The "Special Counsel" Law is Patently Unconstitutional

[JonKoch]

Department of Justice
Office of Public Affairs
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, May 17, 2017
Appointment of Special Counsel
Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein today announced the appointment of former Department of Justice official and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III to serve as Special Counsel to oversee the previously-confirmed FBI investigation of Russian government efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election and related matters.



“In my capacity as acting Attorney General, I determined that it is in the public interest for me to exercise my authority and appoint a Special Counsel to assume responsibility for this matter,” said Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein. “My decision is not a finding that crimes have been committed or that any prosecution is warranted. I have made no such determination. What I have determined is that based upon the unique circumstances, the public interest requires me to place this investigation under the authority of a person who exercises a degree of independence from the normal chain of command.”



Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein added, “Each year, the career professionals of the U.S. Department of Justice conduct tens of thousands of criminal investigations and handle countless other matters without regard to partisan political considerations. I have great confidence in the independence and integrity of our people and our processes. Considering the unique circumstances of this matter, however, I determined that a Special Counsel is necessary in order for the American people to have full confidence in the outcome. Our nation is grounded on the rule of law, and the public must be assured that government officials administer the law fairly. Special Counsel Mueller will have all appropriate resources to conduct a thorough and complete investigation, and I am confident that he will follow the facts, apply the law and reach a just result.”



Special Counsel Mueller has agreed to resign from his private law firm in order to avoid any conflicts of interest with firm clients or attorneys.



A copy of the order is attached.

_---------------__________--------------________


The Constitution authorizes three branches of government independent and co-equal.

It does not authorize one branch to interfere with another .branch.

But SCOTUS, again, took it upon itself to amend the constitution in order to allow the judiciary to interfere with powers of the executive branch, Morrison v. Olson, 487 U.S. 654, 699, 108 S.Ct. 2597, 101 L.Ed.2d 569 (1988) (Scalia, J., dissenting).

That case ought to be reversed. And the Constitution restored.

.

But SCOTUS, again, took it upon itself to amend the constitution in order to allow the judiciary to interfere with powers of the executive branch, Morrison v. Olson, 487 U.S. 654, 699, 108 S.Ct. 2597, 101 L.Ed.2d 569 (1988) (Scalia, J., dissenting).

I thought an actual crime had to be committed before appointing a special counsel. So far, there is nothing to indicate that Trump did anything wrong. It's using resources for a witch hunt. The FBI supposedly conducted a secret investigation and found nothing. So, why are we doing this when there are no indications that a crime was committed?

All the media does is quote anonymous sources and back nothing up. We never hear official statements from departments, just nameless, faceless sources that might not even exist. The liberal media is simply continuing their efforts to take down Trump. I've never seen such sore losers in my life.

Weird how unpatriotic you klowns are when another nation interferes with the US elections *shaking head*

 

[JonKoch]

The Constitution authorizes three branches of government independent and co-equal.

It does not authorize one branch to interfere with another .branch.

Congress has oversight.

No, it doesn't.

If one branch can interfere with another can

Trump appoint a special law clerk assigned to justice Roberts since obviously his ruling upholding Ocare evinces that he is not familiar with the constitution.


Can Trump appoint a special legislative Assistant for Schumer so that in the future he knows to vote to repeal Ocare?


.

You seem to be forget one thing. This is all being done within the executive branch. No one in congress or a court appointed Muller.

.

You seem to forget one HUGE thing


The PRESIDENT has exclusive authority to determine what goes on within the executive branch.


If he didn't want to investigate the Russian scam he didn't have to.


Its up to Congress to use their constitutional authority to investigate/impeach/try.


.

Yeah, let's see how well THAT would go over if Trumpov tried to stop the FBI investigation against RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN THE US ELECTIONS! NOT SAYING PUTIN WAS HOLDING SNOWFLAKE TRUMPOVS HAND IN THIS MATTER BUBBA'S, YET!

 

[OKTexas]

The Constitution authorizes three branches of government independent and co-equal.

It does not authorize one branch to interfere with another .branch.

Congress has oversight.

No, it doesn't.

If one branch can interfere with another can

Trump appoint a special law clerk assigned to justice Roberts since obviously his ruling upholding Ocare evinces that he is not familiar with the constitution.


Can Trump appoint a special legislative Assistant for Schumer so that in the future he knows to vote to repeal Ocare?


.

You seem to be forget one thing. This is all being done within the executive branch. No one in congress or a court appointed Muller.

.

You seem to forget one HUGE thing


The PRESIDENT has exclusive authority to determine what goes on within the executive branch.


If he didn't want to investigate the Russian scam he didn't have to.


Its up to Congress to use their constitutional authority to investigate/impeach/try.


.

You're right, and both would be acting within their constitutional authority. In this case congress asked the executive to appoint a special counsel and they did, all done within the executive branch, nothing unconstitutional about that.

.

 

[Contumacious]

The Constitution authorizes three branches of government independent and co-equal.

It does not authorize one branch to interfere with another .branch.

Congress has oversight.

