On Friday's Deadline: White House, MSNBC host Nicolle Wallace seemed to be channeling her inner Keith Olbermann as she accused the Donald Trump administration of arresting a Milwaukee judge to serve as a "distraction" from the economy.
Wallace set up the segment by fretting that President Trump is engaging in "intentionally intimidating acts aimed at key figures and institutions" as she related that Judge Hannah Dugan was arrested outside the courthouse where she worked in Milwaukee, with the Justice Department charging that she "obstructed the detention of an undocumented immigrant who was wanted by federal authorities."
MSNBC legal analyst Andrew Weissmann -- who went after Trump as special counsel Robert Mueller's deputy -- dismissively argued that the case against the judge is weak, beginning his analysis: "So there has been a violation here that we know for sure, and it is not the judge. That's something that remains to be proved. The thing that we do know is that the FBI director has violated DOJ policy."
After vaguely recalling that former FBI director James Comey was criticized by liberals for commenting publicly on the decision not to charge presidential Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, Weissmann continued:
This is somebody who's being charged, and you are supposed to stay mum. And, instead, he completely denigrated her, and you don't do that. The same thing, by the way, Pam Bondi was on Fox News talking about how we're going to go after judges. That is what they're doing. I mean, this is a much more sinister view of the President saying, "We need to impeach them," that led to the chief justice having to step in. Here that is really the way to see this.
Wait: Democrats are saying it's rude to say you need to impeach someone? Weissman dismissively concluded:
Even if you thought there was a ground for doing this, the judgment call that you thought that this is the case to bring tells you everything about what the strategy is. And that, by the way, that's a huge "if." I mean, I can't imagine that this case is going to hold up for a whole variety of factual and legal reasons. But, again, there is no adult in the room who would have said, "Are you kidding me?" This person was apprehended steps from the courtroom -- steps from the courthouse. This -- it's going to be so hard to prove.
Even if you could somehow show that this was the judge's intent, was to obstruct, why would you possibly do this? And the answer is, "Because we want to send a signal to the judiciary." And that's what you shouldn't be doing. I mean, that is -- that is fighting the last branch of government to oppose the executive branch.
As Wallace went to the Bulwark's Tim Miller for reaction, she theorized that the judge was arrested to benefit President Trump by taking attention away from the economy:
... this comes at a moment when Trump's approval rating is in freefall, and it is plunging around what he has done to his own pretty hot economy. He's tanked it with this obsession over tariffs. Whether it's causal or not, we'll never know, but he has also tanked -- his two political sort of shields have always been people thinking he was actually a businessman, even though that was a character he played on a reality show, and people liking his energy or aggressiveness on immigration. He's tanked his -- his approval on both fronts. I think this was a distraction from the first weakness on the economy and a case that they wanted to be arguing in the press instead of that of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. So I just want to lay down the foundations so we're not, sort of, covering the shiny object they wanted us to focus on today.
Former MSNBC host Keith Olbermann was notorious for repeatedly accusing the George W. Bush administration of making announcements for purposes of distracting the public.
Transcript follows:
MSNBC's Deadline: White House
April 25, 2025
4:23 p.m. Eastern
NICOLLE WALLACE: Today, another in a streak of intentionally intimidating acts aimed at key figures and institutions. This morning, agents of the FBI arrested a county judge in Milwaukee as she was in the parking lot on the way in to work into court. She's now out on bond according to the charging documents. The Bureau alleges this: Quote, "Judge Hannah Dugan obstructed the detention of an undocumented immigrant who was wanted by federal authorities." Just last hour, lawyers for that justice released a statement that reads, in part, quote, "Judge Dugan will defend herself vigorously and looks forward to being exonerated."
(...)
I want to go to the reporting. I do -- just because this moment has come -- I have to start with you. The FBI arresting judges, and the director of the FBI tweeting about it -- that's how I first saw it.
ANDREW WEISSMANN, MSNBC LEGAL ANALYST: So there has been a violation here that we know for sure, and it is not the judge. That's something that remains to be proved. The thing that we do know is that the FBI director has violated DOJ policy. I know -- I can hear Tim (Miller) looking at me, going, "That's so quaint."
WALLACE (laughing): The norms, the norms!"
