Former FBI director and current Special Counsel Robert Mueller has been unrelenting in his investigation into alleged collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential election.

But Tom Fitton, President of the government accountability organization Judicial Watch, questions the legality of the Special Counsel itself. According to a video message Judicial Watch posted to FacebookFitton argues that the office of the Special Counsel is unconstitutional because it holds the authority of a US attorney without the accountability that comes with being appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

For Fitton, the proper course for the Trump administration would be to dissolve the Special Counsel and begin anew, although he acknowledges that would be a “politically uncomfortable” move owing to immense media scrutiny.

Fitton explains: “Mueller was appointed under these regulations the Justice Department promulgated under [former Attorney General Janet] Reno’s term … and the Special Counsel is appointed by the Attorney General, or in this case the Deputy Attorney General …

“And he’s appointed, given a charge, to investigate X, Y, or Z, and then the responsible official washes his hands. Well, under our constitutional system that’s not the way it’s supposed to work. Under the regulations, Mueller has all the powers of a US attorney, but none of the accountability.”

Fitton continues, saying the current Special Counsel process lacks a “lawful delegation of authority” because Mueller and his team are not supervised “day-to-day” by appropriate Justice Department officials.

As a result, Fitton concludes that Mueller “doesn’t really have the authority under our Constitution to do the work he’s supposedly wanting to do. … It’s not about Mueller at this point, it’s about the Office of the Special Counsel.”

Fitton’s recommendation: “If I were them, I’d go back to square one, no matter how politically uncomfortable it is, to make sure that that office is lawful and lawfully run.”

Fitton goes on to question what he considers “the suspicious circumstances under which Muller was appointed.” He recounts how former FBI Director James Comey testified to leaking memos of his conversations with the President in order to provoke the creation of a Special Counsel. Interestingly, the individual ultimately selected by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to lead the Special Counsel was Mueller, with whom Comey has a friendly “mentor-protege”  relationship.

If Mueller knew what Comey was planning, Fitton says he should have recused himself from the investigation due to being “conflicted.” Fitton emphasizes that “obstruction” charges against President Trump are unfounded because he was within his authority to dismiss Comey from the FBI for any reason he deemed appropriate. Fitton said, “The President isn’t above the law. But he’s not beneath the law.”

Judicial Watch argues that the office of the special counsel is unconstitutional because it holds the authority of a US attorney without the accountability that comes with being appointed by the President and confirmed by the SenateDo you agree?

Mueller’s Special Counsel has taken a strange turn of events. As Christian News Alerts reports, Mueller is preparing a case against former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort, ostensibly in the hope of getting to Trump.

Newsweek notes that the Special Counsel is now investigating the infamous Buzzfeeddossier containing salacious, debunked allegations about Trump. And Bloombergreports Mueller is having his team research the extent of the President’s pardon power to determine whether Trump could pre-emptively pardon aides under the Special Counsel’s scrutiny.

Mueller is operating with immense latitude. If Fitton is correct that the Special Counsel — as it’s currently operating — violates the Constitution, this investigation can have long-term ramifications for accountability in government.

Views: 53

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Interesting that not a single republican has brought this to the public's attention, or taken any steps to put a stop to it.

yeah, interesting - in a disgusting kind of way.   a disgusting constant that won't go away.

Image result for robert mueller investigation illegal cartoon

Image result for robert mueller investigation illegal cartoon

Related image

Related image

Image result for robert mueller investigation illegal cartoon

The first Special Counsel was that of Archibald Cox, special prosecutor charged, by the AG, with the Watergate inquiry, a political witch-hunt and outright fiasco conjured up for the expressed purpose of preserving the separation of powers and insure that the Executive, while under legal attack, would not unduly influence the Judicial Branch.

In real time it was nothing but the front face of a Sam Ervin led destroy Nixon at any cost democrat political maneuver assisted by an oh so willing media that hated Nixon as well.

It is remarkable how these special counsels mirror each other. Names have changed, yet the same motivation lives on, and it is purely political as well as criminal. 

Judicial Watch knows as well as anyone that none of those involved in Mueller's Mirage  give a crap about the Constitution. They don't care, and they don't have to care either. Who is it that would make them answer to a parchment?  Who?

No damn body, that's who.

This isn't Bad News for Mueller. In fact, it isn't even new at all.




“You’d Go To Jail For Contempt”FBI Refuses Order To Produce McCabe Communications

Fox News contributor Sara A. Carter reports that the FBI refuses to produce outgoing FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s communications in response to “a government watchdog group that has filed a lawsuit on behalf of a former senior FBI special agent.”

Carter reports:

The communications in question are related to McCabe’s wife’s unsuccessful run for Virginia State senate and might also contain invaluable information on McCabe’s role in the Bureau’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server used to send classified information, several former FBI sources and a government official told this reporter.

In January, Judicial Watch, a formidable conservative watchdog group based in Washington D.C., filed a lawsuit against the FBI for the communications on behalf of retired FBI Supervisory Special Agent Jeff Danik. Danik spent more than 28 years with the bureau as a supervisor in the counter-terrorism division and special overseas advisor. Danik filed his original Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request in October 2016 for McCabe’s communications.

“They have not produced not one text of McCabe, not one,” said Danik, referencing the bureau. “The government is out of control and it’s astonishing. Do you know what would happen if the government subpoenaed you for information and you didn’t produce records that you had in your possession? You’d go to jail for contempt.”

Carter recently told Fox News host Sean Hannity that Justice Department Inspector General, Michael Horowitz, is investigating whether or not McCabe asked bureau agents to “change their 302s.”

A day after the New York Times reported FBI Director Christopher Wray confronted McCabe over unspecified findings in DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report, the Washington Post reveals the embattled bureau official is being probed over his role in examining emails found on former Rep. Anthony Weiner’s laptop.

That’s not all.

Former Secret Service agent Dan Bongino has hinted to his nearly 320,000-strong Twitter followers that the next bombshell to drop could involve McCabe’s mishandling of classified information.

“Here’s the next shoe to drop -> was Andy McCabe using secure comms to send/receive classified information? Someone should check on that,” tweeted Bongino. 


Here’s the next shoe to drop -> was Andy McCabe using secure comms to send/receive classified information? Someone should check on that.


McCabe stepped down January 29th, as first reported by NBC News.

McCabe, who served a brief stint as acting director of the bureau, was already expected to leave. He will stay on “terminal leave” until he is eligible to retire with benefits in March,” reports CNBC.


© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service