No, it doesn't.

If one branch can interfere with another can

Trump appoint a special law clerk assigned to justice Roberts since obviously his ruling upholding Ocare evinces that he is not familiar with the constitution.


Can Trump appoint a special legislative Assistant for Schumer so that in the future he knows to vote to repeal Ocare?


.

You seem to be forget one thing. This is all being done within the executive branch. No one in congress or a court appointed Muller.

.

You seem to forget one HUGE thing


The PRESIDENT has exclusive authority to determine what goes on within the executive branch.


If he didn't want to investigate the Russian scam he didn't have to.


Its up to Congress to use their constitutional authority to investigate/impeach/try.


.

You're right, and both would be acting within their constitutional authority. In this case congress asked the executive to appoint a special counsel and they did, all done within the executive branch, nothing unconstitutional about that.

.

CONGRESS HAS TO ASK THE PRESIDENT, NOT AN UNDERLING, TO APPOINT A SPECIAL COUNSEL. IF THE PRESIDENT REFUSES THAT'S THE END OF THE ISSUE.


.

 

[JonKoch]

Congress has oversight.

No, it doesn't.

If one branch can interfere with another can

Trump appoint a special law clerk assigned to justice Roberts since obviously his ruling upholding Ocare evinces that he is not familiar with the constitution.


Can Trump appoint a special legislative Assistant for Schumer so that in the future he knows to vote to repeal Ocare?


.

You seem to be forget one thing. This is all being done within the executive branch. No one in congress or a court appointed Muller.

.

You seem to forget one HUGE thing


The PRESIDENT has exclusive authority to determine what goes on within the executive branch.


If he didn't want to investigate the Russian scam he didn't have to.


Its up to Congress to use their constitutional authority to investigate/impeach/try.


.

You're right, and both would be acting within their constitutional authority. In this case congress asked the executive to appoint a special counsel and they did, all done within the executive branch, nothing unconstitutional about that.

.

CONGRESS HAS TO ASK THE PRESIDENT, NOT AN UNDERLING, TO APPOINT A SPECIAL COUNSEL. IF THE PRESIDENT REFUSES THAT'S THE END OF THE ISSUE.


.

The code of federal regulations provides that the attorney general will appoint a special counsel when the attorney general "determines that criminal investigation is warranted and that an investigation by the Justice Department would present a conflict of interest 'or other extraordinary circumstance' and that 'under the circumstances it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside special counsel."

What is a special counsel? - CNNPolitics.com

 

[JonKoch]

The Constitution authorizes three branches of government independent and co-equal.

It does not authorize one branch to interfere with another .branch.

Congress has oversight.

No, it doesn't.

If one branch can interfere with another can

Trump appoint a special law clerk assigned to justice Roberts since obviously his ruling upholding Ocare evinces that he is not familiar with the constitution.


Can Trump appoint a special legislative Assistant for Schumer so that in the future he knows to vote to repeal Ocare?


.

You seem to be forget one thing. This is all being done within the executive branch. No one in congress or a court appointed Muller.

.

You seem to forget one HUGE thing


The PRESIDENT has exclusive authority to determine what goes on within the executive branch.


If he didn't want to investigate the Russian scam he didn't have to.


Its up to Congress to use their constitutional authority to investigate/impeach/try.


.

You're right, and both would be acting within their constitutional authority. In this case congress asked the executive to appoint a special counsel and they did, all done within the executive branch, nothing unconstitutional about that.

.

Summary of U.S. Special Prosecutor Rules
Summary of U.S. Special Prosecutor Rules

 

[OKTexas]

No, it doesn't.

If one branch can interfere with another can

Trump appoint a special law clerk assigned to justice Roberts since obviously his ruling upholding Ocare evinces that he is not familiar with the constitution.


Can Trump appoint a special legislative Assistant for Schumer so that in the future he knows to vote to repeal Ocare?


.

You seem to be forget one thing. This is all being done within the executive branch. No one in congress or a court appointed Muller.

.

You seem to forget one HUGE thing


The PRESIDENT has exclusive authority to determine what goes on within the executive branch.


If he didn't want to investigate the Russian scam he didn't have to.


Its up to Congress to use their constitutional authority to investigate/impeach/try.


.

You're right, and both would be acting within their constitutional authority. In this case congress asked the executive to appoint a special counsel and they did, all done within the executive branch, nothing unconstitutional about that.

.

CONGRESS HAS TO ASK THE PRESIDENT, NOT AN UNDERLING, TO APPOINT A SPECIAL COUNSEL. IF THE PRESIDENT REFUSES THAT'S THE END OF THE ISSUE.


.

The code of federal regulations provides that the attorney general will appoint a special counsel when the attorney general "determines that criminal investigation is warranted and that an investigation by the Justice Department would present a conflict of interest 'or other extraordinary circumstance' and that 'under the circumstances it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside special counsel."

What is a special counsel? - CNNPolitics.com

And if you note, the desecration remains within the executive branch.

.

