I am not alone in my thought that Meuller must resign

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
OPINION
Byron York: Is Robert Mueller conflicted in Trump probe?
by Byron York | Jun 11, 2017, 11:09 PM
Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Email this article Share on LinkedIn

Fired FBI Director James Comey has emerged as the main figure in what some Democrats believe will be an obstruction of justice case against President Trump in the Trump-Russia matter. Comey's stories of conversations with the president, plus the fact that he was fired, ostensibly as a result of the Russia probe, make him potentially the star witness in the case.

Which brings up an intriguing legal question. Comey is a good friend of special counsel Robert Mueller — such a good friend, for about 15 years now, that the two men have been described as "brothers in arms." Their work together during the controversies over Bush-era terrorist surveillance has been characterized as "deepening a friendship forged in the crucible of the highest levels of the national security apparatus after the 9/11 attacks," after which the men became "close partners and close allies throughout the years ahead."

Now Mueller is investigating the Trump-Russia affair, in which, if the increasing buzz in the case is correct, allegations of obstruction against the president will be central. And central to those allegations — the key witness — will be the prosecutor's good friend, the now-aggrieved former FBI director.

Is that a conflict? Should a prosecutor pursue a case in which the star witness is a close friend? And when the friend is not only a witness but also arguably a victim — of firing — by the target of the investigation? And when the prosecutor might also be called on to investigate some of his friend's actions? The case would be difficult enough even without the complicating friendship.

This is by no means a definitive answer, but I put that question to five Washington lawyers Sunday — lawyers in private practice, on Capitol Hill, in think tanks, some of them veterans of the Justice Department. The verdict came back mixed. But the answers made clear this is a question that will have to be answered in the course of the Mueller investigation.

"This is very odd," said one big-firm lawyer and Justice Department veteran Sunday:

An ordinary prosecutor would turn this over to someone uninvolved, and there would be lots of candidates. That is particularly so here where Comey is not just the star witness but a potential target. That said, I doubt anyone outside can or should do anything here. Mueller should resign, but if he chooses not to — either on the theory he can handle the conflict, or on the theory it is such a mess he should just persevere — the attorney general should not fire him. As to how Mueller might handle, he could announce that the Comey part of the case will be handled by someone else within his office, but that is complex and not very satisfactory.

On the other hand, from another big-firm lawyer and Justice Department veteran:

I don't see any problem with a prosecutor being a friend of a potential witness. It's hard to imagine a scenario, for example, where information acquired as part of a friendship would impair the prosecutor's ability to do his or her job or, alternatively, improperly influence the witness' testimony. I expect, in any event, that any interview of Comey would be very much a group effort on the part of Mueller's team, so that his personal relationship with Comey would hardly be an issue.

From a Capitol Hill veteran now in private practice:

They [Comey and Mueller] have a mutual admiration society. Mueller should hire another prosecutor to deal with Comey. But Comey is central to their case, so it infects the whole prosecution. Could [a close colleague] investigate me? No, he would recuse. But Mueller's stature is great, and he may be able to overcome it.

From another Justice Department veteran:

I think it raises a serious conflict of interest that would normally require the prosecutor to recuse himself from the case.

And finally, from another Hill lawyer:

It's somewhat ironic, no? I mean, the whole purpose of the special counsel is to have a prosecutor from outside the government and outside of the normal chain of command because inherent conflicts render the Justice Department incapable of handling it. So, now the special counsel is a close friend (mentor/mentee relationship) with the star witness, who by his own admission leaked the memos at least in part to engineer the appointment of a special counsel. Only in Washington. You can't make this stuff up.
 

WVUCOOPER

Redshirt
Dec 10, 2002
55,555
40
31
OPINION
Byron York: Is Robert Mueller conflicted in Trump probe?
by Byron York | Jun 11, 2017, 11:09 PM
Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Email this article Share on LinkedIn









































Highlights From Comey's Testimony
Washington Examiner







Your content starts in 10 seconds





Autoplay: On | Off
Recommended for You

Byron York: Five notes on Trump's current predicament


How many times did Attorney General Jeff Sessions meet with Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak?


