Reining in Mueller

July 21, 2017

There is an old saying: “Work expands to fill the allotted time.” The Washington corollary to that is “A special counsel’s work expands to fit the allotted budget.”

Whenever a special counsel is appointed in Washington, it’s always presented as a reasonable step to insure a trustworthy, efficient investigation, untainted by politics. Then it usually becomes the opposite, as the investigation starts growing like kudzu, hiring more and more staff and chasing leads and rumors that had nothing to do with its original mission. Eventually, they waste so much time and money that they can’t admit they found no crime, so they make one up, like getting some details wrong in testifying to investigators about an nonexistent crime the person didn’t commit (that actually happened to Martha Stewart, who was never charged with insider trading but went to prison for denying she did what she was never charged with. That was James Comey’s finest hour, up until Hillary’s emails.)

I have the same trepidation every time a special counsel is appointed, whether it’s to investigate a Democrat or a Republican (each side loves it so much when a SC bedevils the other side that they forget how annoying it is when it’s their turn.) Power corrupts, and having the power to investigate anyone in Washington, with no deadline or strict budget, corrupts absolutely.


Commentary continues below advertisement


Latest case: Robert Mueller was sold to us as the straightest arrow in the quiver. Then, no sooner was he named special counsel to look into alleged Russian interference in the election than it became clear he had close ties to James Comey that required him by law to step down. But he didn’t. Instead, he’s been hiring oodles of lawyers right off the Clinton Foundation donor list and payroll. Now comes word that he wants to look into at least a decade of Donald Trump’s business dealings involving Russia, a massive and completely irrelevant expansion of the investigation, but a potential gold mine of opposition research for Democrats. These ominous dealings include the fact that the 2013 Miss Universe Pageant was held in Moscow (does Mueller suspect Putin tried to rig the swimsuit competition?)

READ MORE

Trump’s attorneys are reportedly trying to rein in Mueller’s investigation. That’s from the Washington Post and anonymously sourced, so take it with a whole mine of salt. Still, it will undoubtedly be treated by the media as an outrage. There will be no thought given to the idea that it’s kind of outrageous that a man hired to investigate an allegation for which nobody’s found any evidence, and who should have already resigned to comply with federal law, seems intent on expanding the investigation in every direction until the taxpayers are picking up the tab for a battalion of $400-an-hour lawyers to investigate where the Trump Plaza restaurant got its recipe for Russian dressing.

READ MORE

Comments 1-5 of 9

  • SANDY COX

    07/23/2017 02:13 AM

    I just don't understand why nobody is able to question Mueller about having a conflict of interest. Isn't there committees in Congress that could be inquiring about these issues? I think we need someone that truly supports the Trump administration to replace Paul Ryan ... And, why is Mueller ONLY hiring attorneys and investigators that despise Trump and support and voted for Obama and Hillary? If half of them weren't fans of Trump .. I'd be ok with that .. but when they are ALL anti-Trump .. it's bizarre that's even allowed! Maybe he's only hiring Dems so when nothing is found .. the libs, Trump haters and MSM can't say ... they were all Trump supporters. <heavy sigh>

  • Sylvia Greer

    07/22/2017 06:13 PM

    There is so much smoke, as with Nixon I expect to find fire and lots of it. I completely support Mueller's investigation. If he is stopped I will I insist to Congress that Trump be impeached immediately. If there is nothing to hide then let's get on with it. Why Does He Want To Know Who He Can pardon.
    Why can't he release his income Tax. Prove me wrong.
    I don't see my comment. Why will you not post it.

  • Joseph Durham

    07/22/2017 05:46 PM

    The real question is what crime has been committed? There is no statutory law against collusion that could possibly apply even if everything the Democrats are saying is true. It's just not against the law. If you think it's against the law, then you don't know the law as good as you think you do.

  • Janice C

    07/22/2017 05:20 PM

    Governor Huckabee,
    Since President Trump and others seem to embrace the Internet, why not take this to the people? I propose an informal "vote" using survey polling asking folks from all walks of life in the US to chime in. Some constituents just don't want to write, but might be willing to click on a box. I would pose the question of whether the investigation should continue on as is, have the investigation continue on with a deadline, or stop the investigation now to hear what they Mueller has to say at this time. I think another question would be if everyone feels the composition of his team is fair and impartial.

