Why Mangione escaped terrorism charge: Andrew McCarthy explains on 'The Glenn Beck Program'



Luigi Mangione, who is accused of killing UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in New York City last year, caught a break this week when a New York judge dismissed one of the charges in the state case. Former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew McCarthy joined "The Glenn Beck Program" on Tuesday morning to explain why.

Judge Gregory Carro dropped the terrorism charge against Mangione, concluding that there was "no evidence presented" that he broke the state's terrorism law.

'I just don't think it trivialized the murder to say that it's not a terrorism crime.'

The crime of terrorism, under New York law, is defined as an "intent to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of a unit of government by intimidation or coercion, or affect the conduct of a unit of government by murder, assassination, or kidnapping."

"While the defendant was clearly expressing an animus toward UHC, and the health care industry generally, it does not follow that his goal was to 'intimidate and coerce a civilian population,' and indeed, there was no evidence presented of such a goal," Carro wrote. The judge mentioned that federal prosecutors did not charge Mangione with terrorism offenses.

However, Carro stated that there was sufficient evidence that the suspect "murdered Brian Thompson in a premeditated and calculated execution." As such, the second-degree murder charge still stands, which carries a potential penalty of 15 years to life in prison.

RELATED: Alleged manifesto of murder suspect Luigi Mangione highlights lessons learned from Unabomber: Court docs

Luigi Mangione. Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images

"To prove terrorism, you have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt an intent to intimidate or coerce a civilian population," McCarthy told Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck. "What the judge said is, this was very narrowly targeted at the health care industry and this particular health care executive."

"I just don't think it trivialized the murder to say that it's not a terrorism crime," he continued.

McCarthy also explained why Mangione is facing second-degree murder instead of first-degree murder. He stated that in the 1990s, former New York Gov. George Pataki (R) wanted to revise the state's capital murder statute to revive the death penalty.

RELATED: ‘Saint Luigi’? America’s moral compass couldn’t be more broken

Photo by BRYAN R. SMITH/AFP via Getty Images

"This ultimately was not a successful effort," McCarthy remarked. "What they did was, they took the things that you could get the death penalty for, which in New York, were only things like killing a police officer or killing a prison guard in the prison, and they made those the only murder in the first degree."

"They were trying to clean the statute in a way that murder one would be revived as capital murder," he continued. "And all other murder was going to be second-degree murder."

Mangione's case, therefore, would not qualify for first-degree murder under New York law.

McCarthy believes that if the suspect is convicted in the federal system, he will likely get the death penalty.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

‘Pretty Nutty’: Andy McCarthy Dismantles One Of Dems’ Favorite DOGE Talking Points

'It actually is a component of the executive office of the president'

Daniel Penny’s Acquittal Won’t Undo The Damage His Show Trial Caused

A semblance of sanity emerged in New York City on Monday when a jury found American hero Daniel Penny not guilty of criminally negligent homicide. But the damage has already been done. Conviction or no conviction, this circus was designed to instill fear in men, signaling that if they protect the innocent, the full weight […]

‘No Legal Need For It’: Andrew McCarthy Says Smith Brief ‘Poisoning’ Jury Pool

'The point of releasing this now can only be to affect the election'

Will Trump get full presidential immunity? Law expert explains



Former President Donald Trump is in the midst of multiple legal battles, but everything could change if the Supreme Court rules that he has full presidential immunity.

“The Court is a lot more concerned about the presidency than about Trump,” National Review contributing author Andrew McCarthy tells Glenn Beck.

“It’s an important point to make because a lot of the coverage has been this hysteria over whether the Trump-packed Supreme Court is in the tank for him and they’re going to get rid of Jack Smith’s prosecution,” McCarthy says. “I don’t think that’s going to happen at all.”

Rather, McCarthy believes that the court will send the case back to the trial judge in Washington “with instructions to sort out what things in the indictment against Trump are what you would call "official acts" that might arguably be immune from prosecution” and “what are private acts or private wrongs that he would not have immunity for.”

However, according to McCarthy, Trump’s lawyer has admitted that a lot of conduct charged in the indictment is considered private conduct that wouldn’t fall under an immunity claim.

“What are some of the acts that could fall under private?” Glenn asks, adding, “and what are the acts that are the president and you don’t prosecute?”

One of the “solid examples” McCarthy uses is that “Trump’s lawyer conceded that if Trump made a private scheme with private lawyers to get slates of electors designated for him and to supply documents to the Congress suggesting that they were the authentic, actual slate of electors designated by a state, that would be private conduct because it’s purely office-seeking.”

“On the other hand,” McCarthy explains, “there’s an allegation in the indictment that Trump tried to use the Justice Department to signal to states that there were serious concerns about fraud and considered both removing the attorney general when he got push back and considered sending a letter that they never sent from the Justice Department to the state of Georgia to tell them that they needed to do more scrutiny over what happened in the popular election.”

“Trump argues very strongly, and I think the court will probably go along with this, that is the president’s control over the Justice Department,” he says.


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Andy McCarthy Reveals The ‘Due Process Violation’ Trump Is Dealing With

'They're making it impossible for him to prepare adequately'

Andy McCarthy Predicts Judge Will Act As ‘Rubber Stamp’ For Alvin Bragg, Keep Trump Case Alive Despite Doc Dump

Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy said Monday that the judge hearing former President Donald Trump’s criminal case in Manhattan “was acting as a “rubber stamp” for Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and would keep the case going despite a “discovery violation.”