Legal Analysts Discuss Special Counsel Appointment For Trump Investigation

Former President Trump says he’s “not going to partake” in the recently announced special counsel investigation. Legal analysts Paul Butler and Glenn Kirschner dig into what the attorney general’s special counsel appointment means for the Trump investigations.



Follow MSNBC Show Blogs

MSNBC delivers breaking news, in-depth analysis of politics headlines, as well as commentary and informed perspectives. Find video clips and segments from The Rachel Maddow Show, Morning Joe, The Beat with Ari Melber, Deadline: White House, The ReidOut, All In, Last Word, 11th Hour, and Alex Wagner who brings her breadth of reporting experience to MSNBC primetime. Watch “Alex Wagner Tonight” Tuesday through Friday at 9pm Eastern.

Connect with MSNBC Online
Subscribe to the MSNBC Daily Newsletter: MSNBC.com/NewslettersYouTube

#Trump #Investigation #DOJ

[oonaghanderson]

Amazing to hear American tv host saying it out loud. Why when so much evidence is there delay. Move it US you're looking pathetic to rest of world.. all respect gone. He should have been arrested a long time ago.

[jerryclasby]

Trump's comments indicates that this move by Garland is a good move

[valentino]

Appointing a special council is just another way for Garland to avoid having to indict Trump. We need a DOJ with a back bone. This will delay accountability and ultimately it will be dropped. If your rich and or powerful you are above the law bottom line.

[elizabeth_]

The special council will outlive this Congress and it also may suggest there may be indictments of other political figures, or even international implications.

[oldasrocks]

Smith may actually speed it up, why not discuss that possibility?

[maggiereeder]

I would never bet against Merrick Garland

[suburbanhousewife]

Garland has been too much Judge and too little prosecutor. Well said Glen Kirschner!, , 💯

[thinkitthrough]

Trump's worst nightmare is called Jack Smith, and Trump knows it. Brilliant move by AG Garland.

[yapdog]

No, it's not about how Donald Trump will frame the appointment of a Special Counsel. It's about how *history* will frame it. And, in that regard, Garland made the right choice.

[speaktruth]

*_"Without fear or favor, "_* except I'm fearful of some (inevitable) accusations, so I'm showing *_even more favor_* to the world's most coddled criminal.

[danlandis]

If there was no Special Counsel, Trump would have cried there was a conflict of interest. Trump will complain and attempt to play the victim; it is the most basic move he has in his perverse playbook. That's a given. Whining is what he does. The issue here is for those looking at the situation who have a modicum of objectivity to avoid any "appearance" (whatsoever) of even possibly untoward legal maneuvering. I think Garland gave the right call by handing the cases over to Jack Smith.

[jimlutz]

This was a great move...about 18 months ago!

[geak]

What is the connections between FTX, Ukraine and the Dem Party?

[jimgraham]

Does M. Garland think the GOP would be so accommodating to JB if the role was reversed? My guess is, the GOP would select Trump appointed corrupt individuals to the Special Counc, and care less about consequences.

[flamingdumpster]

Did Twitter restore the Florida man's Boycott Tesla cars!!!!

[Dr.JudeAEMasonMD]

Funny how Barr seems to actually remember how the law is supposed to work again.

[ronaldclark]

I'm just dissapointed in how garland has done. He had more then enough time over 2 years and we don't know if they will do anything.

[Trumpwon]

Trump- I will not partake in the investigation. Cue democrat tears!

[albertowachsman]

Garland would like to wait until Agent Orange becomes history, but as they say in Spanish 'bad weeds never die'.

[WalkiTalki]

But who is going to investigate Garland for dragging this out for so long?