In a new interview for MSNBC, former GOP Congresswoman Liz Cheney of Wyoming — herself a lawyer — ridiculed recent arguments from Donald Trump amid his federal case alleging multiple criminal conspiracies inherent in his attempts after the last presidential election to stay in power despite losing to Joe Biden.
Special Counsel Jack Smith, who brought the case, is now asking the Supreme Court to take up appeals related to Trump’s arguments in order to more quickly resolve the dispute and keep trial on track. (It’s currently scheduled for March.) The former president is contending that he has wide-ranging immunity from prosecution covering everything he did within the so-called outer perimeter of his presidency unless an impeachment and accompanying Senate conviction covered the contested conduct. Prosecutors say this reading of the legal standards around the presidency is directly at odds with the law and history.
“The notion that somehow a president has got complete immunity for criminal activity that he committed while in office just strikes me as not a close call,” Cheney said. “So, I thought it was the right decision.” The last portion of her comments refers to Smith’s decision to seek Supreme Court intervention, which he’s pursuing before the resolution to a more lengthy appeals process at a lower level.
In another interview on MSNBC, former federal prosecutor Andrew Weissmann, who served with Special Counsel Robert Mueller, predicted the Supreme Court would take up the dispute, which could set up oral arguments on the substance of the controversy early next year. At present, the court is just deciding whether to jump in at this stage at all and has directed the Trump team to produce their arguments in opposition to Smith’s push for intervention. Notably, the Supreme Court already granted Smith’s request for expedited consideration of whether to essentially bypass the lower appeals court.