Carter Page: Committees have 'completely blocked' me from testifying


The mainstream media should shut up and listen for awhile


Preet Bharara: 'Absolutely evidence' to begin obstruction case against Trump




Fired FBI Director James Comey has emerged as the main figure in what some Democrats believe will be an obstruction of justice case against President Trump in the Trump-Russia matter. Comey's stories of conversations with the president, plus the fact that he was fired, ostensibly as a result of the Russia probe, make him potentially the star witness in the case.

Which brings up an intriguing legal question. Comey is a good friend of special counsel Robert Mueller — such a good friend, for about 15 years now, that the two men have been described as "brothers in arms." Their work together during the controversies over Bush-era terrorist surveillance has been characterized as "deepening a friendship forged in the crucible of the highest levels of the national security apparatus after the 9/11 attacks," after which the men became "close partners and close allies throughout the years ahead."







Week Twenty of the Trump White House in Review
Watch Full Screen
Now Mueller is investigating the Trump-Russia affair, in which, if the increasing buzz in the case is correct, allegations of obstruction against the president will be central. And central to those allegations — the key witness — will be the prosecutor's good friend, the now-aggrieved former FBI director.

Is that a conflict? Should a prosecutor pursue a case in which the star witness is a close friend? And when the friend is not only a witness but also arguably a victim — of firing — by the target of the investigation? And when the prosecutor might also be called on to investigate some of his friend's actions? The case would be difficult enough even without the complicating friendship.

This is by no means a definitive answer, but I put that question to five Washington lawyers Sunday — lawyers in private practice, on Capitol Hill, in think tanks, some of them veterans of the Justice Department. The verdict came back mixed. But the answers made clear this is a question that will have to be answered in the course of the Mueller investigation.

"This is very odd," said one big-firm lawyer and Justice Department veteran Sunday:

An ordinary prosecutor would turn this over to someone uninvolved, and there would be lots of candidates. That is particularly so here where Comey is not just the star witness but a potential target. That said, I doubt anyone outside can or should do anything here. Mueller should resign, but if he chooses not to — either on the theory he can handle the conflict, or on the theory it is such a mess he should just persevere — the attorney general should not fire him. As to how Mueller might handle, he could announce that the Comey part of the case will be handled by someone else within his office, but that is complex and not very satisfactory.

On the other hand, from another big-firm lawyer and Justice Department veteran:

I don't see any problem with a prosecutor being a friend of a potential witness. It's hard to imagine a scenario, for example, where information acquired as part of a friendship would impair the prosecutor's ability to do his or her job or, alternatively, improperly influence the witness' testimony. I expect, in any event, that any interview of Comey would be very much a group effort on the part of Mueller's team, so that his personal relationship with Comey would hardly be an issue.

From a Capitol Hill veteran now in private practice:

They [Comey and Mueller] have a mutual admiration society. Mueller should hire another prosecutor to deal with Comey. But Comey is central to their case, so it infects the whole prosecution. Could [a close colleague] investigate me? No, he would recuse. But Mueller's stature is great, and he may be able to overcome it.

From another Justice Department veteran:

I think it raises a serious conflict of interest that would normally require the prosecutor to recuse himself from the case.

And finally, from another Hill lawyer:

It's somewhat ironic, no? I mean, the whole purpose of the special counsel is to have a prosecutor from outside the government and outside of the normal chain of command because inherent conflicts render the Justice Department incapable of handling it. So, now the special counsel is a close friend (mentor/mentee relationship) with the star witness, who by his own admission leaked the memos at least in part to engineer the appointment of a special counsel. Only in Washington. You can't make this stuff up.
Yeah I think everyone had already assumed you got that thought from somewhere else and just followed your orders.
 
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
Byron York is the chief political correspondent for the Washington Examiner, a Fox News contributor and the author of The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy.

I'm shocked I tell ya!!!! Shocked!!!
 

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
Byron York is the chief political correspondent for the Washington Examiner, a Fox News contributor and the author of The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy.

