Mueller’s Investigation Must Be Limited and Accountable

By | 2017-06-02T18:30:05+00:00 July 19, 2017|
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

How much goalpost moving should be tolerable in the Trump-Russia collusion investigation?

Remember, we started with an allegation that the Trump campaign may have been complicit in the Putin regime’s “cyber-espionage”—i.e., the hacking our intelligence agencies have concluded that Russian government operatives carried out against email accounts tied to Democrats. The investigation took a more serious turn last week, when it was revealed that Trump campaign officials met in June 2016 with a suspected emissary of the Putin regime. Yet, there is currently no basis to believe that meeting had anything to do with hacking. So, while the meeting warrants investigation, the original allegation is no closer to being proved.

Of course, it is certainly possible for a political campaign and a foreign government to engage jointly in unsavory behavior that does not rise to the level of crime. The less objectionable the behavior, however, the further afield we would be from the egregious allegation that prompted the investigation in the first place. Unless one is a rank partisan whose goal is to damage the president (rather than hold him accountable for actual, significant wrongdoing), this should be a matter of concern. Investigations are debilitating. They erode an administration’s ability to govern.

The investigation is a moving target because of its slippery vocabulary. It has been discussed and analyzed through the prism of “collusion” and “counterintelligence.”

When we think of an “investigation,” the connotation is a criminal proceeding—crimes, penal law, grand juries, subpoenas, warrants, arrests … prosecution. In that thicket, the terms “collusion” and “counterintelligence” are outliers. The former is a vague term that blurs the legally salient lines between mere association and conspiracy—that is, the difference between innocence and guilt. The latter is an unnecessary term: a counterintelligence investigation is an information-gathering exercise designed to divine the intentions of foreign powers to the extent they bear on American interests; a criminal investigation, by contrast, is an evidence-gathering exercise designed to build a prosecutable case that a specified person has committed a suspected penal-law offense.

The Trump Tower meeting on June 9, 2016, between Trump campaign figures and suspected Russian agents illustrates our difficulty.

In the criminal law, our sights are trained on conspiracy, which makes things easy. A conspiracy is an agreement to commit a violation of law. If Smith and Jones have a meeting, it is of no concern to the police unless the meeting is for the purpose of, say, arranging a heroin shipment or robbing a bank. It is the criminal offense that is the objective of the meeting, and nothing else, that makes the meeting relevant.

To speak in terms of collusion rather than conspiracy—as the Russia investigation coverage often does—only confuses matters. Contrary to what you may have heard from sundry “strategists” and “analysts,” collusion is neither a crime nor a term that has a legally consequential meaning. The word has a pejorative feel, especially in the last seven months. But literally, all it means is “concerted activity.” That could be criminal or noncriminal, sinister or benign.

Thus, if we insist on asking about “collusion” in the context of a criminal investigation, we’re really asking two questions: was there any concerted activity between two or more people, and, if yes, what was the precise nature of the activity—i.e., collusion in what?

That is where we are at with respect to the Trump Tower meeting. In light of the Donald Trump, Jr. emails and the meeting that followed them, it makes little sense to me to claim there was no “concerted activity.” Yet, the “in what?” question remains vital.

In an ordinary federal criminal case, if the “what” is not a felony, there is no cause to investigate further. Here, of course, we are not talking about an ordinary criminal investigation. The president is involved. Our standards for presidents are higher than whether an indictable crime has been committed. They involve fitness for the high responsibilities of the office. Since there is now indisputable proof of some kind of concerted activity between Trump campaign staff and potential Russian operatives, it is worth focusing investigative attention on the exact purpose of that activity and the nature of the relationship.

Nevertheless, a counterintelligence investigation is the wrong vehicle for such an inquiry. It is not designed to investigate wrongdoing. Its purpose is to collect intelligence in order to understand a foreign power’s designs and to predict its behavior. It is forward-looking, whereas criminal investigations are retrospective. It seeks to assess, not to prove. As such, there are no natural limitations on the investigator’s warrant; it is completely open-ended.

The lack of jurisdictional confines exacerbates a problem that exists in every special counsel investigation: the assignment of a prosecutor with prodigious resources to probe a single target (or set of targets) with a mandate and a high incentive to make a case if there is one to be made.

In an ordinary prosecutor’s office, a lawyer is assigned to investigate, say, a suspected fraud crime. The assignment is finite. Depending on the complexity of the fraud scheme (most are not that complicated), the prosecutor and the police working on the investigation know what kind of evidence are looking for. They will either find it or not in relatively short order. If they find it, the case is indicted; if they do not find it within a reasonable time, the case is closed. The office has lots of cases and cannot afford the luxury of too much time and resources spent on any single one.

To the contrary, a special counsel such as Mueller, has only one case to worry about—he can pour into it all the resources at his disposal into it. The only solace for an investigative subject in such a heavy-handed arrangement is that the prosecutor is supposed to be looking for something specific. The regulations for assigning special counsels when the Justice Department is beset by a conflict-of-interest call for there to be a basis for a criminal investigation—a specific, suspected crime—before the special counsel is assigned.

To make the special counsel investigation a counterintelligence investigation eviscerates this modicum of protection and investigative discipline. Mueller has virtually unlimited resources, one set of targets to focus on, and no jurisdictional restrictions.

This is how it becomes so easy to slide from hacking conspiracy to “collusion” in something (who knows what?), to obstruction of the limitless investigation, to whatever crimes Mueller and his swelling staff of notoriously aggressive prosecutors might reasonably suspect . . . or creatively imagine.

It is fair to observe that there was more interaction between Donald Trump’s campaign and the Russian regime (including Putin’s oligarch cronies) than the president and his subordinates acknowledged. Even if that interaction is unrelated to Russia’s cyber-espionage, the nature and extent of the relationship merits investigation.

But an investigation of a president necessarily compromises an administration’s capacity to govern. That can harm the country. Therefore, the investigation must have parameters.

The applicable regulations make it incumbent on the Justice Department to specify what exactly a special counsel is authorized to investigate. The Justice Department has failed to do this, a dereliction that must be rectified. Complying with this requirement would not prevent special counsel Mueller from seeking an expansion of his jurisdiction were he to discover behavior that warrants additional investigation. But limits must be imposed.

If they are not, there is no telling where the probe will wander, how long it will take, and how paralyzing it will be. And that does not serve the country well.

Content created by The Center for American Greatness, Inc is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a significant audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected]centerforamericangreatness.com

About the Author:

Andrew C. McCarthy

Andrew C. McCarthy is a former chief assistant U.S. attorney best known for successfully prosecuting the “Blind Sheikh” (Omar Abdel Rahman) and eleven other jihadists for waging a terrorist war against the United States – a war that included the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and a subsequent plot to bomb New York City landmarks. He is a recipient of the Justice Department’s highest honors, helped supervise the command-post near Ground Zero in lower Manhattan following the 9/11 attacks, and later served as an adviser to the Deputy Secretary of Defense. His several popular books include the New York Times bestsellers Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad and The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America. He is a senior fellow at National Review Institute and a contributing editor at National Review. He is a frequent guest commentator on national security, law, politics, and culture in national media, and his columns and essays also appear regularly in The New Criterion, PJ Media, and other major publications.

  • Sam McGowan

    Andrew is a lawyer so he’s thinking in lawyer terms, but there’s something very important to remember, something the media never mentions – that we live in a free country and unless something is explicitly forbidden by law, all Americans are free to do whatever they wish, and that includes meeting with foreigners and even representatives of foreign governments. In fact, ther only prohibition against contact with foreigners is if government secrets are turned over. (Yes, there are prohibitions of foreign contributions to political campaigns but those prohibitions only apply to things of value and information has no value.) Hopefully, Mueller knows that but since he’s another damn lawyer, I doubt if he does. After all, he went after an innocent man in the anthrax case, had him tried and found guilty then after the man was proven innocent, refused to acknowledge any wrong doing.

    • blatantplayer

      Whoa, wait! Are you suggesting a right to free association? That is so 2007. Get with the post-Constitutional times.

