation as president,’ meaning as a result of stuff he did while President, quote, ‘Richard Nixon has become liable to possible indictment. Whether or not he shall be so prosecuted depends on findings of the appropriate grand jury and the discretion of the authorized prosecutor,” Maddow said.

“So the idea that this is an open question, that it might be that a former president can never be tried for something that he did, because he was president when he did it, is disproven by a plain reading of American history and the whole justification for Richard Nixon being pardoned in the first place,” she said. “So the idea that this has to be taken up, is them saying ‘the sky is green.’”

“And I think even for the non lawyers among us to be able to say, ‘you know what, the sky is not green, even on our worst day, this is B.S., you’re doing this as a dilatory tactic to help your political friend, your partisan patron.’ It’s just flagrant, flagrant bull pucky, and they know it, and they don’t care that we know it. And that’s disturbing about the future legitimacy of the court,” Maddow added.

You May Also Like