Maddow can’t contain her glee while reading indictment: ‘The neener-neener factor here is high’

MSNBC host Rachel Maddow’s giddy analysis of former President Donald Trump’s indictment may have delighted leftist viewers, but the “neener-neener factor” was telling in more than one way.

(Video: MSNBC)

Friday, the 49-page indictment regarding the storage of documents marked classified at Mar-a-Lago was unsealed containing 37 counts; 31 of which were willful retention of national defense information. As such, the “walls closing-in” crowd delighted in what this could mean for Trump while paying little to no mind to the perceived political persecution transforming the democratic republic into a banana republic.

During a panel discussion, Nicolle Wallace sought to hone in on what she asserted was the “kill shot” that demanded a “Rachel Maddow dramatic reading of a court filing,” leaving her laughing along as a cherry-picked quote was presented as a definitive blow against the president.

“The first thing I thought of when I heard about it is, how does the press get this information that’s classified?” Trump was quoted as saying at a press conference on Feb. 16, 2017. “How do they do it? You know why? Because it’s an illegal process, and the press should be ashamed of themselves. But more importantly, the people that gave out the information to the press should be ashamed of themselves. Really ashamed.”

From there, Maddow was given the floor and she asserted, “Yes, and he’s showing that, and he puts that quote in from 2017 at the end of this portion of the indictment where Trump is shown to be giving the information to a member of the press — that’s classified information that he knows is classified. And he does it, I think, not just to ‘neener-neener’ him — although the ‘neener-neener’ factor here is high — he does it to show that Trump is aware this is illegal, Trump is aware that this is not some arcane, picayune point of law that nobody has to abide by. This is Trump saying this is a serious matter, it’s a matter of law. And so he knew it was wrong when he did it.”

Maddow did go on to read from a transcript included in the indictment where the president was said to have been showing documents to a writer and publisher alongside staffers on July 21, 2021, six months after leaving office.

“See as president, I could have declassified it,” Trump was marked as saying, garnering a “Yeah, ha ha,” from a staffer.

“Now I can’t. But this is still a secret,” the transcript continued as the staffer continued to laugh and added, “Now we have a problem.”

Trump concluded, “Isn’t that interesting.”

“Yes, you do have a problem,” Maddow asserted, “because you just acknowledged this is a classified document that you have shown to a staffer with no security clearance, as well as a reporter in the room. Yeah, we have a problem. Yeah, isn’t this interesting.”

As Lawrence O’Donnell joined in the discussion noting how juries respond to laughter on wiretaps, Wallace enthusiastically stated, “It’s the sort of profile of a sociopath,” before hedging, “I’m just speaking as a fan of ‘The Wire.'”

Meanwhile, as previously reported, conservative commentator and syndicated radio host Mark Levin blasted the indictment as a hit job as he called Attorney General Merrick Garland a “mob lawyer” and Special Counsel Jack Smith a “rogue Soviet-style prosecutor.”

Levin highlighted, “The Presidential Records Act is not a criminal statute and it was never intended to be. The Espionage Act of 1917 was passed under Woodrow Wilson, another corrupt president — Woodrow Wilson used it to go after his adversaries and they imprisoned 2,000 people. So I suppose over there at the Department of Injustice and this clown prosecutor spend a lot of time at The Hague, they probably figured these laws could be used to try and entrap Trump.”

The radio host and one-time chief of staff to Attorney General Edwin Meese during President Ronald Reagan’s administration had pointed out on Twitter, “When an indictment is released, as in the case of President Trump, it presents a completely one-sided story developed by the prosecutor. Witnesses are not represented by attorneys, there is no opportunity for cross-examination, there is no opportunity for presenting exculpatory information, etc. It is not a trial jury.”

“The indictment appears to me to be a piling on, which explains why the prosecution brought in as many witnesses and documents as possible, cherry-picking information, etc.,” he continued. “Even now, nobody is present to deal with these charges in the media — for example, why is it assumed in some instances that the movement of some boxes was for the purpose of concealment.”


Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.
Kevin Haggerty


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

PLEASE JOIN OUR NEW COMMENT SYSTEM! We love hearing from our readers and invite you to join us for feedback and great conversation. If you've commented with us before, we'll need you to re-input your email address for this. The public will not see it and we do not share it.

Latest Articles