Tag Archives: Andrew McCarthy

Mueller’s appointment was illegal

Because there was never any evidence of a crime by the president. Now the Dims and their lapdog media will battle to see the full Mueller report.

“You want disclosure? Me too. But let’s see all of it. Not just Mueller’s report. Let’s see everything: all of the memoranda relevant to the opening of the investigation, all of the testimony at closed hearings, all of the FISA-warrant applications, all of Rosenstein’s scope memo. (A year ago, I surmised that scope memo is redacted because it relies on the [Clinton and Dim supported] Steele dossier — as did the FISA-warrant application Rosenstein had approved just a few weeks earlier; anyone want to bet me on that?)”

Via National Review’s Andrew McCarthy

Protecting the presidency

At some point in the swirling accusations and counter-accusations about Trump versus Mueller, who has kept quiet even as Trump comments on Twitter but probably is commenting by leak, there has to be concern for the office of the presidency. Andrew McCarthy at National Review:

“Unless Mueller can demonstrate that a serious crime has been committed, that Trump was complicit in it, and that Trump is in possession of evidence that is essential to the prosecution, [deputy AG] Rosenstein should bar him from seeking an interview, let alone issuing a subpoena demanding grand-jury testimony. This is not merely about protecting Trump; it is about protecting the office of the presidency.”

Only three presidential subpoenas have been issued: Clinton’s subpoena was withdrawn when he agreed to testify voluntarily in a civil case. Nixon’s criminal subpoena went away when he resigned. Only Jefferson stood up for the presidency when he declined to comply in a criminal case against his vice president.

Hopefully Trump will follow Jefferson’s lead and simply refuse to comply. Then let the House impeach him if they will and the Senate convict if they can. Impeachment has precedent. Mueller’s dangerous grandstanding does not.

UPDATE:  Reagan-appointed Virginia federal judge questioned Mueller’s indictment of former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort on 13-year-old fraud charges: ““I don’t see what relation this indictment has with what the special counsel is authorized to investigate,” Ellis said to prosecutors. “You don’t really care about Mr. Manafort’s bank fraud. … What you really care about is what information Mr. Manafort could give you that would reflect on Mr. Trump or lead to his prosecution or impeachment.”