 

[JonKoch]

You seem to be forget one thing. This is all being done within the executive branch. No one in congress or a court appointed Muller.

.

You seem to forget one HUGE thing


The PRESIDENT has exclusive authority to determine what goes on within the executive branch.


If he didn't want to investigate the Russian scam he didn't have to.


Its up to Congress to use their constitutional authority to investigate/impeach/try.


.

You're right, and both would be acting within their constitutional authority. In this case congress asked the executive to appoint a special counsel and they did, all done within the executive branch, nothing unconstitutional about that.

.

CONGRESS HAS TO ASK THE PRESIDENT, NOT AN UNDERLING, TO APPOINT A SPECIAL COUNSEL. IF THE PRESIDENT REFUSES THAT'S THE END OF THE ISSUE.


.

The code of federal regulations provides that the attorney general will appoint a special counsel when the attorney general "determines that criminal investigation is warranted and that an investigation by the Justice Department would present a conflict of interest 'or other extraordinary circumstance' and that 'under the circumstances it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside special counsel."

What is a special counsel? - CNNPolitics.com

And if you note, the desecration remains within the executive branch.

.

Yeah, that's how it works, AG, DOJ, FBI, etc are within the Executive Branch which is why when there were warnings to Ronnie Reagan about the S&L crisis and Dubya about the subprime bubble, they ignored or fought them

 

[OKTexas]

Congress has oversight.

No, it doesn't.

If one branch can interfere with another can

Trump appoint a special law clerk assigned to justice Roberts since obviously his ruling upholding Ocare evinces that he is not familiar with the constitution.


Can Trump appoint a special legislative Assistant for Schumer so that in the future he knows to vote to repeal Ocare?


.

You seem to be forget one thing. This is all being done within the executive branch. No one in congress or a court appointed Muller.

.

You seem to forget one HUGE thing


The PRESIDENT has exclusive authority to determine what goes on within the executive branch.


If he didn't want to investigate the Russian scam he didn't have to.


Its up to Congress to use their constitutional authority to investigate/impeach/try.


.

You're right, and both would be acting within their constitutional authority. In this case congress asked the executive to appoint a special counsel and they did, all done within the executive branch, nothing unconstitutional about that.

.

Summary of U.S. Special Prosecutor Rules
Summary of U.S. Special Prosecutor Rules

From you link:

Stage Three: "Special Counsel" f 1999-Presentl

Current U.S. practice is governed by the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Chapter 6. The CFR eliminates the judicial "Special Division" provided for by the EGA, the concept of "covered persons" and the opportunity for Congress to request that an independent counsel be appointed. In general, it provides the AG much wider discretion in deciding whether to appoint an independent prosecutor and gives the AG much greater influence over the investigation than the EGA. The main provisions of the CFR relating to the appointment of a Special Counsel are the following:

Is that your point?

.

 

[OKTexas]

You seem to forget one HUGE thing


The PRESIDENT has exclusive authority to determine what goes on within the executive branch.


If he didn't want to investigate the Russian scam he didn't have to.


Its up to Congress to use their constitutional authority to investigate/impeach/try.


.

You're right, and both would be acting within their constitutional authority. In this case congress asked the executive to appoint a special counsel and they did, all done within the executive branch, nothing unconstitutional about that.

.

CONGRESS HAS TO ASK THE PRESIDENT, NOT AN UNDERLING, TO APPOINT A SPECIAL COUNSEL. IF THE PRESIDENT REFUSES THAT'S THE END OF THE ISSUE.


.

The code of federal regulations provides that the attorney general will appoint a special counsel when the attorney general "determines that criminal investigation is warranted and that an investigation by the Justice Department would present a conflict of interest 'or other extraordinary circumstance' and that 'under the circumstances it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside special counsel."

What is a special counsel? - CNNPolitics.com

And if you note, the desecration remains within the executive branch.

.

Yeah, that's how it works, AG, DOJ, FBI, etc are within the Executive Branch which is why when there were warnings to Ronnie Reagan about the S&L crisis and Dubya about the subprime bubble, they ignored or fought them

Damn you're good at revisionist history, I could post numerous videos of Barney the Frank sucker and other commiecrats, proclaiming that Freddie and Fannie were doing just fine despite the warnings from the administration that something had to be done. Now do try to stay on topic.

.

 

[JonKoch]

You're right, and both would be acting within their constitutional authority. In this case congress asked the executive to appoint a special counsel and they did, all done within the executive branch, nothing unconstitutional about that.

.

CONGRESS HAS TO ASK THE PRESIDENT, NOT AN UNDERLING, TO APPOINT A SPECIAL COUNSEL. IF THE PRESIDENT REFUSES THAT'S THE END OF THE ISSUE.


.

The code of federal regulations provides that the attorney general will appoint a special counsel when the attorney general "determines that criminal investigation is warranted and that an investigation by the Justice Department would present a conflict of interest 'or other extraordinary circumstance' and that 'under the circumstances it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside special counsel."

What is a special counsel? - CNNPolitics.com

And if you note, the desecration remains within the executive branch.

