Frank Figliuzzi, a seasoned ex-FBI official, didn’t mince words on MSNBC this weekend.
He blasted the Supreme Court’s decision on presidential immunity, saying it’s time to “look back in history.”
History Repeats? Supreme Court’s Controversial Decision
Chief Justice John Roberts, in a striking 6-3 majority, declared former President Donald Trump has “presumptive immunity” for actions in office.
This ruling connects directly to allegations of Trump interfering in the 2020 election.
Trump’s Troubles: From Charges to Claims of Witch Hunts
Back in August 2023, Trump faced indictment over attempts to overturn the 2020 election results.
He’s pleaded not guilty, dismissing the charges as a political witch hunt. But what does this immunity ruling mean for his future and ours?
A Question of Law: What If the President Is Above It?
During the MSNBC segment, co-host Alicia Menendez posed a chilling question: if the president is above the law, what’s next for law enforcement in the U.S.?
Figliuzzi’s answer? A warning that shakes up our sense of security.
Alito’s Take: Extreme Hypotheticals or Grim Reality?
Justice Samuel Alito brushed off concerns as “extreme hypotheticals.”
But Figliuzzi argued this isn’t far-fetched at all. It’s a stark reminder of a past where government agencies overstepped their bounds—illegally spying on Americans.
Spying Scandals of the 70s: A Dark Chapter in FBI History
The 1970s unearthed some unsettling truths about the FBI, DOJ, and CIA’s snooping on Americans without legal backing.
Think about it—anyone seen as a threat was fair game.
The Huston Plan Uncovered
The notorious “Huston Plan” was a blueprint for invasive surveillance, primarily targeting dissident groups like the Black Panthers.
It was a key factor in Nixon’s downfall. Are we seeing history loop back to these dangerous tactics?
CIA Oversteps
A presidential commission laid bare the CIA’s illegal antics in the 70s—bugging, break-ins, and more. It’s a part of a series of actions that encroached on civilians’ privacy.
The DNSA sheds light on these startling violations.
Figliuzzi’s Fears: A Future of Retribution?
Figliuzzi expressed concern that Trump, if reelected, might use his power for personal vendettas.
His warnings are a wake-up call to the potential misuse of presidential immunity in settling scores.
Trump’s Vague Promises
While Trump hints at using “success” as his form of retribution, his intentions remain unclear.
His ally Steve Bannon echoes this, pushing for justice and full investigations. But what does that mean in the context of this ruling?
Justice Sotomayor Speaks Out
Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s dissent is powerful—she fears a president who acts as a king, untouchable and bold.
Her words paint a grim picture of what unchecked presidential power could look like.
Historical Warnings Ignored? Brennan’s Alarm
John Brennan, ex-CIA director, didn’t hold back either. He called the ruling “breathtaking” with potentially “dangerous implications.”
According to him, it’s a shift towards a presidency unbound by law.
