So in other words, there is no statute requiring special counsels to be confirmed, only your belief that they should be.
But as the discussion you cited clearly showed, among other things, the US Supreme Court has previously ruled that Special Counsel appointees are inferior officers of the govt and do not requires Senate confirmation. And in fact no one is publicly claiming that they are not.
Of all the legitimate criticism of the current special counsel, of which there is considerable amount, the least persuasive is that the law requires him to be appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate, notwithstanding your belief that that is the case.
But as an inferior officer, he is severely restricted in scope and can only be hired for a specific narrow field. He does not become an “at large” US Attorney with more power than a US Attorney.
No US Attorney gets an unlimited budget, and can proceed anywhere he wants including the White House.
So if he is indeed an inferior officer as has been ruled, he is far out of bounds.