Why Lindsey Graham's message about Special Counsel Jack Smith matters

Those hoping that Donald Trump will be held criminally liable – again – for his alleged misconduct will have to lower their expectations. As my MSNBC colleague Jordan Rubin explainedThe Republican’s election victory will effectively collapse prosecutors’ ongoing cases against him.

The same goes for NBC News reported In the aftermath of the election, Justice Department officials have been “evaluating how to conclude the two federal criminal cases” before Trump takes office, “to comply with the department’s long-standing policy that a sitting president cannot be prosecuted.” ”

Time will tell if Special Counsel Jack Smith will resign before Inauguration Day – the president-elect has already promised so firework (And possibly deport) the prosecutor – but either way, it looks like his cases won’t go forward, despite their merits.

It was against this backdrop that Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina published a message to report to Smith via social media the morning after election day. It said:

“It’s time to look forward to a new chapter in your legal career as these politically motivated charges against President Trump hit a wall. The Supreme Court has substantially rejected what you tried to do, and after tonight it is clear that the American people are tired of the practice of law. Put an end to these things. The American people deserve payback.”

So a few things.

First, as the sycophantic senator probably knows, there is literally zero evidence to suggest that Smith’s cases are “politically motivated.”

Second, if Graham believes that the Supreme Court’s ruling — written entirely by Republican-appointed justices — immunizing presidents from liability is worth celebrating, I would encourage him to look again.

But even putting these pertinent details aside, it is also worth realizing how far this differs from the position Graham has taken in the recent past.

For example, in 2017, when Trump wanted to impeach then-special counsel Robert Mueller, Graham was the one told reporters that if the then-president were to fire the then-special counsel, it “could be the beginning of the end of Trump’s presidency.”

The South Carolinian added that the system needed “a check and balance here,” and the senator even passed legislation That would prevent a president from acting unilaterally to remove a special counsel.

Months later, Graham also said that it was “corruptIf Trump were to remove a special counsel investigating him, he added that a president halting an investigation without cause “would be a constitutional crisis.”

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 message updates our related previous reporting.