I'm shocked I tell ya!!!! Shocked!!!

Byron York did not make the statements on conflict of interest. He interviewed 5 attorneys. Nice try.
 

Brushy Bill

Hall of Famer
Mar 31, 2009
52,644
102,621
113
How to get a special prosecutor in today's America.

Step 1 - fabricate a lie
Step 2 - leak the lie to a propagandist for a national "media" outlet
The next few steps take place in secret because, you know, it's hard to overthrow a duly elected President with a spotlight on you.
Last step - recommend prosecution using classified evidence and hope that open civil war doesn't erupt.

I'm not looking forward to that last one.
 
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
How to get a special prosecutor in today's America.

Step 1 - have the House committee leader secretly and covertly meet with the President at night after dark and stop the visitor logs in an attempt to hide the visits
Step 2 - have the Senate drag their feet and have 50% of them bury their head like nothing ever happened and nothing needs investigated
Step 3 - attack the media
Step 4 - attack all of the intelligence agencies
Step 5 - lie about contacts and communications
Step 6 - accept illegal payments from Turkey and Russia
Step 7 - fire the guy leading the FBI investigation
Step 8 - make multiple excuses for why you fired the guy
Step 9 - pay for advertisements that smear and impune the reputation of the guy you fired

FIFY
 

moe

Sophomore
May 29, 2001
32,557
152
63
How to get a special prosecutor in today's America.

Step 1 - fabricate a lie
Step 2 - leak the lie to a propagandist for a national "media" outlet
The next few steps take place in secret because, you know, it's hard to overthrow a duly elected President with a spotlight on you.
Last step - recommend prosecution using classified evidence and hope that open civil war doesn't erupt.

I'm not looking forward to that last one.
Come on, dry your eyes, wipe your nose and get back in there.
 
Aug 27, 2001
63,466
198
0
OPINION
Byron York: Is Robert Mueller conflicted in Trump probe?
by Byron York | Jun 11, 2017, 11:09 PM
Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Email this article Share on LinkedIn

Fired FBI Director James Comey has emerged as the main figure in what some Democrats believe will be an obstruction of justice case against President Trump in the Trump-Russia matter. Comey's stories of conversations with the president, plus the fact that he was fired, ostensibly as a result of the Russia probe, make him potentially the star witness in the case.

Which brings up an intriguing legal question. Comey is a good friend of special counsel Robert Mueller — such a good friend, for about 15 years now, that the two men have been described as "brothers in arms." Their work together during the controversies over Bush-era terrorist surveillance has been characterized as "deepening a friendship forged in the crucible of the highest levels of the national security apparatus after the 9/11 attacks," after which the men became "close partners and close allies throughout the years ahead."

Now Mueller is investigating the Trump-Russia affair, in which, if the increasing buzz in the case is correct, allegations of obstruction against the president will be central. And central to those allegations — the key witness — will be the prosecutor's good friend, the now-aggrieved former FBI director.

Is that a conflict? Should a prosecutor pursue a case in which the star witness is a close friend? And when the friend is not only a witness but also arguably a victim — of firing — by the target of the investigation? And when the prosecutor might also be called on to investigate some of his friend's actions? The case would be difficult enough even without the complicating friendship.

This is by no means a definitive answer, but I put that question to five Washington lawyers Sunday — lawyers in private practice, on Capitol Hill, in think tanks, some of them veterans of the Justice Department. The verdict came back mixed. But the answers made clear this is a question that will have to be answered in the course of the Mueller investigation.

"This is very odd," said one big-firm lawyer and Justice Department veteran Sunday:

An ordinary prosecutor would turn this over to someone uninvolved, and there would be lots of candidates. That is particularly so here where Comey is not just the star witness but a potential target. That said, I doubt anyone outside can or should do anything here. Mueller should resign, but if he chooses not to — either on the theory he can handle the conflict, or on the theory it is such a mess he should just persevere — the attorney general should not fire him. As to how Mueller might handle, he could announce that the Comey part of the case will be handled by someone else within his office, but that is complex and not very satisfactory.

