Lindsey Graham called out by legal expert for covering for Pete Hegseth

In a column for MSNBC, legal analyst Lisa Rubin took Sen. Lindsey Graham to task for attempting to dismiss accusations against Donald Trump's choice to be defense secretary, saying the South Carolina Republican should know better when he attempted a specific line of defense.

Addressing Graham changing his tune about Fox News personality Pete Hegseth despite a wealth of accusations of sexual improprieties and public drunkenness, she noted the GOP senator told Fox host Sean Hannity, "The allegations against Pete are anonymous sources. I’m not going to make any decisions based on an anonymous source. If you’re not willing to raise your hand under oath and make the accusation, it doesn’t count. I’ve heard everything about all of these people. None of it counts. No rumors, no innuendo.”

According to Rubin, as a lawyer himself who has served as a Judge Advocate General (JAG) in the military, Graham knows he using a faulty defense.

ALSO READ: EXCLUSIVE: Senate Dems consider whether Biden should ‘clear the slate’ and pardon Trump

As she wrote, "... to discount serious allegations simply because the sources were granted anonymity is misguided."

"And, of course, at least one of the anonymous people featured in reporting about Hegseth isn’t anonymous to Hegseth: The Jane Doe who has accused him of rape and with whom he signed an agreement; Hegseth and his lawyer are well aware of her identity. (To be clear, there’s no indication Jane Doe herself has been a source in media reports about her accusation,) she explained before accusing, "Yet Graham might be purposefully eliding those facts because it allows him and other conservatives to continue their campaign against the 'mainstream media'or 'fake news' for its purported bias against Trump and/or Republicans writ large."

Writing, "Anonymity for victims can be especially important in criminal investigations of sexual assault and other violent crimes" she continued "His allies seem to believe anonymous sources are worth less in the Senate confirmation process than in a criminal prosecution. Yes, the use of 'unnamed, unaccountable sources" has contributed to what The Associated Press acknowledged, even seven years ago, is a 'fall in the trust in the media.'"

She then lectured, "But given our historical experience in revealing 'genuine insight into the uses and abuses of power' through anonymous sources, I’d like to remind Graham: They count. A lot."

You can read more here.