.

Yeah, that's how it works, AG, DOJ, FBI, etc are within the Executive Branch which is why when there were warnings to Ronnie Reagan about the S&L crisis and Dubya about the subprime bubble, they ignored or fought them

Damn you're good at revisionist history, I could post numerous videos of Barney the Frank sucker and other commiecrats, proclaiming that Freddie and Fannie were doing just fine despite the warnings from the administration that something had to be done. Now do try to stay on topic.

.

You mean just repeating what the Bush admin told them?

Bush talked about reform. He talked and he talked. And then he stopped reform. (read that as many times as necessary. Bush stopped reform). And then he stopped it again

Testimony from W's Treasury Secretary John Snow to the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS concerning the 'regulation of the GSE's 2004

Mr.BARNEY Frank: ...Are we in a crisis now with these entities?

Secretary Snow. No, that is a fair characterization, Congressman Frank, of our position. We are not putting this proposal before you because of some concern over some imminent danger to the financial system for housing; far from it.

October 26, 2005

STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY

The Administration strongly believes that the housing GSEs should be focused on their core housing mission, particularly with respect to low-income Americans and first-time homebuyers. Instead, provisions of H.R. 1461 that expand mortgage purchasing authority would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers.

George W. Bush: Statement of Administration Policy: H.R. 1461 - Federal Housing Finance Reform Act of 2005

Yes, he said he was against it because it "would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers"


THAT WAS THE ONLY BILL TO MAKE IT OUT OF EITHER HOUSE OF CONGRESS 2001-2007 ON F/F REFORM, YOU KNOW WHERE BARNEY FRANK THE MINORITY MEMBER HAD ZERO POWER TO STOP A SINGLE BILL?




June 17, 2004

(CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.

Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004


BUT NO, THOUGH BUSH CRUSHED F/F (AS REGULATOR), THE GSE'S DIDN'T CAUSE THE BUSH SUBPRIME CRISIS


Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis


The "turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007," the President's Working Group on Financial Markets
Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis


GSE Critics Ignore Loan Performance

There is no data anywhere to cast doubt on the vastly superior loan performance of the GSEs. Year after year, decade after decade, before, during and after the housing crash, GSE loan performance has consistently been two-to-six times better than that of any other segment of the market. The numbers are irrefutable, and they show that the entire case against GSE underwriting standards, and their role in the financial crisis, is based on social stereotyping, smoke and mirrors, and little else.

GSE Critics Ignore Loan Performance

 

[JonKoch]

You're right, and both would be acting within their constitutional authority. In this case congress asked the executive to appoint a special counsel and they did, all done within the executive branch, nothing unconstitutional about that.

.

CONGRESS HAS TO ASK THE PRESIDENT, NOT AN UNDERLING, TO APPOINT A SPECIAL COUNSEL. IF THE PRESIDENT REFUSES THAT'S THE END OF THE ISSUE.


.

The code of federal regulations provides that the attorney general will appoint a special counsel when the attorney general "determines that criminal investigation is warranted and that an investigation by the Justice Department would present a conflict of interest 'or other extraordinary circumstance' and that 'under the circumstances it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside special counsel."

What is a special counsel? - CNNPolitics.com

And if you note, the desecration remains within the executive branch.

.

Yeah, that's how it works, AG, DOJ, FBI, etc are within the Executive Branch which is why when there were warnings to Ronnie Reagan about the S&L crisis and Dubya about the subprime bubble, they ignored or fought them

Damn you're good at revisionist history, I could post numerous videos of Barney the Frank sucker and other commiecrats, proclaiming that Freddie and Fannie were doing just fine despite the warnings from the administration that something had to be done. Now do try to stay on topic.

.

DUBYA FOUGHT ALL 50 STATE AG'S IN 2003, INVOKING A CIVIL WAR ERA RULE SAYING FEDS RULE ON "PREDATORY" LENDERS!



"The FBI correctly identified the epidemic of mortgage control fraud at such an early point that the financial crisis could have been averted had the Bush administration acted with even minimal competence." William K. Black Sr. regulator during S&L debacle

The Two Documents Everyone Should Read to Better Understand the Crisis | HuffPost




FBI saw threat of loan crisis - Los Angeles Times

A top official warned of widening mortgage fraud in 2004, but the agency focused its resources elsewhere.


"It has the potential to be an epidemic,"... "We think we can prevent a problem that could have as much impact as the S&L crisis,"

They ended up with fewer resources, rather than more.

FBI saw threat of loan crisis



Shockingly, the FBI clearly makes the case for the need to combat mortgage fraud in 2005, the height of the housing crisis:

Financial Crimes Report to the Public 2005

The Bush Rubber Stamp Congress ignored the obvious and extremely detailed and well reported crime spree by the FBI.

THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION and GOP CONGRESS stripped the White Collar Crime divisions of money and manpower.

Financial Crimes Report 2005 — FBI

"Those selling the CDS's would not have been able to sell them if they had been required by regulators to maintain standard insurance reserves."

