Legal analystSol Wisenberg said Tuesday on Fox News he was doubtful of a positive outcome for former President Donald Trump in regards to his presidential immunity case.
Wisenberg appeared on “The Ingraham Angle” to discuss Trump’s cases, highlighting the former president’s recent appearance in Washington D.C. for a hearing about his claims to presidential immunity. Fox host Laura Ingraham asked the analyst his thoughts about the outcome of the case, pointing out how it could be the start of a “very dangerous trajectory.”
Wisenberg said he believed the D.C. Circuit would be ruling “against” Trump for the immunity case, asserting the “most disturbing” aspect to the prosecution is it’s “obviously political.”(RELATED: New York AG Says Trump Should Pay $370 Million In Civil Fraud Trial)
“Well, I would say, number one, you are correct that — I think the D.C. Circuit is going to rule against President Trump on this particular issue. And I think what’s most disturbing about the prosecution is that it is so obviously political,” Wisenberg stated. “If they were serious about investigating the former president, they would have started that investigation right away and indicted him.”
Wisenberg continued to say the only possible case they “should have considered” for the former president was insurrection. However, he emphasized that even this claim wouldn’t amount to anything. The analyst additionally said he believed the U.S. Supreme Court will find the efforts to throw Trump off the ballot as “invalid.” (RELATED: Jack Smith Wants To Use Old Tweets, ‘Stand Back And Stand By’ Comments As Evidence Against Trump)
“First of all, the only thing they should have considered indicted him for was, was insurrection. I’m not saying they had a case. In fact, because they didn’t have a case, they came up with this harebrained theory that they came up with. But that’s the only serious thing they should have looked at. And you don’t wait until August or July of 2023 to bring the indictment and then insist that he go to trial almost right away in two separate federal districts,” Wisenberg stated.
“That’s what I think is so upsetting to people. But I think ultimately, what you’re going to have at the Supreme Court is a very strong opinion, saying that the efforts to keep Trump off the ballot are completely invalid. But, uh, I’m not so sure at all that they’ll even consider the question of presidential immunity and I don’t know which way that will go.”
Special counsel Jack Smith hit Trump with two grand jury indictments in 2023, one in Florida claiming the former president allegedly mishandled documents and the second in Washington, D.C., alleging Trump engaged in conspiring to interfere in the 2020 election, according to The Washington Post.
Since the allegations were brought forward, the former president has claimed he should not be criminally prosecuted due to presidential immunity, specifically in regards to Smith’s claims of 2020 election interference. Trump made an appearance in the Washington D.C. court Tuesday to support his team’s arguments that he was immune to federal prosecution. They reportedly argued he was acting within his official presidential capacity during the election, and also said he should not be tried since he was acquitted during his second impeachment trial.
Smith had originally attempted to fast track Trump’s presidential immunity claims to the U.S. Supreme Court in December 2023. However, the justices denied the request.