MSNBC columnist Glenn Kirschner recently wrote about former President Donald Trump's promise to fire Special Counsel Jack Smith, calling it evidence that Trump is "corrupt to his core."

Despite this, arguments put forward by two legal scholars appear to vindicate the former president's promise. 

Aileen Cannon "on the short list to be Trump's attorney general"

In his piece, Kirschner recalled how during his first term, Trump's fellow Republicans were able to prevent him from removing Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

Yet the columnist maintained that "Trump may have a scheme to ensure a Justice Department official will do his dirty work."

Specifically, Kirschner pointed to a report that Judge Aileen Cannon is "on the short list to be Trump's attorney general" while adding that "she might be just the person whom Trump could count on to fire Smith."

Smith made headlines earlier this year by dismissing charges of mishandling classified documents Smith had brought against the former president, ruling that his appointment was unconstitutional.

Kirschner: "The health of American democracy is on the line"

"Let's assume Trump nominates Cannon to be attorney general and she is confirmed by the Senate," Kirschner asserted. "Trump likely won’t even have to tell Cannon to fire Smith, because, in substance, she already has."

As he drew to a close, Kirschner wrote that "Trump's promise to fire Smith is a final warning to voters that he is proudly and enthusiastically corrupt to his core."

"And, given that the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling has given Trump a blueprint for how to continue to evade criminal accountability, it’s not hyperbole to conclude that in the upcoming election, the health of American democracy is on the line," the commentator concluded.

However, Newsweek noted in an article published last week that two prominent legal experts believe Smith is the one who is corrupt.

Smith's actions suggest a political motivation

One of them is former prosecutor and CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig, who alleged in a New York magazine column that Smith will "bend any rule, switch up on any practice — so long as he gets to chip away at Trump's electoral prospects."

Honig pointed to Smith's decision to file a brief containing a plethora of new allegations just weeks before Election Day, a move which the Department of Justice's Justice Manual warns against.

Meanwhile, George Washington University Law School professor and Fox News legal analyst Jonathan Turley raised similar complaints in a blog post.

Turley wrote that Smith's "timing" is politically motivated since "any trial would occur in 2025" and thus "there was no reason to release this filing shortly before an election."