If Mueller was as close with Trump as he is with Comey

[Damocles]

A personal relationship almost always results in a recusal. As you say, for appearances sake.

Unless you are an Obama AG and meet with the former President and husband of the target of investigation (matter)...

 

[Darth Omar]

I'll take the word of legal and ethics experts over Breitbart.

"Friendship or no, a pre-existing relationship doesn’t mean that Mueller’s role in the investigation rises to the level of a legal conflict of interest that would require recusal, said Craig Holman, government affairs lobbyist for the accountability and transparency lobbying organization Public Citizen:

Conflict of interest means there’s some financial or pecuniary benefit that could come one’s way [as a result of an investigation]. For example, If I had worked at a business and business has something at stake, that’s a conflict. But just people being friends and knowing each other, that’s not a conflict."

​

This George Washington law professor sees an issue with it:

"The Mueller and Comey history in the Bush administration would have been enough for me to scratch off his name from the list of possible special counsels. As the obstruction allegations grew against Trump, so did the discomfort over Mueller’s connections to Comey. The White House has said that Mueller interviewed with Trump for the FBI position to replace Comey. The day before he was made special counsel. Presumably, if this conversation occurred, Trump may have explained why he fired Comey and what he was looking for in his replacement. With obstruction now confirmed as a focus of the special counsel investigation, that makes Mueller a possible witness. It certainly raises the issue of whether Trump shared any thoughts material to his firing of Comey.

Mueller was appointed under 28 CFR 600.7, which states that “[t]he Special Counsel may be disciplined or removed from office only by the personal action of the Attorney General. The Attorney General may remove a Special Counsel for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies.” If Mueller is a potential witness, recusal or termination would be warranted under that standard as a conflict.

None of this is meant to cast aspersions on Mueller. No one has questioned his integrity. However, this investigation is already being discussed as the possible basis for the indictment or impeachment of a president. There should be no questions of motivation or bias as part of such an investigation. There are roughly 1.2 million lawyers in this country. Indeed, in Washington, you can throw a stick on any corner and hit ten out of the over 50,000 lawyers in the city."

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-bl...if-rosenstein-recuses-himself-mueller-may-not
_______________

'Best friends' is a strawman.

You don't need to watch football games or hang out most weekends with someone you are closely associated with professionally or on your job.

The professor nailed it and it's plain for the world to see: the SP is closely associated with a potential star witness in the investigation.

That's a WTF!?

Part of me hopes they go ahead with it because if Mueller starts getting outside pressure to recuse himself and he does it after the ball is rolling, the whole thing could fall apart.

 

[christiefan915]

He won. You lost. I see you're having lots of trouble getting over it. You're not alone, dear.

I've been over Hillary since 11/9 but you people won't let us forget her because you bring her up every single day. However we recognize it as a deflection from trump and his growing number of problems.

 

[GazzaQueen]

I've been over Hillary since 11/9 but you people won't let us forget her because you bring her up every single day. However we recognize it as a deflection from trump and his growing number of problems.

You want the POTUS to have problems because he beat the shingles off of the ancient crone. Get over it. She lost.

 

[christiefan915]

This George Washington law professor sees an issue with it:

"The Mueller and Comey history in the Bush administration would have been enough for me to scratch off his name from the list of possible special counsels. As the obstruction allegations grew against Trump, so did the discomfort over Mueller’s connections to Comey. The White House has said that Mueller interviewed with Trump for the FBI position to replace Comey. The day before he was made special counsel. Presumably, if this conversation occurred, Trump may have explained why he fired Comey and what he was looking for in his replacement. With obstruction now confirmed as a focus of the special counsel investigation, that makes Mueller a possible witness. It certainly raises the issue of whether Trump shared any thoughts material to his firing of Comey.

Mueller was appointed under 28 CFR 600.7, which states that “[t]he Special Counsel may be disciplined or removed from office only by the personal action of the Attorney General. The Attorney General may remove a Special Counsel for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies.” If Mueller is a potential witness, recusal or termination would be warranted under that standard as a conflict.