  • blatantplayer

    McCarthy asks, “How much goal post moving should be tolerated?” Honest answer is zero. But, I wonder of whom he is asking this question. The left will move until they get what they want. I believe he is asking the question of his friends, the co-agitators in the NeverTrump movement – the same who repeat this “collusion” or its more ridiculous cousin “intent to collude” verbiage. For such a ‘principled’ gang of conservatives they are really fluent in leftese. Remember, McCarthy’s “good friend” Comey purposefully and willfully metastasized the “collusion” narrative. Now, McCarthy’s “good friend’s” good friend Mueller will likely do the same. Does anyone doubt that a final report from Mueller wouldn’t look and sound similar to Comey’s indictment of Clinton with the difference being that there was an underlying crime(s) in re Clinton while there will almost certainly not be in Trump’s case. “The investigation indicated that while there certainly seemed to be a willful intent to collude with foreign powers, Russia more specifically in this instance as evidenced by …. (same charges we have heard for almost a year now) … , the investigative team could find no verifiable evidence that either the President or those in his campaign did in fact do so. However, in the course of the investigation there were several instances of obfuscation by those interviewed that have been referred to grand jury ………….” It’ll be a real sh*t show and it will have served its intended purpose – There will be no resolution and the lefty/NT angst will continue unabated.

  • Bill S

    Good points, and I am sure that everyone arguing that Mueller’s investigation should be limited and focused on a specific area also deplored how Ken Starr’s investigation of Bill Clinton for a real estate transaction morphed into an inquiry about whether he lied about a blowjob.

    • Michellemknickerbocker

      Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !pa289d:
      On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
      !pa289d:
      ➽➽
      ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash289SportWorkGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!pa289l..,..

    • Whiskey Sam

      You mean committed perjury (he did).

    • elHombre

      Regardless of the reactions of the uninvolved, Starr’s investigation illustrates McCarthy ‘s point, does it not?

    • Joe_NS

      “Lied” under oath in a lawsuit that the Supreme Court voted 9–0 should go forward per a sexual-harassment-in-the-workplace law that Bill Clinton signed.

      You forgot that. Otherwise, first rate question begging.

    • mj01323

      The impeachment of Bill Clinton was a waste of time because everyone in Congress knew the Democrats would never convict him. Now, given the Never Trumper Republicans, some of these Republicans are likely to join with their Democrat overseers and vote to remove Trump. What a mess we are in as a nation.

  • The Demon Slick

    McCarthy you almost had it then you walked away from it… The statute requires a crime has occurred before the special counsel is appointed. The special counsel statute only authorizes the investigation of a criminal matter. Criminal. What crime was Mueller appointed to investigate? None. Rosenstein violated the law by appointing Mueller. Mueller violated the same statute by accepting. They should both be fired and disbarred.

    • jack dobson

      You are absolutely correct. Someone needs to file a formal complaint against both with the D.C. Board of Professional Responsibility.

    • URstandingwhere

      Comey was investigating counterintelligence.

    • SS Trumptanic

      Rosenstein is part of Trumps team so why would he do that?

      • Disappointed

        Good question! Not part of the team, or does not know what his responsibilities .

      • Golden Rule

        Deep state.

      • ASingleRose

        Obama hold over, not on Trumps team. Not sure why he Rosenstein wasn’t replaced.

        • SS Trumptanic

          Because Trump doesn’t know what he’s doing and knows his sheep will bleat “Obama”

        • Walter Thomas

          Another problem caused by Sessions.

          • ASingleRose

            Is it caused by Sessions, or is it because Trump either chose not to replace him, or Trump’s pick is being held back by Congress for approval?

          • Walter Thomas

            Good questions. It is Sessions. He recused himself without warning Trump. He is lame; that is, he is on the offensive nowhere, nada, zip, zilch.

          • paul

            During Senator Sessions confirmation hearings Senator Sessions was repeatedly asked if he would recuse himself in a situation where impartiality was in question.

            When the “allegations” President Trump colluded with the Russians now Attorney General Sessions felt his credibility was on the line and respectfully recused himself.

            It was a Democrat trap and set up all along.

            The line of questioning during Senator Sessions confirmation hearing was not appropiate to begin with!

      • The Demon Slick

        Right before Obama left he changed the order of succession at the FBI. Every time Trump fires a swamp rat, another swamp rat slides into place. Mueller has put more people on the doj payroll than Trump. That’s the democrats slow walking confirmations.

        • paul

          Please see my reply to Walter Thomas above. I would appreciate your input as you seem to be good at unpacking democratic rhetoric.
          TY.

          • The Demon Slick

            I can understand that he might feel that way, given the public knowledge of Sessions so far. I am reserving judgement, he might be working on some things behind the scenes. It’s interesting that Trump said that to the Slimes, I wonder why. People say Trump is impulsive but I find he does everything for a reason, even if I don’t get it until later. I can speculate. Get him to resign without actually asking him to resign so he can’t be charged for it (fake obstruction of justice charges)? Or just another bugbear for the media to chase? I’m not sold on this Wray guy either but I just gotta trust Trump and wait for it to make sense. I think the Sessions recusal was weak but I still think he’s a good dude.

          • paul

            thx for your reply! Well said!

    • Left Coaster

      Nope.
      That actually makes sense but it isn’t true.

      Mueller has an unlimited scope of authority to review anything he chooses.

      That’s how special prosecutions work…..

      • jerseymark

        Not according to the law pertaining to special counsel.

      • The Demon Slick

        Nonsense. Be gone with your stupidity and go read the statute that authorizes special counsel. Focus on the first sentence, in particular the word “criminal”. Here in the US first we identify that a crime has occurred, then we investigate to find out who did it. We don’t send out investigations in search of a crime, that’s old commie style.

    • donsker

      Obstruction of justice, conspiracy to engage in theft and dissemination of property, campaign finance laws, espionage, to name a few. And just so you get this right, you don’t have to prove a crime was committed, just a reasonable belief that some violation may have occurred.

      • The Demon Slick

        You need a crime to appoint a special counsel. The way we do things in America is first you identify that a crime has occurred, then we investigate to find out who did it. Rosenstein never identified a crime. He sent a witch hunt to find a crime. That’s old Soviet style. And it’s illegal. Obstruction of justice means covering up a crime. What crime? None. The rest of the crimes you allege are NOT things Trump is accused of. Not things anyone has evidence that occurred.

    • Danny Alt

      Was the theft of DNC E-mails and the theft of John Podesta’s E-mails..,
      subsequently used, with the likely help of certain unpatriotic (so called) americans, to help Vladimir Geppetto’s favored candidate, Donald Pinocchio, get narrowly elected.., in addition to Donald Pinocchio’s effort to obstruct all inquiry.., not crimes ?

      • The Demon Slick

        No. First off, Podestas emails went in a phishing scam, not a sophisticated cyber theft, and his password was password, because all you lefties are dumb. Secondly the dnc was not hacked it was leaked. Ask your mom to explain the difference.

        • Danny Alt

          You are revealing your ignorance and unconfined anger.

          First, regarding your ignorance, I am not a “Lefty”, never have been. I have voted Conservative in every Presidential election since 1972.

          Accordingly, I kept up the streak, and did not vote for Trump.

          Second, regarding your overt anger, so adolescently displayed, and likely opioid induced, in your reference to my mother, it is to be expected given the state of your leaders imploding presidency, after only 6 months – LOL

          Call the theft of DNC and Podesta e-mails what ever you like; callout phishing, call it not a sophisticated cyber theft, call it a leak, call it fukcin yellow ballon. It is illegal to take from another, without their permission, what you are not authorized to simply take. That’s a theft; it’s not legal; it’s a crime.

          Furthermore, it is also crime to receive said stolen property while knowing it was stolen.

          So.., while you hide behind an adolescent pseudonym (LMAO), armed with internet access and a two (2) digit IQ, Robert Mueller, The Former FBI Director, Combat Marine Corp Veteran, awarded the Bronze Star w/valor, presently The Special Counsel, albeit not quite the legal scholar you claim to be (LOL), is, by all accounts, going full steam ahead to thoroughly investigate the possible illegal connecting activities between Comrade Vladimir Geppetto and his hand made puppet, Comrade Donald Pinocchio.

          Now take another “Oxy”, get back on your porch, strum your banjo, and await the tourists canoeing down the river.

