Politics

How Trump plans to avoid a ‘Saturday Night Massacre’

Published

1 year ago

November 11, 2024

How Trump plans to avoid a ‘Saturday Night Massacre’

Donald Trump told a conservative radio host Thursday that, if elected, he would fire special counsel Jack Smith “within two seconds.” It’s hard to hear this without recalling how another Republican president, Richard Nixon, tried this same maneuver as a last-ditch attempt to avoid having to comply with a special prosecutor’s subpoena for what turned out to be incriminating audio tapes. Nixon’s directive to fire then-special prosecutor Archibald Cox led to the “Saturday Night Massacre,” when Nixon’s attorney general and deputy attorney general resigned rather than carry out Nixon’s order.

But Trump may have come up with a plan to avoid the messy Nixon-era optics of multiple resignations.

Given that he’s no student of history, Trump may not know that a president can’t fire a special counsel — at least not directly.

In November 2022, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Smith as special counsel and authorized him to conduct two investigations. The first covered possible crimes committed by Trump in connection with his attempts to retain the power of the presidency after losing the 2020 election, while the second concerned possible crimes surrounding his retention of classified documents in Florida. As a result of this appointment, Smith indicted Trump on four counts for crimes allegedly committed on and around Jan. 6, 2021, and 40 counts in the classified documents case.

Unsurprisingly, then, Trump has attacked Smith ever since his appointment, and is now promising to fire Smith as one of his first acts should he be elected to a second term.

Given that he’s no student of history, Trump may not know that a president can’t fire a special counsel — at least not directly. Only the attorney general can fire a special counsel. This is why, in 1973, when Nixon wanted to shut down Cox, he ordered Attorney General Elliot Richardson to do so. Richardson refused and immediately resigned. Nixon then turned to his deputy attorney general, William Ruckelshaus, and ordered him to fire Cox. Ruckelshaus also refused and resigned. Nixon then moved on to the No. 3 guy at the Department of Justice, Solicitor General Robert Bork and ordered him to fire Cox. Bork did so, though a court later would rule the firing was unlawful.

Trump has considered firing a special counsel once before. During Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation, Trump considered asking Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to fire Mueller (Attorney General Jeff Sessions had recused himself from overseeing the inquiry). But his White House counsel Don McGahn threatened to resign, and even loyal Republicans like Sen. Lindsey Graham warned that “any effort to go after Mueller could be the beginning of the end of the Trump presidency.”

This time, though, Trump may have a scheme to ensure a Justice Department official will do his dirty work. ABC News recently reported that Trump’s transition team has none other than Judge Aileen Cannon on the short list to be Trump’s attorney general. NBC News and BLN haven’t confirmed the report, which cited “sources familiar with the matter.” But Cannon’s appeal to Trump is obvious, as she might be just the person whom Trump could count on to fire Smith.

Trump likely won’t even have to tell Cannon to fire Smith, because, in substance, she already has.

Cannon was nominated to the federal bench by Trump (and confirmed after he lost the 2020 election). When the FBI seized classified documents from Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s Florida property, Trump filed suit contesting the legality of the seizure. Cannon was assigned to preside over the litigation, and her ruling appointing a special master to the matter effectively stopped the criminal investigation dead in its tracks. When the Department of Justice appealed, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed Cannon not once but twice for abusing her judicial discretion.

After Smith indicted Trump for crimes including unlawful retention of classified materials, obstructing justice and violating our nation’s espionage laws, the trial was unfortunately assigned to Cannon. After months of foot-dragging, she dismissed the charges against Trump, concluding that special counsels are unconstitutional. Cannon made this ruling notwithstanding the fact that special counsels and special prosecutors have been used in the criminal justice system dating back to the 1800s, and every judge and court that has ever litigated the issue has ruled that they are lawful and constitutional.

It’s fair to say that Trump hit the jackpot by having Cannon preside over and dismissing his criminal case. He certainly thinks so: though Trump has relentlessly and often viciously criticized virtually all other judges who are presiding over his criminal and civil cases, he has praised Cannon effusively every step of the way.

Now, the kicker: Let’s assume Trump nominates Cannon to be attorney general and she is confirmed by the Senate. Trump likely won’t even have to tell Cannon to fire Smith, because, in substance, she already has. Trump would be able to avoid the messy “Saturday Night Massacre” debacle that was part of Nixon’s downfall.

Trump’s promise to fire Smith is a final warning to voters that he is proudly and enthusiastically corrupt to his core. In the event voters return him to office, he undoubtedly will once again be willing to use that office’s powers to evade criminal accountability. And, given that the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling has given Trump a blueprint for how to continue to evade criminal accountability, it’s not hyperbole to conclude that in the upcoming election, the health of American democracy is on the line.

