Replies

I’m no lawyer, Cboldt is one of the experts here on legal issues. My understanding is based on the information below.

§ 600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel.
The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and -

(a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney’s Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and

(b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/600.1

It seems to indicate that a criminal investigation is warranted. What was the suspected crime? Also, the investigation began as a counter-intelligence effort. So it seems that the appointment of Mueller didn’t have the basis needed, and now they are searching for the crimes after the fact. Although, I would wonder who at the Justice Department at the time would not have had a conflict of interest.

Anyone please feel free to correct me. My question is, if the appointment of Mueller could be challenged, why hasn’t it been?

Thank you!

The notion that 28 CFR 600 et seq (SC regulations) is unconstitutional on the basis of appointments clause in the constitution is folly.

In principle, the SC is under the thumb of whoever appointed SC, usually AG, in this case DAG becuse sessions is properly recused from "investigating himself." (he was on the campaign that is being investigated).

Morrison v. Olsen if you want to dig into the details, but it's a waste of your time. Levin is just keeping things interesting for his audience, which is getting impatient.

To the notion that no criminal allegation (as equired by 600.1) exists, that challenge HAS been mounted. See May 17, 2018 Grassley Letter to Rosenstein re: Mueller appointment.

Manafort's motion to dismiss came close, but wasn't directly on that point.

The "counterintelligence does not equal criminal" angle was hit pretty hard a year ago, then vanished. see McCarthy and others. I composed a vanity on the subject.