          Nevertheless, thanks for the opportunity!

          • The Demon Slick

            You’re as conservative as my cat. Funny though. It’s obvious that you didn’t take the time to read the special counsel statute. I suppose that remaining ignorant is what protects your fragile id. I have to tell you, it’s not a good long term strategy.

          • Danny Alt

            I trust Attorney General Sessions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, Former FBI Director Robert Mueller, White House Counsel, All Trump and Family Personal Attorneys.., and seemingly every Republican in both houses read it.
            Oh, and James Comey definitly read it.., before setting the rat trap – LOL!
            And that’s good enough for me!

          • The Demon Slick

            You have proven beyond all reasonable doubt that you are a useful idiot. Good luck with that. The irony is that you are too lazy to google and read a one sentence law, yet you profess to be informed enough to hold a valid opinion. 3 days you’ve had. Your insistence on remaining ignorant is a tell.

          • Danny Alt

            My point: The Appointment of The Special Counsel was legal.

            Your Point: The Appointment of The Special Counsel was not legal, because you believe there was no crime committed to legally trigger the appointment.

            Respective to my point:
            Not one person or entity, of significance, not even Donald Trump, is taking legal action to stop, what you claim is an illegal investigation by The Special Counsel. Illegal, because you claim there was no crime committed to legally trigger the appointment,

            Respective to your point:
            What say you about there being no formal court appeal from AG Sessions?
            What say you about there being no formal court appeal from White House Counsel?
            What say you about there being no formal court appeal from Donald Trump Personal Attorneys ?
            What say you about there being no formal court appeal from Kushner’s Attorneys ?
            What say you about there being no formal court appeal The Trump “kids” Attorneys ?
            What say you about there being no formal court appeal from every Republican Congress person ?
            What say you about there being no formal court appeal from every Republican in the Senate ?
            What say you about, notwithstanding you, the “din of silence” respective to your isolated point ?

          • The Demon Slick

            You should stop digging. The more you write the more clear it is that you lack even the most basic understanding of the statute and the process. 5 days now and you still haven’t bothered to read it, yet you seem to have all kinds of feelings about it. Conservatives are logical and reasonable. You are not.

          • Danny Alt

            Very funny, I guy that goes by the name “The Demon Slick”, (LMFAO) can’t answer at least one of eight simple questions, and yet, speaks of “logical and reasonable”.
            Who cares about “The Demon Slick’s” interpretation of the law!
            You simply don’t matter.
            You are a nobody “hiding” in social media.

            Those individuals I listed above, are not acting as thou your interpretation is relevant.

            The Trump Family and associates are preceding as if a legally authorized Special Counsel is Investigating them and The Russians, that is why they are hiring lawyers, you idiot!

          • The Demon Slick

            Still didn’t read it. I think another poster put it up downthread somewhere. I don’t know how much easier anyone can make it for you.

          • trangbang68

            How’s your boy Egg McMuffin doing these days?

          • Danny Alt

            He doesn’t have a Special Counsel’s high caliber attorneys and FBI Agents conducting a body cavity search on him and his “read” kids.., and he’s not running around doing his best imitation of a guilty man with several bodies buried in his back yard – LOL!. Otherwise he’s okay.

          • trangbang68

            So the fact that the deep state , the swamp rats in the media and the Democrat psychotics are all in to stop Trump from dismantling their criminal enterprises is funny. You are a useful idiot for the left, a spineless weasel who will sit and sniff the wilted flowers of our former republic when they take our last freedoms away.

          • Danny Alt

            All righty then!

          • JET

            If what you say “receive said stolen property while knowing it was stolen” is true, why isn’t the Washington Post and New York Times under investigation? They’ve been extensively publishing stolen classified documents they had to know were stolen. Some would call that espionage.

            That being said, the fact that the DNC and Podesta emails were stolen does not prove Trump or his campaign had anything to do with those thefts. Nor does it prove the Russians had anything to do with them. The fact is, in all the hundreds and thousands of pages of print on these topics, there is not one shred of proof offered from all the leaked “sources” that Trump had anything to do with the emails being stolen. His joke about getting the 30K+ deleted messages from the Russians may have been dumb to say but do you think he would have said that if he knew the Russsians actually had them? I think not.

            As far as the meeting with the Russian lawyer goes, again, a dumb move by Trump Jr. based on his lack of experience in politics but no one is saying that there was anything specific or valuable offered and nothing of value was received (unless you count her inexplicable lobbying to change the Magninsky Act). The premise of the meeting was bogus and borders on entrapment. If you read the emails, it’s clear that nutcase promoter was planting seeds that would useful later — like now — to destroy our government’s ability to serve the voters as the voters decided they wanted to be served (passing the Trump agenda). And that is what Putin wants – to destroy our ability to act against him. He’s doing a great job of that, with the help of our stupid media and the useful idiots who refer to themselves as the “Democratic Party.” He is playing chess and we are playing pin the tail on the donkey.

          • Danny Alt

            “nor does it prove the Russians had anything to do with them”
            Okay, we’re done here!

          • Fredrick Massey

            Ok………….the jury is in. JET shut you down with facts and logic. I imagine that you are taking Benedryl for the burn.

          • Danny Alt

            Indeed the jury is in. The Russians interfered with our election. Anyone not agreeing with that, saying “nor does it prove the Russians had anything to do with them”, is not worth talking too.

          • Fredrick Massey

            “The Russians interfered with our election. ”
            Anyone stupid enough to believe the above quote is not worth talking to.
            There. Fixed.

          • Danny Alt

            That certainly limits the number of intelligent people, stupid by your definition, that you can talk to.
            And wasn’t your mimicking response more like that of a child, ” I know you are, but what am I” – LMFAO!

          • Fredrick Massey

            Rush is right.
            1. Lefties have no sense of humor.
            2. Lefties are thin-skinned to the point of being blue vein road maps.

          • Danny Alt

            If the “Rush” to which you refer is a Limbaugh, he is a “blow hard” and not typically right.
            In fact, most popular and well known comedians are historically “Lefties”, while very few, if any, are Conservative thinkers.
            Accordingly, any seeming lack of a sense of humor on my part is largely due to my being a Conservative thinker, not a “lefty”.
            Which makes your assumptions about “Rush” and me equally wrong.
            And that is no surprise. Indeed, it was to be expected.
            P.S. Ironic is a Trump supporter labeling anyone, other than Trump, as “thin skinned”.

      • Comey testified that the Russian meddling had zero impact on the election’s outcome. Likewise, there’s zero evidence of justice obstruction.

        • Danny Alt

          That is not completely correct, infant it is a false narrative.
          Comey qualified the response to which you refer. He explained he could only testify to his knowledge within his capacity of FBI Director, limited to his knowledge that no votes cast were digitally altered. He further explained he would leave it to other more appropriately experienced and qualified to determine the actual “influencing” affect it had on individual voters actions.
          It will take years of research to determine the affect the Russian/Wikileaks E-mail theft, the Trump teams alleged targeted scheduling of release dates of said E-mails, Comey’s opening and closing Hillary Investigations.., and Russian demographically targeted social media “Fake News” influencing efforts.., directly had on individuals casting votes for Trump.
          The mathematical probability of “not one” deliberating voter, out of 65 million, being affectively influenced, by those Russian/Wikileaks efforts and Comey’s gaffs etc., is simply illogical.

          Then consider, Trump won an Electoral College Election solely because a mere 80,000 voters, concentrated in 3 Rust Belt States, voted for him over Hillary.
          He won by 0.123076923077% of all votes cast in America.
          To be sure.., he won by a little more than 1/10th of 1% of all votes cast.., and those votes were concentrated in three (3) states, believed by Intelligence experts to have been targeted for Russian “Fake News” planted on social media sites thereat.
          I did not vote for Hillary or Trump, but simple mathematical probability allows for the possibility of the Russian Interference actually affecting the deciding outcome.

