Should a 2nd Special Counsel Be Created?

[MDM4AU 321]

This is an interesting opinion on the special investigations into Trump. It makes sense to me and I think it would go a long way with many people. We know it wouldn't satisfy everyone because anything short of the death penalty for some on the left or total canonization from some on the right will be a letdown.  

 

What say you?

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/06/19/we-need-robert-mueller-resignation-or-second-special-counsel-glenn-reynolds-column/102990890/

[bigbird 60,359]

Interesting indeed.  Some very good points were made.

[AuburnNTexas 7,124]

Mueller's friendship with Comey does go against the State departments rules on conflict of Interest. Even if he is a true straight arrow who could be impartial despite his friendship if he found obstruction it would look bad even if he was right. I like the idea of two different Special counsels.

[bigbird 60,359]

1 hour ago, AuburnNTexas said:

Mueller's friendship with Comey does go against the State departments rules on conflict of Interest. Even if he is a true straight arrow who could be impartial despite his friendship if he found obstruction it would look bad even if he was right. I like the idea of two different Special counsels.

Exactly,  if he found anything people would cry foul. A recusal is the only way to keep any impartiality and remove any appearance of impropriety.

[TexasTiger 12,782]

Interesting how he was initially praised as the perfect choice by the left and right until it became apparent he would do a thorough job. Now he's suspect.

[MDM4AU 321]

I never had much of an opinion of him, good or bad, to be honest. Do you disagree with the author? If so, why?

[homersapien 11,337]

On 6/20/2017 at 0:03 PM, bigbird said:

Exactly,  if he found anything people would cry foul. A recusal is the only way to keep any impartiality and remove any appearance of impropriety.

BS. If he finds "anything" it will stand on it's own merits.

The people who cry "foul" will be trying to change the subject.

[bigbird 60,359]

8 hours ago, homersapien said:

BS. If he finds "anything" it will stand on it's own merits.

The people who cry "foul" will be trying to change the subject.

Exactly. Any appearance of impropriety should be removed so that no one can cry foul. That's the point.

 

If you and I were neighbors and we had a boundary dispute, then I wouldn't want your friend, who might be the be all end all most upright surveyor in the world, doing the surveying. I'd want some expert from South Dakota doing it.   It takes away any ammunition I have to use against you if it doesn't go my way.  I would think that you would want that too.

[AuburnNTexas 7,124]

I like Mueller and I think he is honest but like Bigbird has said it is also about the appearance. Having him do the initial investigation on Russian collusion is fine. having him involved in an obstruction of justice where his friend Comey is a witness could give the appearance of an unfair investigation. By the way Comey might be the guy who clears Trump if he is innocent. Then  the Dems would be upset because they were friends.  When Comey hurt Hillary the Dems hated him and wanted him fired when the shoe is on the other foot the republicans hated him and in this case fired him.

It is better all around if we have somebody on the obstruction investigation that is not related in any way to witnesses in the investigation. If  they get a second counsel and that person has donated money to either Democrats or Republican I have no problem with that. You can prefer one party or the other and still be a straight shooter.

[TexasTiger 12,782]

23 hours ago, MDM4AU said:

I never had much of an opinion of him, good or bad, to be honest. Do you disagree with the author? If so, why?

No. The most Mueller does is lay out the case-- he's not the judge or factfinder. For Trump, the Republican House & Senate will both have to find the case very convincing. For Trump's associates, a jury would have to find them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt- that's a high bar. Any qualified person is going to have friends. He's probably as good as it gets.

[TexasTiger 12,782]

10 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

No. The most Mueller does is lay out the case-- he's not the judge or factfinder. For Trump, the Republican House & Senate will both have to find the case very convincing. For Trump's associates, a jury would have to find them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt- that's a high bar. Any qualified person is going to have friends. He's probably as good as it gets.

Besides, Trumpbots will dismiss any critical outcome regardless of the players involved. Dear Leader will so instruct.

[homersapien 11,337]

9 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Besides, Trumpbots will dismiss any critical outcome regardless of the players involved. Dear Leader will so instruct.

That was my point.

[MDM4AU 321]

10 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Besides, Trumpbots will dismiss any critical outcome regardless of the players involved. Dear Leader will so instruct.

Well, I pretty much addressed this in my OP. There will always be those that won't "buy" the outcome. You think the nut-bag-Left will be satisfied if Mueller comes back with nothing on Trump?

 

[WDavE 332]

Can we make all the investigators Republicans?

 

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/23/senate-announced-probe-loretta-lynch-behavior-2016/

[TexasTiger 12,782]

3 hours ago, MDM4AU said:

Well, I pretty much addressed this in my OP. There will always be those that won't "buy" the outcome. You think the nut-bag-Left will be satisfied if Mueller comes back with nothing on Trump?

 

Probably not, so why cater to anybody's nutjobs?

[TexasTiger 12,782]

2 hours ago, WDavE said:

Can we make all the investigators Republicans?

 

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/23/senate-announced-probe-loretta-lynch-behavior-2016/

The fact finders are already Republicans.