'Cynical, hypocritical and wrong': Alito buried for blowing off 'facts of this case'
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's extended grilling of attorney Michael Dreeben, who is representing special counsel Jack Smith in Donald Trump's presidential immunity case, hit a sour note when he blew off an answer from the lawyer with a sharp, "I'm not talking about the particular facts of this case."
That led to a chorus of complaints from legal experts who piled on the conservative justice for not caring about a Dreeben answer in which he talked about a president "making a mistake" that the DOJ attorney claimed wouldn't necessarily lead to criminal charges.
Alito's persistence, taken in whole, led University of Texas law professor Steve Vladek to complain on X, "Justice Alito suggests that, if former presidents are subject to prosecution after leaving office, they'll be more likely to seek to unlawfully remain in office after they were defeated for re-election/their term has ended. JFC."
ALSO READ: A criminologist explains why Trump’s Manhattan trial is the biggest threat to his freedom
Frequent MSNBC legal analyst Elie Mystal flipped out, writing: "Alito: "I'm not talking about the particular facts of this case." WHY? WHY THE HELL ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT THIS F-----G CASE RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU?"
"Alito is implying that unless a president has immunity his successors will persecute him. ... Did I just imagine that this has never happened in US history? This is dark sophistry," accused Financial Times associate editor Ed Luce that had MSNBC host Ari Melber agreeing and adding, "Chilling: Justice Alito seems to seriously suggest U.S. coups will be *more* likely if the prosecution of former Presidents is legal, because then some would be incentivized to stage coups to avoid later prosecution."
Former U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade was appalled by another Alito assertion, writing, "Alito: Skeptical of layers of protection in criminal justice system. Projecting bad faith? SC: Advice of AG, grand jury finding of probable cause. Alito, a former prosecutor of all people, says a grand jury can indict a Jan [sic] sandwich. Cynical, hypocritical, and wrong."
Illinois attorney Joel Ostrow predicted, "Alito just admitted he has no interest in discussing the particular facts of this case #SCOTUS The fix is in."
"Alito is indicting a criminal justice system when it comes to Trump that he defends when it comes to every other criminal defendant. He’s such a bad faith actor," former Associate White House Counsel Ian Bassin summed up.