          • Unless Russia engineered Obama’s flat to failing, low growth, bad jobs economy, and the crisis of the disappearing middle class (which underlie the populist revolt of 76 million Americans) it had zero to do with Trump’s victory.

            http://www.apollospeaks.com/?p=22114

            http://www.apollospeaks.com/?p=21365

          • Danny Alt

            Given that 62,984,825 American’s voted for Trump and 65,853,516 voted for Clinton, with close to 8 million voting for “Other” candidates, I don’t know to what you refer in a 76 million American Revolt.
            What exactly are you referring to ?

          • 63 million middle class Trump votes and the 13 million for the Bern.

          • Danny Alt

            The 13 million Bern votes were cast during the primary not during the General Election.
            The 63 million Trump votes were cast during The General Election not during the primary.
            It is ridiculous to simply add those two numbers and call it 76 million separate Americans Revolting, without logically considering that a significant number that voted for Bern in the Primary also voted for Trump in The General. Fuzzy math my friend.
            That “Alternative Fact” reflects poorly on your credibility.

          • Even so that was 13 million angry Democrat Americans part of a declining middle class up in arms over the status quo that wasn’t working for them – wanting change using government solutions. The same middle class that put Donald Trump in power wanting less government and free market solutions.

            It was a populist middle class revolt against the status quo coming from opposite political directions that underlie the rise of both Trump and Sanders.

    • CMSgt (Ret.)

      Bingo! No prior violation has occurred on which a special council is based.

    • John Say

      I think it is a constitutional principle – enshrined in atleast the 4th amendment – that if the government investigates a person – they must also be investigating a crime.

      This principle is reflected throughout government – it is why the issues with unmasking.
      The intelligence community – including parts of the FBI are not that constrained by individual rights.
      Their means and methods are incredibly broad.
      But they are strictly prohibted from conducting criminal investigations, and severely limited in their ability to investigate US Persons.

      • The Demon Slick

        “Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime ” is not Constitutional.

        • John Say

          No it is Lavrentiy Beria

          and what we have is the beginings of a left wing nut show trial.

  • InformedConservativemom

    Sessions needs to be fired. Gulliani hired and Muller dismissed for conflict of interest.

    • fb274

      Gulliani is no cleaner than McCabe, Comey, Mueller, Clinton and a bunch more.

  • Ted2

    Remember Ken Star? Sure, He limited his investigation to just WhiteWater…. he did not jump into Monica…

    • Brian B

      1. Starr was appointed under the Independent Counsel statute which conferred broad powers on any IC and which has since lapsed.
      2. Starr, as provided by law, sought and received authority from the overseeing three judge panel to expand the investigation into the other areas he investigated.
      3. Mueller, or Rosenstein for that matter, doesn’t seem particularly concerned with any limiting statutory language.
      4. Jumping into Monica was what got Billy Jeff in trouble in the first place.

      Nice try though.

  • Peter63

    If you want to know how worthless the GOP are, nearly to a man and woman, the failure to have special counsels looking into Hillary Clinton, Loretta Lynch and several other leading Democrats’ histories, the failure to impeach the Hawaiian judge who has overruled the ruling of the Supreme Court, and the general failure of the Republicans in Congress to get a grip on anything, tells its own tale; and if you want the full story as to why they behave as they do, kindly re-read Ann Coulter’s latest book “In Trump We Trust” (2016).

    Yet it isn’t a new tale. As long ago as 7 July 2009 David Kahane, in a mordant article in the National Review entitled ‘I Still Hate You, Sarah Palin’, looked at the whole leftwing/Democratic Party/liberal approach to politics and their fighting tactics and set forth just how tough the Republicans and all conservatives ought to be to counter the bullying. None of his (implied) advice has been followed by anyone except President Trump. By contrast Attorney General Sessions – forsooth! – recused himself and so opened the way for an endless Democratic Party fishing-expedition to paralyse the new administration.

    So still it is the case that it is Trump contra mundum as regards getting his agenda enacted.

    All this – any of this – will only stop if and as the Republican members of the Congress are primaried out of their precious seats in that body and replaced by genuine patriots who care not for acquiring big money, privilege and self-importance via dancing to the tune of their Donors and Owners but who actually want to save the United States from ruination as a Third-World hellhole.

    As soon as THAT begins, the rest of the GOP will fall into line behind the President and he will start to have some political support.

    But not till then.

    • brianOO7

      Until and unless that happens, the Trump administration is doomed, first by a Congress that accomplishes nothing, second by effective Democrat control of the organs of Congress using a shifting group of RINOs.

    • jack dobson

      All this – any of this – will only stop if and as the Republican members of the Congress are primaried out of their precious seats in

      It likely will happen. Base GOP voters are furious at the Establishment Republicans over Obamacare and even my long-term MoC apparently will draw a primary opponent. There is no shift to the Dems but definitely a target on every Republican incumbent.

      • Peter63

        This gladdens me. Thank you for the encouragement.

      • Osa

        Nothing (significant & positive) will happen until WE make it happen. Such “opponents” to GOP-incumbents as are currently testing waters — look like the same old opportunistic RINOs/RINOs-in-training as the establishment Republicans we got in Congress right now.
        Trump-victory on 11/8/16 generated an opportunity for development of real (as opposed to rhetorical) national MAGA-movement with LOCAL MAGA-TeaParty-NRA-Evangelicals, etc. coalitions working to primary-out as many Hill-RINOs as possible before 11/6/18 & beyond.
        So far, Trump & his good-faith advisers (Bannon, Conway & Miller) seem to be oblivious to this opportunity and so are old TeaParty leaders & supporters.
        It’s not too late to start working on such LOCAL initiatives now — but we better get cracking soon..
        #StopWhiningStartWinning!

  • Norbert G. Buttguster, Jr.

    Anyone who thinks about this “investigation” knows exactly what it is: a political witch hunt with no redeeming value.

  • jack dobson

    You whiffed. The statute explicitly requires a crime before a special counsel is appointed. There was none. So let’s stop with calling this an “investigation” and acknowledge it as the coup d’état it is. Every day this drags on further delegitimizes the federal government, perhaps a good thing in a sense but chilling nonetheless.

    The applicable regulations make it incumbent on the Justice Department to specify what exactly a special counsel is authorized to investigate. The Justice Department has failed to do this, a dereliction that must be rectified.

    Do you think this was an accident? Deputy USAG Rosenstein at best has been woefully negligent, at worst complicit in a conspiracy to conduct a junta under the patina of law.

    • URstandingwhere

      Counterintelligence investigations are the FBI’s, Comey was heading it, when Trump fired him it may have been obstruction of Justice.

      • jack dobson

        Read the statute. There was no pre-existing criminal allegation so the whole damned thing, which is a coup anyhow, is illegitimate and further delegitimizes the federal government and judiciary.

        • Les Leinaweaver

          Where is the statute?

          • Golden Rule

            regulation
            28 cfr § 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.

      • Gangnam Style

        Except Deputy FBI Director McCabe, a Democrat who temporarily took over when Comey was fired testified before Congress that A) There was zero outside interference from the White House in the investigation, and; B) Comey’s dismissal would have zero impact on the ongoing investigation.

      • jerseymark

        The investigation continued. Comey was not involved with the nuts and bolts of the investigation. What he did repeatedly constituted a termination offenses.

    • donsker

      Yeah, everybody’s ganging up to hold Trump accountable. Of course, if he’s done nothing wrong, he should welcome an investigation. But he’s dirty as sin, knows it, and is doing everything possible to shut down an investigation into his traitorous conduct. Say hello to Vladmir, Jack, ’cause he loves all of you Chumpsters.

      • jerseymark

        You are a simpleton if you believe the “if he did nothing wrong he should welcome the investigation” line. You seem to have no understanding of what such an investigation does, especially a politically targeted one, even when nothing wrong is uncovered.

      • skeptical1776

        Enjoy your alternate universe Hellary presidency, you pathetic sucker.

      • The Demon Slick

        In America, first we identify that a crime has occurred and what the crime is. Then we investigate to find out who did it. What we do not do is investigate a person in search of a crime. That’s old school Soviet style.

    • james r ruston

      The only thing this investigation de-legitimizes is the jerk you people elected as president.

      • skeptical1776

        Enjoy your alternate universe Hellary presidency, pathetic sucker.