"We certainly don't want there to be a fine print preventing people from owning their home" , the President(DUBYA) said in a 2002 speech. "We can change the print, and we've got to."

 

[OKTexas]

CONGRESS HAS TO ASK THE PRESIDENT, NOT AN UNDERLING, TO APPOINT A SPECIAL COUNSEL. IF THE PRESIDENT REFUSES THAT'S THE END OF THE ISSUE.


.

The code of federal regulations provides that the attorney general will appoint a special counsel when the attorney general "determines that criminal investigation is warranted and that an investigation by the Justice Department would present a conflict of interest 'or other extraordinary circumstance' and that 'under the circumstances it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside special counsel."

What is a special counsel? - CNNPolitics.com

And if you note, the desecration remains within the executive branch.

.

Yeah, that's how it works, AG, DOJ, FBI, etc are within the Executive Branch which is why when there were warnings to Ronnie Reagan about the S&L crisis and Dubya about the subprime bubble, they ignored or fought them

Damn you're good at revisionist history, I could post numerous videos of Barney the Frank sucker and other commiecrats, proclaiming that Freddie and Fannie were doing just fine despite the warnings from the administration that something had to be done. Now do try to stay on topic.

.

You mean just repeating what the Bush admin told them?

Bush talked about reform. He talked and he talked. And then he stopped reform. (read that as many times as necessary. Bush stopped reform). And then he stopped it again

Testimony from W's Treasury Secretary John Snow to the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS concerning the 'regulation of the GSE's 2004

Mr.BARNEY Frank: ...Are we in a crisis now with these entities?

Secretary Snow. No, that is a fair characterization, Congressman Frank, of our position. We are not putting this proposal before you because of some concern over some imminent danger to the financial system for housing; far from it.

October 26, 2005

STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY

The Administration strongly believes that the housing GSEs should be focused on their core housing mission, particularly with respect to low-income Americans and first-time homebuyers. Instead, provisions of H.R. 1461 that expand mortgage purchasing authority would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers.

George W. Bush: Statement of Administration Policy: H.R. 1461 - Federal Housing Finance Reform Act of 2005

Yes, he said he was against it because it "would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers"


THAT WAS THE ONLY BILL TO MAKE IT OUT OF EITHER HOUSE OF CONGRESS 2001-2007 ON F/F REFORM, YOU KNOW WHERE BARNEY FRANK THE MINORITY MEMBER HAD ZERO POWER TO STOP A SINGLE BILL?




June 17, 2004

(CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.

Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004


BUT NO, THOUGH BUSH CRUSHED F/F (AS REGULATOR), THE GSE'S DIDN'T CAUSE THE BUSH SUBPRIME CRISIS


Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis


The "turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007," the President's Working Group on Financial Markets
Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis


GSE Critics Ignore Loan Performance

There is no data anywhere to cast doubt on the vastly superior loan performance of the GSEs. Year after year, decade after decade, before, during and after the housing crash, GSE loan performance has consistently been two-to-six times better than that of any other segment of the market. The numbers are irrefutable, and they show that the entire case against GSE underwriting standards, and their role in the financial crisis, is based on social stereotyping, smoke and mirrors, and little else.

GSE Critics Ignore Loan Performance

Setting the Record Straight: Six Years of Unheeded Warnings for GSE Reform

Setting the Record Straight: Six Years of Unheeded Warnings for GSE Reform

.

 

[Esmeralda]

Department of Justice
Office of Public Affairs
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, May 17, 2017
Appointment of Special Counsel
Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein today announced the appointment of former Department of Justice official and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III to serve as Special Counsel to oversee the previously-confirmed FBI investigation of Russian government efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election and related matters.



“In my capacity as acting Attorney General, I determined that it is in the public interest for me to exercise my authority and appoint a Special Counsel to assume responsibility for this matter,” said Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein. “My decision is not a finding that crimes have been committed or that any prosecution is warranted. I have made no such determination. What I have determined is that based upon the unique circumstances, the public interest requires me to place this investigation under the authority of a person who exercises a degree of independence from the normal chain of command.”



Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein added, “Each year, the career professionals of the U.S. Department of Justice conduct tens of thousands of criminal investigations and handle countless other matters without regard to partisan political considerations. I have great confidence in the independence and integrity of our people and our processes. Considering the unique circumstances of this matter, however, I determined that a Special Counsel is necessary in order for the American people to have full confidence in the outcome. Our nation is grounded on the rule of law, and the public must be assured that government officials administer the law fairly. Special Counsel Mueller will have all appropriate resources to conduct a thorough and complete investigation, and I am confident that he will follow the facts, apply the law and reach a just result.”



Special Counsel Mueller has agreed to resign from his private law firm in order to avoid any conflicts of interest with firm clients or attorneys.



A copy of the order is attached.

_---------------__________--------------________


The Constitution authorizes three branches of government independent and co-equal.

It does not authorize one branch to interfere with another .branch.

