Why Lindsey Graham's message about special counsel Jack Smith matters

Anyone hoping that Donald Trump will again be held criminally responsible for his alleged misconduct needs to lower their expectations. As my MSNBC colleague Jordan Rubin explained, the Republican's victory will effectively derail prosecutors' ongoing case against him.

Similarly, NBC News reported following the election that Justice Department officials were “considering how to dismiss the two federal criminal cases” before Trump takes office, “in order to comply with the department's long-standing policy that a sitting president should not face criminal charges.” can be tracked.”

Time will tell whether special counsel Jack Smith resigns before Inauguration Day — the president-elect has already vowed to fire (and possibly deport) the prosecutor — but either way, it appears his cases will not be pursued, regardless of their merits .

With that in mind, Senator Lindsey Graham sent a message of sorts to Smith via social media the morning after Election Day. The South Carolina Republican wrote:

So, a few things.

First, as the sycophantic senator probably knows, there is literally no evidence that Smith's cases are “politically motivated.”

Second, if Graham thinks the Supreme Court's decision — written entirely by Republican-appointed justices — absolving presidents of accountability is worth celebrating, I would encourage him to take another look throw.

But even if we leave these relevant details aside, it is worth appreciating what a departure this is from a position Graham has taken in the recent past.

In 2017, for example, when Trump wanted to oust then-special counsel Robert Mueller, it was Graham who told reporters that if the then-president got rid of then-special counsel, it “could be the beginning of the end.” Trump presidency.”

The South Carolinian added that the system needs “checks and balances here,” and the senator even supported legislation that would prevent a president from unilaterally removing a special adviser.

Months later, Graham also said that it would be “corrupt” for Trump to fire a special counsel investigating him, adding that it would be a constitutional crisis if the president were to drop an investigation without providing reasons.

Of course, there is one relevant detail that is different – Mueller did not indict Trump, but Smith did – but Graham's development on this speaks volumes about his partisan perspective.

This post updates our relevant previous reporting.