  • Keith_Vlasak

    Unfortunately, the object of Mueller’s investigation is not to serve the country but to serve the Democratic Party. What is stunning is that that was blatant right from the beginning and the investigation was still given the go ahead (of course, by a Democrat).

  • UrVapid

    This needs to be shut down. This is liberal xanax. It always has been. If the Republicans won’t start doing their jobs, we will find conservatives who will in 2018.

    • URstandingwhere

      What the problem with clearing Trump’s name?

      • alwanderer

        silly boy. you keep covering it with yur spit.

        • URstandingwhere

          URN8

      • jerseymark

        There is no clearing necessary. The whole thing is trumped up by the Dems out of whole clothe. They have investigated this for a year and found nothing. This last meeting with Donald Jr. is nothing as exposed by the WSJ article this past Sunday and Dershowitz’s statement that he was well within his rights to take the meeting and even to receive the incriminating evidence suppose to be provided concerning Hillary. In fact, it was his duty to receive it and pass it on to the DOJ.

    • donsker

      You better keep your morale up, because your leader is imploding right before our very eyes. So keep your spirits up, you’ll need to.

  • Joe_NS

    Mueller must be dismissed now.

  • NASArefugee

    Mr. McCarthy, either wittingly or unwittingly you perpetuate the mischaracterizations that undergird the Democrats case for “collusion”. Supposedly three (or maybe four) of our intelligence agencies have concluded that Russia meddled in the election. Fine and good, but to infer from that that Russia hacked the DNC server is a tendentious stretch, given that none of those agencies even examined the DNC server! All “evidence” of Russian hacking comes from CrowdStrike, not government agencies. Would you base a criminal investigation on that quality of evidence?

    Second, Natalia Veselnitskaya, the Russian lawyer whom you glibly label a representative of the Kremlin, was in the US without a visa under special dispensation by Loretta Lynch as a lawyer representing the company Prevezon, which you surely know. Nevertheless, when she met with Trump jr., mutatis mutandes, she becomes a subversive Kremlin agent. Which is it? Did the Obama State Department knowingly admit a Kremlin operative to the US under extraordinary circumstances, or is she what she claims to be? Expecting Donald Trump jr. to divine Veselnitskaya’s true agenda presumes he had knowledge that the State Department did not, imputing his guilt.

    You are smart enough to know better.

  • fb274

    The “Russian Hacking” the 2016 election was cooked-up within 48 hours after Hillary lost the election by John Podesta and Robby Mook. All ofthe “Never Trump Rinos” and the DEMs immediately got on board. What Did the DEMs have on Rob Rosenstein other than he worked for Comey and Mueller previously to so rapidly select Mueller for a Special Counsel to have broad investigative powers. Now, Mueller has stacked the Deck with Clinton Supporters, Donors and attorneys who worked for the Clinton Foundation. Crowdstrike did the only investigation on the DNC computers and within 10 min. said Russia hacked them. Of Course, close association to Hillary Clinton had no influence./s, The DCCC most likely was hacked by the I.T. workers–Awan (6) Brothers and wives-Pakistani Nationals with High Security Clearance. All of this could have been to cover up how the DNC was transfering money to a joint account of Debbie W-Schultz at Amalgumated Bank from Bernies Accounts-ne real, the other false acct. ACTBLUE was Bernies, ACTBLUES (S on the end) was the false acct. that Debbie had fingers in. This is what needs investigation along with much more corruption–RINOs are not exempt.

    Rumor has it Mueller has offered Blanket Immunity to Comey, McCabe, Nides, Jack Lew, Dennis McDonough and LORETTA Lynch plus 19 from the State Dept. who worked under Hillary as well as Mueller, Comey and McCabe have long defended Hillary to keep her from being charged for her numerous crimes from their Mena, Arkansas days.

  • Whiskey Sam

    Too late. Mueller is expanding the witch hunt into any area he likes. This should have ended the moment Comey revealed he broke the law to get a special prosecutor appointed, even more with Mueller’s blatant conflicts of interest.

  • Ruckus_Tom

    Ah yes. Andrew McCarthy. One of the National Review neverTrumpers.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430126/donald-trump-conservatives-oppose-nomination

  • Buzzeroo

    Mueller was hired to look into any association that the Trump campaign had with the Russians. Like all so called ‘special prosecutors’ he has interpreted that as an invitation to search high and low through every facet of his target’s and its various constituent’s lives from their dates of birth until they FIND SOMETHING TO PIN ON THEM—even if it is a totally unrelated misstep in response to the infinitely detailed myriad of questions put to them 24/7 ad nauseum with the clear intent of accomplishing just that.
    The only possible way to avert an assassination by one of these cancer bearing creatures is to FIRE THEM the very moment that they show their bad faith and evil intentions –which this Mueller thing has clearly done. First by confining his staff hiring exclusively to anti Trump people and now by his indicated intention to stray into any and everything Trump from erection to resurrection if necessary. Business being what it is, not one of them could stand such a frisk –especially in the face of an evil biased media with a demonstrated proclivity not only to make mountains out of molehills regarding Trump but to even go so far as to invent mountains of threatening adverse publicity regarding matters that they fabricate out of whole cloth on their page 1’s and retract it weeks late on page 67 intermixed with the want ads.
    Trump will never survive a multi year colonoscopy by the likes of Mueller SO he should simply dump him and his motley crew off the result of which undoubtedly being horrendous but a mere walk in the park compared to what it would be if he lets the skunks hang around.

    • jerseymark

      That is not true at all – not hired to look into ANY association that the Trump campaign had with the Russians. Mueller has interpreted it that way due to his political bias and he must be fired. Let the chips fall where they must.

      • Buzzeroo

        If you say so–OK But we most certainly do agree that Mueller has interpreted his appointment to be that of the leader of Trump’s political assassination team who will obviously do any and everything to drive him out of office–or, at the very least, embroil him in so many distracting tangential accusations as to paralyze and ruin him…..along with the America that he and his filthy ilk do not give a damn about.
        HE HAS TO GO. I repeat— Absolutely no fallout from dumping him and his misbegotten biased lot of bozo lawyers could even begin to compare to what will happen if they are permitted to carry on this dishonest illegal travesty.
        According to every legal authority I’ve read, Trump has every right to dump the rat. Though doing so might take some complicated moves but he has the best lawyers in the country to guide him through this most pleasurable task.
        The talking heads love to blather on about Trump’s inability to survive doing such a thing–likening him to Nixon. They are full of crap. Trump is not even a ghost of Nixon and he would not only not be injured by shooting the snakes that are attacking him but he would thrive.

  • larrythelogger

    To make the special counsel investigation a
    counterintelligence investigation eviscerates this modicum of protection
    and investigative discipline. Mueller has virtually unlimited
    resources, one set of targets to focus on, and no jurisdictional
    restrictions. This is how it becomes so easy to slide from hacking
    conspiracy to “collusion” in something (who knows what?), to obstruction
    of the limitless investigation, to whatever crimes Mueller and his
    swelling staff of notoriously aggressive prosecutors might reasonably
    suspect . . . or creatively imagine.

    Thank you Jeff Sessions.

    The
    applicable regulations make it incumbent on the Justice Department to
    specify what exactly a special counsel is authorized to investigate. The
    Justice Department has failed to do this, a dereliction that must be
    rectified.

    Thank you Jeff Sessions!

    If they are not, there is no telling where the probe will wander, how long it will take, and how paralyzing it will be.

    I
    know Andy! I´m not even a lawyer and don´t play one on TV. Think of the
    worse case for the nation, multiply that times 1,000 and THAT´s a teeny
    tiny bit of how paralyzing it will be. PLUS, it´s already an excuse for
    the GOP to actively work with the Marxists to get Trump impeached WHILE
    making sure they do absolutely NOTHING for Trump´s agenda, an agenda
    EVERY SINGLE Republican supported in 2016 and every Senator supported
    for the last seven years. Andy, lose the freaking nuance. We know you
    know legaleze.

  • John Willson

    This can go not one step farther. There are already so many layers of swamp-filling going on that we’ll have to blow it up rather than just drain it. The whole upper echelon of the DOJ and FBI have to be cleaned out and replaced with people who have read the Constitution.