But SCOTUS, again, took it upon itself to amend the constitution in order to allow the judiciary to interfere with powers of the executive branch, Morrison v. Olson, 487 U.S. 654, 699, 108 S.Ct. 2597, 101 L.Ed.2d 569 (1988) (Scalia, J., dissenting).

That case ought to be reversed. And the Constitution restored.

.

LOL Got you running scared.

 

[Synthaholic]

Oh, that's right: you're the "libertarian" who defends Trump. I'd ask "how's that working out for you?" but the ALL CAPS already tell me all I need to know.

We were given 2 choices on Nov 2016.

We were forced to select the lesser of two evils.


I have a problem when career bureaucrats and civil servants get to stick it to the person who threatens their jobs and agendas.

Had Ron Paul won he would been a greater threat to the swamp than DJT. Imagine what they would have done to him.


.

Trump has filled the swamp, not drained it. He hired 3 Goldman-Sachs bigwigs. But at least he didn't give a speech to them.

Imagine if Trump had nominated Dr Paul. He would have been shot on the spot..

The deep state has adopted a policy which states" the swamp shall not be drained"


.

Are you trying to sell the idea that unseen forces made Trump pick 3 Goldman Sachs executives to be part of his administration?

 

[JonKoch]

The code of federal regulations provides that the attorney general will appoint a special counsel when the attorney general "determines that criminal investigation is warranted and that an investigation by the Justice Department would present a conflict of interest 'or other extraordinary circumstance' and that 'under the circumstances it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside special counsel."

What is a special counsel? - CNNPolitics.com

And if you note, the desecration remains within the executive branch.

.

Yeah, that's how it works, AG, DOJ, FBI, etc are within the Executive Branch which is why when there were warnings to Ronnie Reagan about the S&L crisis and Dubya about the subprime bubble, they ignored or fought them

Damn you're good at revisionist history, I could post numerous videos of Barney the Frank sucker and other commiecrats, proclaiming that Freddie and Fannie were doing just fine despite the warnings from the administration that something had to be done. Now do try to stay on topic.

.

You mean just repeating what the Bush admin told them?

Bush talked about reform. He talked and he talked. And then he stopped reform. (read that as many times as necessary. Bush stopped reform). And then he stopped it again

Testimony from W's Treasury Secretary John Snow to the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS concerning the 'regulation of the GSE's 2004

Mr.BARNEY Frank: ...Are we in a crisis now with these entities?

Secretary Snow. No, that is a fair characterization, Congressman Frank, of our position. We are not putting this proposal before you because of some concern over some imminent danger to the financial system for housing; far from it.

October 26, 2005

STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY

The Administration strongly believes that the housing GSEs should be focused on their core housing mission, particularly with respect to low-income Americans and first-time homebuyers. Instead, provisions of H.R. 1461 that expand mortgage purchasing authority would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers.

George W. Bush: Statement of Administration Policy: H.R. 1461 - Federal Housing Finance Reform Act of 2005

Yes, he said he was against it because it "would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers"


THAT WAS THE ONLY BILL TO MAKE IT OUT OF EITHER HOUSE OF CONGRESS 2001-2007 ON F/F REFORM, YOU KNOW WHERE BARNEY FRANK THE MINORITY MEMBER HAD ZERO POWER TO STOP A SINGLE BILL?




June 17, 2004

(CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.

Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004


BUT NO, THOUGH BUSH CRUSHED F/F (AS REGULATOR), THE GSE'S DIDN'T CAUSE THE BUSH SUBPRIME CRISIS


Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis


The "turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007," the President's Working Group on Financial Markets
Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis


GSE Critics Ignore Loan Performance

There is no data anywhere to cast doubt on the vastly superior loan performance of the GSEs. Year after year, decade after decade, before, during and after the housing crash, GSE loan performance has consistently been two-to-six times better than that of any other segment of the market. The numbers are irrefutable, and they show that the entire case against GSE underwriting standards, and their role in the financial crisis, is based on social stereotyping, smoke and mirrors, and little else.

GSE Critics Ignore Loan Performance

Setting the Record Straight: Six Years of Unheeded Warnings for GSE Reform

Setting the Record Straight: Six Years of Unheeded Warnings for GSE Reform

.

Oh I get Buba, you are one of those brain down CONservatives who are swayed by out of context BS excuses and ignore reality as long as it fits into your world view *shaking head*


Bush talked about reform. He talked and he talked. And then he stopped reform. (read that as many times as necessary. Bush stopped reform). And then he stopped it again

Again, it's too bad that the GOP Congress would work with Dubya with 2 UNFUNDED tax cuts, 2 UNFUNDED wars, UNFUNDED Medicare expansion that CBO says cost as much as Obamacares 2013-2020, a law to get between a man and his wife (Schiavo), but wouldn't pass a GSE reform. Good thing the Dems got into power and got one passed right snowflake?

 

[JonKoch]

Oh, that's right: you're the "libertarian" who defends Trump. I'd ask "how's that working out for you?" but the ALL CAPS already tell me all I need to know.

We were given 2 choices on Nov 2016.

We were forced to select the lesser of two evils.