WEISSMANN: Right, exactly. But that is -- you don't do it. Remember sitting here going, James Comey, you know, really flouted the rules because he started talking about his own personal opinions of somebody who was not being charged. This is somebody who's being charged, and you are supposed to stay mum. And, instead, he completely denigrated her, and you don't do that. The same thing, by the way, Pam Bondi was on Fox News talking about how we're going to go after judges. That is what they're doing. I mean, this is a much more sinister view of the President saying, "We need to impeach them," that led to the chief justice having to step in. Here that is really the way to see this.
Even if you thought there was a ground for doing this, the judgment call that you thought that this is the case to bring tells you everything about what the strategy is. And that, by the way, that's a huge "if." I mean, I can't imagine that this case is going to hold up for a whole variety of factual and legal reasons. But, again, there is no adult in the room who would have said, "Are you kidding me?" This person was apprehended steps from the courtroom -- steps from the courthouse. This -- it's going to be so hard to prove. Even if you could somehow show that this was the judge's intent, was to obstruct, why would you possibly do this? And the answer is, "Because we want to send a signal to the judiciary." And that's what you shouldn't be doing. I mean, that is -- that is fighting the last branch of government to oppose the executive branch.
WALLACE: Yeah, I mean, Tim, I'm going to get back into the latest reporting on this with sort of all of the context. I mean, this comes at a moment when Trump's approval rating is in freefall, and it is plunging around what he has done to his own pretty hot economy. He's tanked it with this obsession over tariffs. Whether it's causal or not, we'll never know, but he has also tanked -- his two political sort of shields have always been people thinking he was actually a businessman, even though that was a character he played on a reality show, and people liking his energy or aggressiveness on immigration. He's tanked his -- his approval on both fronts. I think this was a distraction from the first weakness on the economy and a case that they wanted to be arguing in the press instead of that of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. So I just want to lay down the foundations so we're not, sort of, covering the shiny object they wanted us to focus on today.
TIM MILLER, THE BULWARK PODCAST: Yeah, I think that's right. I think that the PR operation around this is the real relevant element as far as the big picture is concerned, right? Obviously, we'd all like to see what the facts are on the specific case regarding this judge, but, like, this was an entire -- this was entirely motivated by PR. We can all sort of speculate about what their motives are. Was it a distraction? Maybe that's part of it. Was it trying to intimidate people and chill people that want to provide aid to undocumented migrants? I think certainly. That has been part of their plan all along. Is it a shot across the bow of the judiciary? Probably, you know. I think it could be all three of those things.
But, like, that is what's motivating not just the arrest, like, the way that they handled it -- you know, having the FBI tweet about it and Pam Bondi go on Fox, as Andrew mentioned. And so I think those are very, like, I mean, it's obviously very serious to think about that, and I think the chilling effect that -- even if this case doesn't work, I think the chilling effect might work because if you're somebody that is in some way helping an undocumented worker, you night think, "Do I --" -- an undocumented immigrant, excuse me -- you might think, "Do I -- is this worth it? Do I want to put out the risk that the FBI is going to come after me?" I think they want people to be thinking about that and having those conversations.
The only good news in this -- the only silver lining is what you alluded to about how is numbers are tanking on immigration, and I think there's just been so much depressing out there about the state of the country and how we think about the country that they elected this guy again -- but starting to see people already starting to reject this immigration regime, I think, is extremely encouraging, and, hopefully, it will be a continued reminder to Democrats and others that oppose this President to stiffen their spine to make these arguments because some people were worried for months, and it was like, "We got to let them do whatever noxious stuff he wants to do on immigration because that's what the people voted for."
Well, it turns out that there actually is a broad majority of Americans that are not for just nabbing people off the street and sending them to a gulag. I know maybe there was some doubt about that -- maybe some people in the Trump administration thought that would be a winner. But it's turning out that that's a loser, and the new poll that came out right before we got on from Siena showed that the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case -- he is less popular -- like, that is -- people are less favorable to his treatment of Kilmar Abrego Garcia than they are to the tariffs or to his behavior with Russia and Ukraine, right? It is his lowest number. And so I just -- I think that is a really encouraging sign that people are going to need to continue to fight back against, you know, these efforts broadly.