    • Felix

      Ask the folks who clerked for Justice Ginsberg who we should hire.
      That’s the poison list.
      Then ask the folks who clerked for Scalia who would be a good bet.
      That’s the HIRE THEM list.
      ASAP after Trump has all of the Obama and Deep State apparatchiks heads on poles (as in “YOU’RE FIRED”)

  • URstandingwhere

    What is Trump afraid of? And to point out that the FBI investigation was a counterintelligence investigation.

  • hamburgertoday2017

    As has been much the case recently, Mr. McCarthy is clear, precise and balanced in his articulation of legal and investigatory issues. The fact that this ‘investigation’ could even be *considered* let alone implemented without a *legal* reason (evidence of an actual crime) is indicative of the depravity of the Swamp. If it were not for the craven nature of Congressional Republicans, Rosenstein and Mueller would be brought to heel. The President has simply been *betrayed* by the Republican Party. Sessions’ should never have recused himself. The fact that he cannot find the courage to set aside is vain sense of ‘propriety’ and step back into this matter is indicative of some kind of cowardice.

  • Joe_NS

    Mueller’s job is to dribble out incomplete information that can be spun and make governance impossible for Trump.

    The media put in their orders for this sort of leak or that. Mueller and his clowns then go to work, like tailors being provided measurements.

    I call it the “bespoke leak.”

  • mj01323

    What we have with Robert Mueller is a man who wanted to return to the FBI. He has conflicts of interest that should never be tolerated when serving as a special counsel. The fact that he took the job knowing full well that he might have to investigate his own protege, James Comey, should have prevented him serving. The fact that he was chosen by a man who used to work for him is another conflict. It appears that Mueller could very well extend his work well beyond the investigation of Bill Clinton. This whole mess does not bode well for our nation. And it is exactly what the moonbat Democrats wanted so that they can damage our nation and destroy the president.

  • Sid

    INAL but how can Muller do anything until he has evidence that the DNC was “Hacked”? Comey and Jeh testified to Congress that FBI and DHS have no such evidence. The fact that a Ukrainian connected consultant hired by the DNC to claim it was the Russians is not evidence of the actual “hack”. unless Muller has the actual server (and can vouch for custody chain from date of said “Hack”), he has no actual legal evidence.

  • Felix

    Did Jeff Sessions gain Trump’s trust as a Trojan Horse for the Deep State and Uniparty?

    • SS Trumptanic

      hahaha

  • SS Trumptanic

    Look at all the sheep bleat the same tune. Guilty men do what Trump is currently doing.

    • Maxx Scott

      So what would an innocent man do differently?

      • SS Trumptanic

        Be transparent by helping the investigators, releasing tax returns etc.

        • Maxx Scott

          With today’s media and their editorial policies that everything that Trump does is bad, even helping the investigators would be panned.

          Everyone should know why he doesn’t want to release his taxes ever and that is because just because it is legal doesn’t make it right. His taxes are thousands of pages long and I’m sure there is a line for taking an exemption for something stupid or loaning himself money to pay off another one of his business to make a profit, etc.

          • SS Trumptanic

            He won’t release because theres something in there he doesn’t want the people to see. If you call me guilty or a liar I would do anything in power to prove you wrong and clear my name. But he does the exact opposite and you carry the water for him. MAGA!!!

          • jerseymark

            Therefore, you are so easily manipulated. Congratulations on being a simple sheep. Someone calling you a liar without proof does not require a “clearing of your name”. That is the classic way the Left intimidates the GOP with baseless statements the Left Media repeat as though they are fact.

          • SS Trumptanic

            So if I say you are guilty of something you wouldn’t want to clear your name? You would just lie, deny and stop investigations?

          • Maxx Scott

            Also, do you really think Mueller and the DNC lawyers he brought on board would stop if Trump cooperated and they ended up with nothing. They have already indicted someone, they are now looking for a crime.

          • SS Trumptanic

            DNC lawyers!!! You guys hate fake news but sure love to spread it

          • Maxx Scott

            There is a difference between being something in there that he doesn’t want people to see. Which is why I agree with you as to why he doesn’t want to release his records, but that doesn’t make him guilty of anything.

            In the 90’s, Clinton was harangued for taken used underwear donations as a charitable contribution. Biden and Obama were criticized for their meager donations (at least through 2008 for Obama, he was very generous after that), Bush was attacked for some of his business dealings, etc. They were all legal but none looked good. That is what Trump is trying to avoid. Maybe it’s that he isn’t that good of a businessman, because in the one tax form that was released he paid a lot more in taxes than someone in real estate should have.

          • SS Trumptanic

            Guilty people hide things plan and simple

          • jerseymark

            You aren’t sure of anything you are stating about his tax returns. It is a principle issue. It is only recent history that the media demands such a thing and absent some illegality which the IRS would check out, there is no basis except for harassment and bullying.

          • SS Trumptanic

            recent history? HAHAHA

          • jerseymark

            How far back does that “practice” go? you want to laugh at it? It does not go back to WWII. It does not go back to Eisenhower. That makes it recent compared to our history. It is NOT an historical tradition.

          • SS Trumptanic

            40+ years. The fact you want to hide them from the American people is telling. Even Crooked Clinton released hers

    • jerseymark

      Bull crap – men who are being unfairly harassed and bullied do what he is doing. I guess you are a spineless one who would easily give in to harassment and bullying but he is not.

      • SS Trumptanic

        Lie, deny and fire people investigating you? I have never seen an innocent person do such a thing but then again I bet you are a 2 time Christie voter.

  • Hyfrydol

    There has been a concerted effort on the part of the national security apparatus to undermine the Trump administration. General Clapper on one hand testified that he did not see evidence of collusion. Director Comey told President Trump repeatedly that he wasn’t under investigation. And yet, Clapper later stated that the Trump situation would be worse than Watergate, and Comey leaked information in order to trigger the appointment of a special counsel. What have we seen thus far is not remotely similar to Watergate, and why is a special counsel necessary, other than to continue to undermine the credibility of an administration? Mr. Mueller has been described as a man of integrity and probity. If that is the case, then the constant stream of national security leaks will also come under investigation. Government employees and special counsels do not have a right to choose our leaders, or disrupt their ability to implement the policies they were elected to pursue.

  • quodverum

    Am waiting with bated breath for another government probe, investigation, examination Show Trial.

    For which depending on who, what and why permits the stars of the show to grandstand in their fifteen minutes of fame.

    That is IF the “probes” are improbably public. Given that “the stupid citizens, basket of deplorables, astro – turf, etc. etc.” would not, could not understand the details of the examiners who are it goes without saying as “representatives” OF Those citizens so much smarter with far more “information to understand those details

  • joulesbeef

    just like Bill clintons. Why yall so scared.

  • JohnnyClams

    America’s legal system has degenerated into something else–here, a political tool by which the establishment protects itself whatever the damage to the constitution.

  • bscook111

    Appoint two more specials, one for Clinton and one for Obama. Let’s get the circus really up and going. More fun than the county fair. Explode all supercilious heads; D, R and foreign. Such would probably kill McCain.

  • Kenny A

    It is really is unfair on you Nationalists. You finally crack the defenses of the Republican establishment, finally maneuver to a place where you can gain some traction with ordinary voters, finally find a candidate willing to say your things. And then he bursts into flame and contagion. Absolutely rotten luck.

  • Blackstone

    At a minimum, Trump should fire or reassign

  • Blackstone

    At a minimum, Trump should fire or reassign Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, because not putting explicit limits in Mueller’s mandate, including a date certain by which the investigation is to be stopped/concluded, Rosenstein has displayed incompetency at least or undermining the nation’s best interests at worst.

  • Left Coaster

    Um.
    Whitewater led to finding out about Lewinsky.
    Watergate led to Agnew being indicted for tax evasion.

    Special prosecutors have unlimited scope.

    Mueller can look at ANY activities or state tax that Trump was involved in that may be illegal or false.

    And yes, tax evasion or money laundering are eligible for review by Mueller.

    • Brian B

      You’re wrong.
      Starr was appointed by a three judge panel under the lapsed Independent Counsel law. ICs had much greater scope, which is one reason it was allowed to lapse. But even so Starr sought and received approval from the three judge panel to expand his probe.
      So nothing you said is accurate, except possibly that you’re a dumbass lefty on the coast.