Glenn Kirschner

Glenn Kirschner, a former assistant U.S. attorney for Washington, D.C., is an NBC News and BLN legal analyst.

Politics

2028 Dem veteran? Uncle Sam wants you.

Published

9 hours ago

March 14, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

In the 15 days since President Donald Trump launched Operation Epic Fury on Iran, Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) is approaching nearly a dozen media appearances, offering his often visceral reaction to the conflict.

Gallego, a 46-year-old combat veteran who deployed to Iraq as an infantryman in 2005, has emerged as a blunt, clear voice for the Democratic Party on foreign policy, speaking as someone whose own generation experienced the forever wars.

There he was on BLN’s “The Source with Kaitlin Collins” saying Secretary of State Marco Rubio was doing “CYA” and noting that the “MAGA base is pissed.” There he was sitting down with the AP speaking “as someone who lives with PTSD,” adding “it’s not been an easy week.” And there he was on Derek Thompson’s podcast, speaking about “going town to town searching for insurgents” 21 years ago, “but there was no clear direction of what victory looked like, what the end goal was, what was going to be the after-action report on Iraq.”

Gallego isn’t alone. Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), a Navy captain who flew combat missions during Operation Desert Storm in 1990, has also racked up a run of high-profile media appearances, as has former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, a U.S. Navy Reserve intelligence officer who deployed to Afghanistan. Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, who served in Afghanistan in the Army’s 82nd Airborne, went on local radio this week to link Americans’ affordability woes to the war.

In a year after many Democrats pined for a metaphorical fighter, the party is now having a conversation with itself about whether it needs a literal fighter — a veteran who can speak with credibility on issues of war and national security.

In an interview with Blue Light News, Gallego spoke of “dodging bullets, IEDs, RPGs, clearing towns and then coming back to the same towns with insurgents” and of “losing friends and still not understanding what the end goal was the whole time.”

“It leaves a mark on you, and you start seeing it happening again, you know, you don’t really think about the politics,” Gallego said. “You think about the people who are going to be potentially dying. And that’s why I think I was not hesitant to speak my mind on that.”

Later this month in San Antonio, Texas, Gallego will join VoteVets Action for its third town hall featuring potential 2028 Democratic presidential candidates, promising “fresh voices to the national conversation — those who have worn the uniform and served alongside us, who connect with everyday Americans others can’t,” according to a promotional video. (They’ve also done town halls with Buttigieg and Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin.)

“On foreign policy, the Dems need a candidate who is seen as strong/tough — not in rhetoric or bravado political platitudes but who conveys a sense of judgement and resolve with which voters connect instinctively,” said Doug Wilson, the former assistant secretary of Defense for Public Affairs during the Obama administration and co-lead of Buttigieg’s 2020 foreign policy team.

The “Iran war underscores the need” for such a candidate, Wilson added.

Whomever the Democrats select as their nominee could potentially face a Situation Room-steeped ticket deep with national security credentials, including a Marine Iraq war veteran in Vice President JD Vance or Rubio, with his secretary of State experience.

Depending on how the many conflicts the U.S. is engaged in at the moment resolve, that experience could cut against them.

But right now, Democrats who can match those bona fides have some currency others without them can’t.

“That’s obviously going to be helpful to them,” said Matt Bennett, co-founder of the center-left think tank Third Way. “It’s gonna be a big part of what they’re talking about for the next little while. But you know, how long does it last? We just don’t know, right? In my professional lifetime, foreign policy stuff and national security has mattered in a presidential race once — in 2004. That’s it. Otherwise, it comes up, but it’s not driving the conversation.”

Some potential Democratic candidates without such credentials have still managed to break through amid the Iran news cycle. Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) has said the White House has treated aspects of the war “as a video game,” in a clip gaining traction on X. “When American service members killed in action are returning to the United States in flagged-draped coffins, and even more Americans have lost limbs or suffered terrible brain injuries or are fighting for their lives, this White House treats war like a game, and it’s a disgrace,” Ossoff said.

When asked whether military service is an essential for the party’s eventual nominee, Gallego acknowledged there is a benefit for someone who can “speak with that type of credibility.”

“I’m not the type of person that’s like, ‘you have to be a veteran — Iraq War veteran,’” Gallego said. “This is a democracy. We’re still one, and there’s a lot of people that can bring valuable experience and knowledge. But you know, someone that actually has a nuanced understanding of foreign policy; that doesn’t go to the total knee-jerk reactionism that sometimes we see where we go to the point of, you know, isolationism; or the other way, where we go to full neocon. There needs to be a very balanced way to how we approach the world.”

Like this content? Consider signing up for Blue Light News’s Playbook newsletter.