I have a problem when career bureaucrats and civil servants get to stick it to the person who threatens their jobs and agendas.

Had Ron Paul won he would been a greater threat to the swamp than DJT. Imagine what they would have done to him.


.

Trump has filled the swamp, not drained it. He hired 3 Goldman-Sachs bigwigs. But at least he didn't give a speech to them.

Imagine if Trump had nominated Dr Paul. He would have been shot on the spot..

The deep state has adopted a policy which states" the swamp shall not be drained"


.

Are you trying to sell the idea that unseen forces made Trump pick 3 Goldman Sachs executives to be part of his administration?

The Wall Street White House: Trump hires fifth Goldman Sachs staffer to the administration
The Wall Street White House: Trump hires fifth Goldman Sachs staffer to the administration

 

[bendog]

The "Special Counsel" Law is Patently Unconstitutional


surrrrrrre it is, that's why all of those Congressmen with law degrees haven't said fucking word about it.


YAWNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN.

Count doesn't track that the DOJ IS the exec branch. LOL

 

[OKTexas]

And if you note, the desecration remains within the executive branch.

.

Yeah, that's how it works, AG, DOJ, FBI, etc are within the Executive Branch which is why when there were warnings to Ronnie Reagan about the S&L crisis and Dubya about the subprime bubble, they ignored or fought them

Damn you're good at revisionist history, I could post numerous videos of Barney the Frank sucker and other commiecrats, proclaiming that Freddie and Fannie were doing just fine despite the warnings from the administration that something had to be done. Now do try to stay on topic.

.

You mean just repeating what the Bush admin told them?

Bush talked about reform. He talked and he talked. And then he stopped reform. (read that as many times as necessary. Bush stopped reform). And then he stopped it again

Testimony from W's Treasury Secretary John Snow to the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS concerning the 'regulation of the GSE's 2004

Mr.BARNEY Frank: ...Are we in a crisis now with these entities?

Secretary Snow. No, that is a fair characterization, Congressman Frank, of our position. We are not putting this proposal before you because of some concern over some imminent danger to the financial system for housing; far from it.

October 26, 2005

STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY

The Administration strongly believes that the housing GSEs should be focused on their core housing mission, particularly with respect to low-income Americans and first-time homebuyers. Instead, provisions of H.R. 1461 that expand mortgage purchasing authority would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers.

George W. Bush: Statement of Administration Policy: H.R. 1461 - Federal Housing Finance Reform Act of 2005

Yes, he said he was against it because it "would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers"


THAT WAS THE ONLY BILL TO MAKE IT OUT OF EITHER HOUSE OF CONGRESS 2001-2007 ON F/F REFORM, YOU KNOW WHERE BARNEY FRANK THE MINORITY MEMBER HAD ZERO POWER TO STOP A SINGLE BILL?




June 17, 2004

(CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.

Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004


BUT NO, THOUGH BUSH CRUSHED F/F (AS REGULATOR), THE GSE'S DIDN'T CAUSE THE BUSH SUBPRIME CRISIS


Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis


The "turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007," the President's Working Group on Financial Markets
Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis


GSE Critics Ignore Loan Performance

There is no data anywhere to cast doubt on the vastly superior loan performance of the GSEs. Year after year, decade after decade, before, during and after the housing crash, GSE loan performance has consistently been two-to-six times better than that of any other segment of the market. The numbers are irrefutable, and they show that the entire case against GSE underwriting standards, and their role in the financial crisis, is based on social stereotyping, smoke and mirrors, and little else.

GSE Critics Ignore Loan Performance

Setting the Record Straight: Six Years of Unheeded Warnings for GSE Reform

Setting the Record Straight: Six Years of Unheeded Warnings for GSE Reform

.

Oh I get Buba, you are one of those brain down CONservatives who are swayed by out of context BS excuses and ignore reality as long as it fits into your world view *shaking head*


Bush talked about reform. He talked and he talked. And then he stopped reform. (read that as many times as necessary. Bush stopped reform). And then he stopped it again

Again, it's too bad that the GOP Congress would work with Dubya with 2 UNFUNDED tax cuts, 2 UNFUNDED wars, UNFUNDED Medicare expansion that CBO says cost as much as Obamacares 2013-2020, a law to get between a man and his wife (Schiavo), but wouldn't pass a GSE reform. Good thing the Dems got into power and got one passed right snowflake?

You seem to have a link for everything except bush actually stopping reform and the reasons why. Why is that?

.

 

[JonKoch]

Yeah, that's how it works, AG, DOJ, FBI, etc are within the Executive Branch which is why when there were warnings to Ronnie Reagan about the S&L crisis and Dubya about the subprime bubble, they ignored or fought them

Damn you're good at revisionist history, I could post numerous videos of Barney the Frank sucker and other commiecrats, proclaiming that Freddie and Fannie were doing just fine despite the warnings from the administration that something had to be done. Now do try to stay on topic.

.

You mean just repeating what the Bush admin told them?