  • Left Coaster

    Impossible to limit Mueller’s scope now that the investigation has been authorized.

    Maybe the GOP congress could change some of the rules concerning special prosecution in the future but the rules in place are the rules in place.

  • Left Coaster

    Trump will have his business dealings exposed.

    But that should be fine…Trump is such an honest guy.

  • Paul52

    Given that Russians have been providing a “disproportionate” amount of money to the trumps for years (that’s don junior’s word, trump fans, not mine), it’s not possible to probe Russian influence without looking under the trump organization’s hood.

    What’s your next question?

  • chesterarthur

    Mueller isn’t finding anything that can be prosecuted.He wants out of this job.When Trump said that expanding the ‘investigation’ into his private business affairs was over the line,Mueller immediately decided to step over that line.His firing would be the only thing that would do real damage to Trump,and that is the point of the exercise.The solution may be an investigation into Mueller’s professional ties,and,as Mueller seems to think it’s proper,an expanded look at his private associations.That could be by a private group,it wouldn’t have to be a government investigation.Since the media touts his honorable career,how could anyone object?If they scream witch hunt,it just means they finally understand what a witch hunt is.

  • calhounite1

    Trump’s narcissism. Don’t fire Comey. Just don’t. If Trump was focused on the objectives of governing instead of himself, watching stuff about himself on tv 12 hours a day, wouldn’t have given a rat’s behind re/ or given any thought to the Justice Department. Comey’s COUNTER-ESPIONAGE (not criminal) investigation would have concluded with a report recommending remedies against Russian election interference, Nothing about Trump, Wouldn’t have prosecuted Clinton, certainly wouldn’t have recommended anything against Trump even with minor involvement of some of Trump’s family or other agents. Firing of Comey led to airing of his legitimate concerns about Trump (loyalty pledge,etc), and started this whole ball of turddome rolling. Trump had his hack at the top. He was doubly protected. Special prosecutor is anathema. Now instead of serving 8 years, will be lucky to get to the year mark

    • ian Chapman

      In retrospect if there was any person in government that justly deserved to be fired with prejudice, it’s Comey. The man clearly was a self-serving hack who thought he was the next incarnation of J Edger Hoover, and was untouchable.

      He will probably go down as one of the worst and most corrupt FBI directors in history (towards both sides of the political ailse).

      • wreckinball

        Yes, there were at least ten justifiable reasons to fire Comey who also should under investigation. But we’re really not about finding crime. We are all about getting Trump.

        • ian Chapman

          The only real mistake Trump made IMHO was not firing Comey on 20 Jan. If he had, I think there would have been cheers across all of DC and the country.

  • Dave Hunter

    Mr. McCarthy’s column then begs the question, why has a special counsel been appointed to continue what is and was a counterintelligence investigation when counterintelligence is not part of the special counsel statute?
    Why is Mueller’s staff now investigating (reportedly) possible money laundering by Manafort?
    Why is Mueller’s staff now investigating (reportedly) financial transactions between PDT’s businesses and any and all Russians?

    PDT can DIRECT the DOJ to limit the scope of the investigation to a counterintelligence effort and he should do so forthwith.

  • Lock him up!

    This is funny. Clearly the author thinks Trump is corrupt and a crook. That is why he is upset with the FBI investigation.

  • shatzy48

    Is it any wonder how Ken Star began with real estate deal and ended up with a semen stained blue dress? Congress basically said we are too divided along partisan lines to do our jobs, so we are punting to a special counsel. There is no telling where this will end up even with a straight arrow like Mueller in charge.

  • donsker

    Can you cite me a similar article you wrote during the multiple investigations of Hillary and Bill Clinton from the 1990s up to the 2014 Bhengazi. You must’ve been saying the same thing when the Dems were under the microscope, right? Because if you didn’t then you’re just being an intellectual fraud, right. Because we’re a nation of laws unless you think Don the Con is above the law. Cite me some past articles.

    • Lock him up!

      He knows Donald is a corrupt man and is afraid what they will find if they investigate him

      The author has no morality, just partisanship

  • Lock him up!

    The sheep are getting scared. They know Donald is a crook!

  • Golden Rule

    Neither limited nor accountable.
    A cowardly Republican Congress will not make it either.

  • ian Chapman

    Here is the problem with Mueller. Mueller is behaving like Beria, Head of the NKVD (Secret Police of the Soviet Union and precurser to KGB), who famously told Stalin: Show me the man, and I’ll find you the crime.

    This entire Mueller Special Investigation is a *gross* breach of due process. If you are going to investigate someone or something, then there should BE AN UNDERLYING AND SPECIFIC CRIME TO INVESTIGATE.

    Otherwise you get a fishing expedition answerable only to an unaccountable High Executioner of a Police State.

    • wreckinball

      Exactly, they are not investigating a wrong doing in general. Unless Hillary losing is considered a wrong doing.They are just investigating one guy until they find something anything.

  • Jon

    Give a federal prosecutor unlimited resources and an open mandate, he’s going to find a crime to prosecute. Doesn’t matter whether it’s you, me, or Trump. It’s illegal, unconstitutional, and just plain wrong. It’s an investigation in search of a crime to prosecute. No one can stand that level of scrutiny, let alone an international businessman.

  • Walter Thomas

    Clear, concise, to the point, and very helpful. Thanks again, Mr. McCarthy.

  • Bob Acker

    I’m not sure whether to call you Andy the Parrot or Andy the Pimp. What’s your opinion?

  • wreckinball

    Good article. But how would you reign in Mueller? I think he needs fired and replaced with someone who is not Comey’s buddy and inclined to fill his staff with Democratic hacks.

    • reality check

      Mueller & Comey weren’t friends. The often worked together. Mueller is a registered Republican. Most Republicans in Cogress including many conservatives asserted that Mueller was a great choice for independent counsel and would be very fair. Can you point out the “Democratic hacks” on Mueller’s staff? While some of Mueller’s staff did donate to Democratic campaigns, Mr Trump donated more than 10 TIMES MORE to Democratic candidates than all those ‘hacks’ combined. There will be NO legimate conflict of interest charges attached to Mueller or any of his staff and we all know it. If Jr’s dad does attempt to fire Mueller it will be a sure sign that dad knows that what Mueller will find out will be much more detrimental to little don john than the fallout from firing him. Now we can all imagine what Mueller is likely to find.
      Poor donald. And all he ever wanted was to be very rich.

      • ian Chapman

        It is well known that Comey and Mueller had a mentor-protege’ relationship when they served together in prior administrations, and Comey broke the law in order to get this particular person appointed special counsel. Yes they were friends and yes Mueller is conflicted.

        • john

          Mueller has already been vetted by the DOJ ethics division. That says it all.

          • ian Chapman

            Meaning the Fox was cleared by his fellow foxes.

  • Eric377

    I don’t worry about this so much. Mueller is unlikely to press it if he comes up without any prosecutions on stuff directly about the election. So his energy is going right now to whether or not there are crimes involved with the election. As such I highly discount the reports that his team is spending time looking back nearly a decade at real estate transactions. The DOJ will throw him out laughing if he says something like “I got nothing on the election but you can’t believe this stuff from 2008”. Not to say that it is impossible to find something criminal that is directly about the election…that I don’t know. But that is the gate his team has to get through first.

    • Melissa

      Oh yes they would! That’s what happened when they investigated Bill Clinton. There was a crime,at least in his case, but they nailed him on something completely unrelated. Scary, but true.

  • rgrif50ish

    Having watched the Ken Starr probe spin-off in a totally unexpected direction, I was shocked that Rosenstein appointed Mueller with an exceptionally vague letter. It should have been very carefully crafted with explicit limitations. For example, under no circumstance should Mueller have been given the authority to investigate anything that happened after the election,, or perhaps slightly further out, the day Trump took office. The area of concern was Russian government activity in the U.S. election process and any related coordination or conspiracy with the Trump campaign. What happened after the election should have been spelled-out as off-limits. Similar limiting words should have been applied to preclude investigations of activities that occurred long before the election began or any financial activities that are not linked to involvement by Russian governmental officials.

