‘A Decisive Blow!’ CNN’s Jim Acosta Stunned By Trump Judge’s ‘Blistering’ Denials In Federal Election Crimes Case

CNN anchor Jim Acosta was stunned by the force of “blistering” denials handed down against former President Donald Trump in the ongoing federal election crimes case against him.

On Friday night, Federal District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan denied two motions to dismiss from Trump’s team, based on First Amendment and presidential immunity claims.

On Friday night’s edition of CNN’s The Source, guest anchor Acosta repeatedly remarked on the forcefulness of Judge Chutkan’s ruling — and its devastating effect on Trump’s legal position:

ACOSTA: U.S. District Judge, Tanya Chutkan, handing down a decisive blow, to Donald Trump, and his legal team, rejecting their attempts, to dismiss charges of the January 6 case, here, in Washington, D.C.

Joining me now, to talk about this, CNN National Security Reporter, Zachary Cohen.

Zachary, what do we know?

ZACHARY COHEN: Yes, Jim, this is really a forceful rebuke, of Trump’s argument that he should have absolute immunity, for really, any crimes he may have committed, while in office. That includes what he said he did after the 2020 election.

And the judge, in this case, Judge Chutkan really making clear that she does not agree, with what Trump’s lawyers are arguing, in this case.

I want to take you through a couple passages here, just to highlight them. The first one compares Trump to a, divine kings, as four years as

Commander-in-Chief do not bestow on him the divine right of kings to evade criminal accountability.

She goes on to say “Whatever immunities a sitting President may enjoy, the United States has only one Chief Executive at a time, and that position does not confer a lifelong ‘get-out-of-jail-free’ pass.”

So, this is an issue, presidential protections that’s going to have to be sorted out by an appeals court, before Trump can go to trial. Obviously, this case is scheduled to go to trial, in March.

But the judge, in this case, making clear that she has no issues, unless a federal appeals court steps in, and takes a different side. We’re going to have to see how quickly the appeals court can take up this issue.

But certainly, a major blow to Trump’s legal strategy, in this federal election subversion case.

ACOSTA: Absolutely, and in a blistering way, as well.

All right, Zach Cohen, thank you very much.

Joining me now, to talk about this, former counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for National Security, Carrie Cordero; and former U.S. Attorney, Michael Moore.

Carrie, what do you make of this ruling, and the judge, Judge Chutkan? I mean, really, it’s almost as though I feel like, when I read what she has to say, in a lot of these cases, it almost sounds like she is talking directly, to the former President.

CARRIE CORDERO, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER COUNSEL TO ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR NATIONAL SECURITY: Well, she–

ACOSTA: “You do not have the divine right of kings” and so on.

CORDERO: She is very clear.

ACOSTA: Yes.

CORDERO: She is clear on that point. And she is clear, on the point that to the extent that the former President’s team makes arguments, about what kinds of cases can be brought, against a president, she consistently says, “But he is not president anymore. He is not the president.”

And so, it is a different situation, when you have someone, who is making these claims, trying to use the cloak of the presidency, and Executive authority, when that simply isn’t his position anymore.

That being said, there are unique aspects of these cases that are brought against him. And so, he does have unique challenges, because the conduct that’s alleged was while he was president.

ACOSTA: Yes.

CORDERO: And now, he is also a candidate for future office. So, that’s why sometimes these First Amendment claims get more attention.

ACOSTA: Yes. Michael, I mean, a lot of this gets wrapped up in “Well, I was president when this happened. And now, I’m running for president, while it’s happening. I need to be granted all these favors and special privileges, because all of these things happened while I was either president or running for president.”

What do you make of what the judge is saying tonight?

MICHAEL MOORE, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY, PARTNER, MOORE HALL IN ATLANTA: Well, I’m glad to be with you both.

I mean, she stung him pretty good, in the order. There’s no question about it. I mean, she went to great lengths to talk about whether or not a president should — or a former President should have immunity.

I do think it was interesting to me, there was a little bit of lack, in talking about the fact that this happened, while he was President, as she refers to him repeatedly as the former President, doesn’t enjoy (ph) this, she put up the quote about, “Well, we have, only one president at a time,” nobody questions that.

The issue is the conduct that occurred at the time that he was the sitting President of the United States. I mean, I do think it’s a blow to the Trump camp. I also don’t think that they were naive enough to think that this was going to get settled, in the first inning of the game. And that’s kind of where we are. This will have to make his way up to an appellate court.

And ultimately, she even recognized at the end of her order, she recognizes that these are issues of first impression, and I’m not trying to be overbroad. And so, we’re going to hear from nine folks sitting up there, at the marble building, at some point, about what they think of the case.

ACOSTA: Yes.

Watch above via CNN’s The Source.

New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters"
Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!