None of this is meant to cast aspersions on Mueller. No one has questioned his integrity. However, this investigation is already being discussed as the possible basis for the indictment or impeachment of a president. There should be no questions of motivation or bias as part of such an investigation. There are roughly 1.2 million lawyers in this country. Indeed, in Washington, you can throw a stick on any corner and hit ten out of the over 50,000 lawyers in the city."

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-bl...if-rosenstein-recuses-himself-mueller-may-not
_______________

'Best friends' is a strawman.

You don't need to watch football games or hang out most weekends with someone you are closely associated with professionally or on your job.

The professor nailed it and it's plain for the world to see: the SP is closely associated with a potential star witness in the investigation.

That's a WTF!?

Part of me hopes they go ahead with it because if Mueller starts getting outside pressure to recuse himself and he does it after the ball is rolling, the whole thing could fall apart.

Comey, Rosenstein and Mueller all have sterling credentials and a record of unbiased decisions. Rosenstein was confirmed by the Senate 94-6, not even close to being controversial.

Let's look at the real problem here. Comey, under oath, called trump a liar. Rosenstein testified he wouldn't fire Mueller without cause, trump's wishes notwithstanding. And Mueller is heading the investigation into trump.

All of these people showed their independent streak and that doesn't fly with trump. He wants an administration filled with yes-men who will swear loyalty to him. That's not the way the law works. Justice is supposed to be blind.

 

[christiefan915]

You want the POTUS to have problems because he beat the shingles off of the ancient crone. Get over it. She lost.

Nah, beating her has nothing to do with it. If it were president Rubio or president Sanders we wouldn't be having this debacle. trump makes his own problems and he's too dumb to realize it. He can't get beyond the fact that he's answerable to the people and no longer the CEO of companies where people answer to him.

 

[Cancel 2018.2]

I've been over Hillary since 11/9 but you people won't let us forget her because you bring her up every single day. However we recognize it as a deflection from trump and his growing number of problems.

Hillary represented three million more Americans than trump did. And it's still killing him.

Liar.

 

[GazzaQueen]

Nah, beating her has nothing to do with it. If it were president Rubio or president Sanders we wouldn't be having this debacle. trump makes his own problems and he's too dumb to realize it. He can't get beyond the fact that he's answerable to the people and no longer the CEO of companies where people answer to him.

You're not the only Democrat who is having trouble coping. It's a difficult time for you.

 

[christiefan915]

Liar.

Oh for god's sake are you drunk? That was a statement of fact about trump's thin-skinned whining, not an argument that she should have been president, trump toady.

 

[christiefan915]

You're not the only Democrat who is having trouble coping. It's a difficult time for you.

You're not the only trump toady who would support him if he stood on Fifth Avenue and shot somebody dead. No ethics, Miss Cleo.

 

[Airstrip One]

You want the POTUS to have problems because he beat the shingles off of the ancient crone. Get over it. She lost.

I think Douchebag Donald could have beaten Scoop Jackson, and I would still be happy not to have the DNC's nominee become president. But the POTUS would still be creating all manner of chaos to fend off.

 

[GazzaQueen]

You're not the only trump toady who would support him if he stood on Fifth Avenue and shot somebody dead. No ethics, Miss Cleo.

Anyone who voted for that losing lady needs to take an ethics class, christiefan915.

 

[GazzaQueen]

I think Douchebag Donald could have beaten Scoop Jackson, and I would still be happy not to have the DNC's nominee become president. But the POTUS would still be creating all manner of chaos to fend off.

That's why they voted for him. It was either no experience Donald or the most qualified person to ever run for the office of the Presidency.

Americans, being Americans, chose the wild man overwhelmingly.

 

[Cancel 2018.2]

Oh for god's sake are you drunk? That was a statement of fact about trump's thin-skinned whining, not an argument that she should have been president, trump toady.

If you were truly over Hillary, why make the argument? Toad.

 

[christiefan915]

If you were truly over Hillary, why make the argument? Toad.

There was no argument, moron. There was a response about the popular vote.