  • john

    Expect Mueller to get a court order for Trump’s tax returns. He must after all follow the money trail. Expect Mueller and probably the finest investigative team ever put together in the US to flush out everything in the Trump families history of doing financial deals with Russians. Mueller’s team are the investigators who unraveled the Enron mess after all, a task orders of magnitude more difficult than taking apart Trump’s financial history. Comey would have been so much easier for Trump to deal with. Mueller has the complete confidence of almost 100% of Congress after all.

    • JoshInca

      So what exactly is the theory here. That some undisclosed Russians shovels dirty money to,Trump decades ago in exchange for his promise to run for president, win and then do something that they wanted?

      That’s gotta be the craziest conspiracy theory of all.

  • See this article on moving the goalposts about Trump’s imaginary collusion with Russia: https://necpluribusimpar.net/moving-goalposts-trumps-collusion-russia/.

    Excerpt: “Imagine that John has been accused of theft for months by a lot of people, who don’t have any evidence except for a few weird coincidences that don’t mean anything. Most of the time, the people who accuse John of theft don’t even say what he is supposed to have stolen, but when they do, they accuse him of having stolen a car. John protests that he did no such thing and claims that people only accuse him because they dislike him for totally unrelated reasons. Although it wasn’t even clear whose car he was supposed to have stolen, it was at least clear that, when people accused John of theft, they were talking about the theft of a car and not something else. After several months of this witch hunt, evidence comes to light which shows that John attempted to steal a banana, although in the end he wasn’t able to do so. Suddenly, even though so far it had only been question of the theft of a car, John’s accusers pretend they are vindicated. When John protests that, when they were accusing him of theft, it was never question of a banana, people accuse him of moving the goalposts. “For months you claimed that you didn’t commit any theft and that it was ridiculous to even suggest it, but now we know that you intended to steal a banana and, since you can no longer say that, you are moving the goalposts and claim that you never stole a car.” Of course, it’s not John who is moving the goalposts, but his accusers.”

    • Melissa

      That was awesome! Great analogies there!

      • Thanks, I’m glad you liked it. You should read my other posts on this and share them if you liked them.

  • olderwiser

    Mueller has already hired far too many people and spent far too much money on this fabrication by the Resistance and the liberal progressive media. If he has an ounce of integrity, he will conclude the investigation and put himself out of business in the next 30 days. But don’t count on it. The power of his position is addictive, and the supplemental income for his retirement ain’t bad either.

    • Travvy

      And, ALL OF THEM are Clinton Donours.

      Hello?

      • john

        No they are not. And Trump by himself in the last decade has given ten times as much money to the Democratic party than all of those attorneys did collectively.

  • Travvy

    “In the criminal law, our sights are trained on conspiracy, which makes things easy. A conspiracy is an agreement to commit a violation of law. If Smith and Jones have a meeting, it is of no concern to the police unless the meeting is for the purpose of, say, arranging a heroin shipment or robbing a bank. It is the criminal offense that is the objective of the meeting, and nothing else, that makes the meeting relevant.”

    Would somebody, ANYBODY, please inform the rest of us as to what LAW HAS BEEN BROKEN?

    Dershowitz says there isn’t one.

    Johnathon Turley says there isn’t one.

    Jeffery Toobin has said that there isn’t one.

    Even Chris Cuomo has conceded that NO CRIME WAS COMMITTED.

    So, WTF is Mueller doing?

    • john

      It is illegal for politicians to accept any form of help, either financially or government sponsored research, from a foreign government. Oppo research on Hillary by the Russian government certainly qualifies as foreign help. Thus it it is obviously illegal. Kushner and Jr may not have gotten anything of value from that meeting but if you conspire to buy drugs and you show up at the designated meeting point, even if there are only cops waiting, you will be convicted of a felony. That is collusion.

      • JoshInca

        Does that also apply to The aid given to Hillary’s campaign by the Ukrainian government? Are you calling for indictments in that case?

      • Brian B

        You’re an idiot.
        Please cite the statute that outlaws meeting a foreigner because they said they had some dirt.
        Then please cite the precedent that makes what occurred in this case a crime.
        Collusion in the legal sense is not a crime but a form of fraud upon the court and so there is no such thing as collusion to commit a felony.
        You don’t even spout prog talking points competently.

  • BanBait

    Trump should publicly give this clown show 90 days. You’ve got 90 days to come up with an indictment or you’re done. Buh-bye.

    • greggreen29

      TownHall writer has an interesting column along these lines. A public letter from Trump to Mueller directing a public response.

      “provide me a written explanation regarding the following matters no later than noon three days hence.”

      “28 CFR 45.2 (”Disqualification arising from personal or political relationship”) bars participation in any investigation involving a personal friend. You are a long-time, close personal friend and mentor of James Comey. He is the source of allegations against me that leaks from your team that indicate that you are investigating. Please explain why you contend that 28 C.F.R. 45.2 does not apply to you based upon your close personal friendship with Mr. Comey.”

      “Federal Election Commission filings show the political donations made by your staff, including donations of the maximum amount allowed by law, are overwhelmingly directed toward the Democratic Party. [Insert here a list of them and their Hillary payoffs so the people can see just how outrageous this really is.] Please explain why 28 C.F.R. 45.2 does not apply to your staff based on their demonstrated partisan preference for liberal Democrats who oppose my administration.”

      Re leaks, “If these leaks are accurate, please explain the steps you are taking to identify who on your team violated your trust and the trust of the American people. If the leaks are not true, please unequivocally state that fact.”

      Trump Needs To Be Smart About How He Fires Mueller

      https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2017/07/24/trump-needs-to-be-smart-about-how-he-fires-mueller-n2358768

  • John Say

    I would suggest that Trump needs to go very public and very forcefull.

    I think that he needs to order Mueller to confine his investigation to the investigation of actual crimes involving the Election and Russia. I think he should order Mueller to complete that investigation in a specific time frame, I think he needs to provide a specific budget and direct that any expansion in scope or time frame or budget must be requested in writing with the final decision being made by the DOJ.

    I think he should additionally order that should the investigation lead to any targets that are not current members of the whitehouse, the DOJ or the FBI that Mueller must turn that investigation back to the DOJ.
    The purpose of the special counsel is to investigate what DOJ/FBI can not. Anything the FBI/DOJ can investigate without conflict should be outside the scope of the Mueller investigation.

    Finally I think that Trump should impose some very specific Ethics and conflict of interest Rules on the SC.

    I do not think Mueller should have been allowed to hire anyone who participated in either campaign or has a close relationship with any target or witness.

    The SC investigation provides a minefield for Trump.

    Trump needs to mine the field for Mueller.
    I think that is the only way to keep this from growing out of control.

    Trump could possibly do this through executive order, and then ask congress to revise the SC law to permanetly include the same provisions.

  • publiusnj

    Sessions violated the DOJ’s rules by recusing himself without discussing the matter with his boss, POTUS. (28 CFR Section 45.2). Rosenstein was then in charge of the investigation and improperly appointed a Special Counsel even though there was no criminal investigation (See 28 CFR Sec. 600.1). Mueller’s Office is now leaking like a sieve which violates DOJ Regs on Media relations and nobody is looking over Mueller’s shoulders. Under 28 CFR Section 600.7(b), Mueller is not subject to day to day supervision, but he can be required to explain the conduct of his office including the leaking that is plaguing his office. If Rosenstein does NOT do that, Trump can order him to do it. and if Rosenstein allows the leaking to go on, Trump can remove both him and Mueller. Trump ought to be moving on these issues before Congressional “Republicans” like Tillis try to remove his authority over the DOJ through legislation.

  • j. sloan

    Yes, the scope of the investigation must be limited. If not, Mueller will discover more crimes. We have obstruction of justice already. There will be more if Mueller keeps looking. Not to worry you righties, Trump will just pardon everyone,including himself. He can’t pardon himself, then Pence will do it.
    One more thing. We must stop the leaks. It is endangering national security— News Flash, Trump re-tweets a classified leak about N. Korea he saw on Fox News. Will Sessions arrest him?? No,, No, No. The leaks provide the public with the truth. We find out about the Trump lies ( one a day, two a day,etc.)