Political analyst and former US Senator Claire McCaskill on Monday tore into US District Court Judge Aileen Cannon for questioning whether special counsel Jack Smith was constitutionally appointed to Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago classified documents case.
The former president's lawyers pushed the claim that Smith wasn't rightfully appointed to take on the indictment in a hearing on Friday, which The New York Timesreported last week are the kind of motions typically "denied in federal cases involving special counsels."
The Times reports that Cannon "has given Mr. Trump’s request extra import by holding hearings and allowing three outside lawyers time in court to make additional arguments about whether there is a constitutional mechanism for naming special counsels."
READ MORE: 'Danger to law enforcement': Jack Smith asks Judge Cannon to make Trump stop lying about FBI
Speaking with MSNBC's Deadline: White House guest host John Heilemann, McCaskill declared that she is "gobsmacked" by Cannon's willingness to entertain the argument at all.
"I think the lawyers that are watching this, and particularly the other federal judges that are watching this, are all like, 'What in the world,'" McCaskill said. "This woman has a serious case of 'robe-itis,' and that is a disease that inflicts a federal judge — once they get the lifetime appointment — they forget that they are accountable to anyone. And even accountable to the people who appear in front of them, the lawyers who appear in front of them."
"I'll give you an example how nuts this is: People file a friend of the court brief many times on various issues," she continued. "Typically, they are only looked at and potentially maybe argued at the appellate level. This woman, on an issue that has been litigated over and over again, about the constitutionality of a special counsel, she's letting people who filed briefs come in and argue in front of her. Like she's a Supreme Court judge or something."
"It is just beyond weird," she added. "I mean, no question, it looks like she's in the tank. It may turn out that she's not. But the appearance of impropriety here, not just with her timing and failure to act, but the rulings she's made. And, as Andrew said, when you get reversed twice by a really conservative appellate court, you start paying attention because no judge — no judge likes being reversed. Even one who doesn't know what she's doing."
READ MORE: 'Fundamentally unsound': Legal expert dismantles Judge Cannon’s 'nonsensical' arguments in docs case
Watch the video below or at this link.