Bush talked about reform. He talked and he talked. And then he stopped reform. (read that as many times as necessary. Bush stopped reform). And then he stopped it again

Testimony from W's Treasury Secretary John Snow to the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS concerning the 'regulation of the GSE's 2004

Mr.BARNEY Frank: ...Are we in a crisis now with these entities?

Secretary Snow. No, that is a fair characterization, Congressman Frank, of our position. We are not putting this proposal before you because of some concern over some imminent danger to the financial system for housing; far from it.

October 26, 2005

STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY

The Administration strongly believes that the housing GSEs should be focused on their core housing mission, particularly with respect to low-income Americans and first-time homebuyers. Instead, provisions of H.R. 1461 that expand mortgage purchasing authority would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers.

George W. Bush: Statement of Administration Policy: H.R. 1461 - Federal Housing Finance Reform Act of 2005

Yes, he said he was against it because it "would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers"


THAT WAS THE ONLY BILL TO MAKE IT OUT OF EITHER HOUSE OF CONGRESS 2001-2007 ON F/F REFORM, YOU KNOW WHERE BARNEY FRANK THE MINORITY MEMBER HAD ZERO POWER TO STOP A SINGLE BILL?




June 17, 2004

(CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.

Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004


BUT NO, THOUGH BUSH CRUSHED F/F (AS REGULATOR), THE GSE'S DIDN'T CAUSE THE BUSH SUBPRIME CRISIS


Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis


The "turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007," the President's Working Group on Financial Markets
Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis


GSE Critics Ignore Loan Performance

There is no data anywhere to cast doubt on the vastly superior loan performance of the GSEs. Year after year, decade after decade, before, during and after the housing crash, GSE loan performance has consistently been two-to-six times better than that of any other segment of the market. The numbers are irrefutable, and they show that the entire case against GSE underwriting standards, and their role in the financial crisis, is based on social stereotyping, smoke and mirrors, and little else.

GSE Critics Ignore Loan Performance

Setting the Record Straight: Six Years of Unheeded Warnings for GSE Reform

Setting the Record Straight: Six Years of Unheeded Warnings for GSE Reform

.

Oh I get Buba, you are one of those brain down CONservatives who are swayed by out of context BS excuses and ignore reality as long as it fits into your world view *shaking head*


Bush talked about reform. He talked and he talked. And then he stopped reform. (read that as many times as necessary. Bush stopped reform). And then he stopped it again

Again, it's too bad that the GOP Congress would work with Dubya with 2 UNFUNDED tax cuts, 2 UNFUNDED wars, UNFUNDED Medicare expansion that CBO says cost as much as Obamacares 2013-2020, a law to get between a man and his wife (Schiavo), but wouldn't pass a GSE reform. Good thing the Dems got into power and got one passed right snowflake?

You seem to have a link for everything except bush actually stopping reform and the reasons why. Why is that?

.

HMM

"Strong opposition by the Bush administration forced a top Republican congressman to delay a vote on a bill that would create a new regulator for mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."

Oxley pulls Fannie, Freddie bill under heat from Bush - MarketWatch

Despite what appeared to be a broad consensus on GSE regulatory reform, efforts quickly stalled. A legislative markup scheduled for October 8, 2003, in the House of Representatives was halted because the Bush administration withdrew its support for the bill,
Oxley pulls bill under fire from Bush

(fyi, broad consensus means it would have probably passed. what happened to it again? oh yea bush stopped it)





He killed the *only* bill ever passed by the Republican controlled Congress. Gave it the one fingered salute, according the the Republican House Finance Chair:

He fumes about the criticism of his House colleagues. “All the handwringing and bedwetting is going on without remembering how the House stepped up on this,” he says. “What did we get from the White House? We got a one-finger salute.”





June 17, 2004

(CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.
Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004



HOLY COW! Bush forced them to lower their standards. If only somebody had warned us that Bush's policies would hurt Freddie and Fannie. Wait, somebody did.

Fannie, Freddie to Suffer Under New Rule, BARNEY Frank Says

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would suffer financially under a Bush administration requirement that they channel more mortgage financing to people with low incomes, said the senior Democrat on a congressional panel that sets regulations for the companies.
https://democrats-financialservices...s/112/06-17-04-new-fannie-goals-bloomberg.pdf

So if your narrative is "GSEs are to blame" then you have to blame bush



WITHOUT HOMEOWNERS USING THEIR HOMES AS ATM'S THE BUSH REGIME HAD LESS THAN 1% GROWTH EACH YEAR

The Economic Blue Screen of Death


Bush lifted the restrictions Clinton placed on the GSEs (2000) to limit their purchase of abusive subprime loans. Later in 2004, Bush would increase the GSE housing goals forcing them to buy more low income home loans and get them to buy $440 billion more MBS'S in the secondary market.

FACTS on Dubya's great recession



YOU KNOW WHY DUBYA NEEDED A HOUSING BUBBLE?



BUT DUBYA CLAIMED THOSE DARN DEMS STOPPED HIM FROM "REFORMING" F/F? LOL