On the other hand, from another big-firm lawyer and Justice Department veteran:

I don't see any problem with a prosecutor being a friend of a potential witness. It's hard to imagine a scenario, for example, where information acquired as part of a friendship would impair the prosecutor's ability to do his or her job or, alternatively, improperly influence the witness' testimony. I expect, in any event, that any interview of Comey would be very much a group effort on the part of Mueller's team, so that his personal relationship with Comey would hardly be an issue.

From a Capitol Hill veteran now in private practice:

They [Comey and Mueller] have a mutual admiration society. Mueller should hire another prosecutor to deal with Comey. But Comey is central to their case, so it infects the whole prosecution. Could [a close colleague] investigate me? No, he would recuse. But Mueller's stature is great, and he may be able to overcome it.

From another Justice Department veteran:

I think it raises a serious conflict of interest that would normally require the prosecutor to recuse himself from the case.

And finally, from another Hill lawyer:

It's somewhat ironic, no? I mean, the whole purpose of the special counsel is to have a prosecutor from outside the government and outside of the normal chain of command because inherent conflicts render the Justice Department incapable of handling it. So, now the special counsel is a close friend (mentor/mentee relationship) with the star witness, who by his own admission leaked the memos at least in part to engineer the appointment of a special counsel. Only in Washington. You can't make this stuff up.

On the surface it seems like a conflict. I'd need more information and more than just "from a big-firm lawyer" conjecture. But since when did real conflicts of interest start bothering you. I mean for crying out loud, you have no issue with Trump using his own businesses to host official events, host dignataries, and house foriegn officials. You had no issue with Rex Tillerson. You have no issues with a Trump daughter and her husband holding key post in the administration either officially or unofficially. You don't even care as to whether or not Trump and his companies owe foreign banks. However this bothers you......
 
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
Why didn't anyone saying anything prior to Comey's testimony?

Hmmm, strange again.

Everyone was heaping praise on Mueller up until today.

I hope and pray Trump does fire him.
 

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
On the surface it seems like a conflict. I'd need more information and more than just "from a big-firm lawyer" conjecture. But since when did real conflicts of interest start bothering you. I mean for crying out loud, you have no issue with Trump using his own businesses to host official events, host dignataries, and house foriegn officials. You had no issue with Rex Tillerson. You have no issues with a Trump daughter and her husband holding key post in the administration either officially or unofficially. You don't even care as to whether or not Trump and his companies owe foreign banks. However this bothers you......

I think you Libs have lost your freaking minds. Ivanka and Jared serving as advisers is a conflict? What about Bobby Kennedy serving as attorney general for his brother? Tillerson was approved by the Senate, and to claim there's a conflict because he got an award in Russia while serving as CEO of Exxon is absurd. That would rule out almost all superior businessman from ever serving in government. As for trumps business interests, there are an army of Lib lawyers just waiting to file lawsuits. I think you are protected. And White House attorneys have signed off on the arrangement. You don't seem to care much about Loretta Lynch telling the FBI director what to call the investigation as means of protecting Hillary.

In this instance, we have a special prosecutor that very well could be investigating his very good friend. Now that is a conflict.
 
Aug 27, 2001
63,466
198
0
I think you Libs have lost your freaking minds. Ivanka and Jared serving as advisers is a conflict? What about Bobby Kennedy serving as attorney general for his brother? Tillerson was approved by the Senate, and to claim there's a conflict because he got an award in Russia while serving as CEO of Exxon is absurd. That would rule out almost all superior businessman from ever serving in government. As for trumps business interests, there are an army of Lib lawyers just waiting to file lawsuits. I think you are protected. And White House attorneys have signed off on the arrangement. You don't seem to care much about Loretta Lynch telling the FBI director what to call the investigation as means of protecting Hillary.

In this instance, we have a special prosecutor that very well could be investigating his very good friend. Now that is a conflict.

Loretta Lynch should have been fired immediately. I have no tolerance for this ********