CNN host Abby Phillip taught a conservative guest a tough lesson live on air after she became tangled up in her own argument.
Federalist reporter Brianna Lyman was part of a discussion on NewsNight about former special counsel Jack Smith, who said Thursday he believed he had to seek criminal charges against President Donald Trump for trying to overturn the 2020 election because no one is above the law.
Critics see the case as just another example of what has come to be known as “lawfare,” the weaponization of the justice system to meet political ends, particularly in relation to Trump.
Phillip asked Lyman about “the concerns conservatives have about the weaponization of justice in this country.” The reporter then began reading a passage from a 2023 New York Times article about former President Joe Biden and former Attorney General Merrick Garland.
“Well, I would say that Biden got us the ball rolling,” she said. “So in March 2023 a New York Times article said that Joe Biden wanted Attorney General Merrick Garland to ‘stop acting like a ponderous judge’ and take decisive action when referred to President Donald Trump, who Biden said was a ‘threat to democracy.’
“Then you have another article from the New York Times entitled ‘Garland faces growing pressure as Jan. 6 investigation widens,’” she said. “It says, ‘Mr. Biden confided to his inner circle that he believed former president Donald Trump was a threat to democracy and should be prosecuted.’”
Phillip leapt in. “Continue reading the article where it says that was never conveyed to Garland,” she said. “And also, the whole fact of the article is that Merrick Garland actually was not doing the thing that the president wanted him to do.
“So two things,” she added. “One, the president never said those things to Merrick Garland, publicly or privately—it’s in the same article that you just read. Two, Merrick Garland did not respond to the pressure which the article is referring to. Pressure that was from the public, that was from liberals. He didn’t respond to the pressure. So again, how does it square with your concern about the weaponization of justice to have the president say we should prosecute a DoJ employee for doing his job?”
Things then got a little bad-tempered. Lyman again tried to return to Biden and Garland, and when Phillip asked, “Are you going to answer the question?” Lyman snapped, “I’m trying to, but you keep cutting me off.”
Trump has been eager to investigate Smith for years, and the former special counsel’s appearance before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday could have offered the president a window to identify an error.
Instead, Smith used his first testimony since stepping down last year to defend his actions, explaining why he believed he had no choice but to seek charges against Trump.
“No one should be above the law in this country, and the law required that he be held to account,” Smith said in his opening remarks. “So that is what I did.”
Trump and his cronies have repeatedly claimed that the justice system was used against him to quell the political threat he posed.
However, since his return to power, much debate has centered on Trump’s demands that the Department of Justice prosecute Smith, as well as former FBI Director James Comey, Sen. Adam Schiff, and New York state Attorney General Letitia James.
In one dramatic incident, Trump posted a message on social media addressed directly to his attorney general, Pam Bondi.
“Pam,” he wrote, “nothing is being done” adding, “What about Comey, Adam ‘Shifty’ Schiff, Leticia???”
The move raised concerns among some commentators about the potential erosion of the DoJ’s independence.
