Libs, who are you going to believe on the DOJ and Trump: Rachel Maddow or Mark Zaid?

So, NOW there’s a Deep State?

Rachel Maddow vs. the Deep State https://t.co/4ZsKS1vEYm

— Greg Pollowitz (@GPollowitz) June 9, 2021

On the other hand, she really has absolutely no idea what she’s talking about. From actual lawyer Mark Zaid: “I understand facts of this case upset ppl, as they should, but precedent is very clear that DOJ decision is consistent w/prior practice”:

Recommended

He WENT There! LOL! @Amuse Play-by-Play Video Thread of White House Correspondent's Dinner Wins Twitter

Sam J.

Comments by @BradMossEsq in this article are 100% correct. I understand facts of this case upset ppl, as they should, but precedent is very clear that DOJ decision is consistent w/prior practice. https://t.co/N0vXfbZjiI

— Mark S. Zaid (@MarkSZaidEsq) June 9, 2021

We’d put Maddow in this “Twitter lawyers” category:

Before all you Twitter "lawyers" & actual real lawyers w/o any experience in this field comment, you should do your research. DOJ has previously certified Westfall Act immunity for fed employees who committed criminal acts, incl rape, while acting in "scope of employment".

— Mark S. Zaid (@MarkSZaidEsq) June 9, 2021

And, keep in mind, Zaid is quite clear on what he thinks about former President Trump:

I want nothing less than Trump being held accountable, criminally & civilly, for so many things.

But ppl need to realize DOJ's decision is designed to protect every President from being sued for defamation for comments made while in office.

Can you not see pandora's box? https://t.co/D2biaIUBu3

— Mark S. Zaid (@MarkSZaidEsq) June 9, 2021

Well, Rachel Maddow does:

Do you really want President Biden sued for some comment he makes off the cuff that someone views as defamatory, whether it is or not?

Can you not see potential for harm & abuse?

I am all for narrowing of scope. Tell Congress.

— Mark S. Zaid (@MarkSZaidEsq) June 9, 2021