    It's really a shame that all folks casting a vote in the last election did not have the opportunity for a provision to elect an email address associated with their vote for such purposes as going direct the voters. It might even encourage more folks to vote!

  • Susan Watson-Smith

    07/22/2017 11:36 AM

    Governor Huckabee, what would you suggest as a way to reign in Mueller? Rosenstein appointed him (and I believe he has the same agenda as Mueller) so how do we bypass Rosenstein? Charles Krauthammer says that firing Mueller would be political suicide. I am not so sure. I think if Trump did so now, he would have his follower's support. If he waits until Mueller finds hints of things, it will be almost impossible. How does Trump reign this in? Your feedback would be most helpful.

Reining in Mueller

July 21, 2017

There is an old saying: “Work expands to fill the allotted time.” The Washington corollary to that is “A special counsel’s work expands to fit the allotted budget.”

Whenever a special counsel is appointed in Washington, it’s always presented as a reasonable step to insure a trustworthy, efficient investigation, untainted by politics. Then it usually becomes the opposite, as the investigation starts growing like kudzu, hiring more and more staff and chasing leads and rumors that had nothing to do with its original mission. Eventually, they waste so much time and money that they can’t admit they found no crime, so they make one up, like getting some details wrong in testifying to investigators about an nonexistent crime the person didn’t commit (that actually happened to Martha Stewart, who was never charged with insider trading but went to prison for denying she did what she was never charged with. That was James Comey’s finest hour, up until Hillary’s emails.)

I have the same trepidation every time a special counsel is appointed, whether it’s to investigate a Democrat or a Republican (each side loves it so much when a SC bedevils the other side that they forget how annoying it is when it’s their turn.) Power corrupts, and having the power to investigate anyone in Washington, with no deadline or strict budget, corrupts absolutely.


Commentary continues below advertisement


Latest case: Robert Mueller was sold to us as the straightest arrow in the quiver. Then, no sooner was he named special counsel to look into alleged Russian interference in the election than it became clear he had close ties to James Comey that required him by law to step down. But he didn’t. Instead, he’s been hiring oodles of lawyers right off the Clinton Foundation donor list and payroll. Now comes word that he wants to look into at least a decade of Donald Trump’s business dealings involving Russia, a massive and completely irrelevant expansion of the investigation, but a potential gold mine of opposition research for Democrats. These ominous dealings include the fact that the 2013 Miss Universe Pageant was held in Moscow (does Mueller suspect Putin tried to rig the swimsuit competition?)

READ MORE

Trump’s attorneys are reportedly trying to rein in Mueller’s investigation. That’s from the Washington Post and anonymously sourced, so take it with a whole mine of salt. Still, it will undoubtedly be treated by the media as an outrage. There will be no thought given to the idea that it’s kind of outrageous that a man hired to investigate an allegation for which nobody’s found any evidence, and who should have already resigned to comply with federal law, seems intent on expanding the investigation in every direction until the taxpayers are picking up the tab for a battalion of $400-an-hour lawyers to investigate where the Trump Plaza restaurant got its recipe for Russian dressing.

READ MORE

Comments 1-5 of 9

  • SANDY COX

    07/23/2017 02:13 AM

    I just don't understand why nobody is able to question Mueller about having a conflict of interest. Isn't there committees in Congress that could be inquiring about these issues? I think we need someone that truly supports the Trump administration to replace Paul Ryan ... And, why is Mueller ONLY hiring attorneys and investigators that despise Trump and support and voted for Obama and Hillary? If half of them weren't fans of Trump .. I'd be ok with that .. but when they are ALL anti-Trump .. it's bizarre that's even allowed! Maybe he's only hiring Dems so when nothing is found .. the libs, Trump haters and MSM can't say ... they were all Trump supporters. <heavy sigh>

  • Sylvia Greer

    07/22/2017 06:13 PM

    There is so much smoke, as with Nixon I expect to find fire and lots of it. I completely support Mueller's investigation. If he is stopped I will I insist to Congress that Trump be impeached immediately. If there is nothing to hide then let's get on with it. Why Does He Want To Know Who He Can pardon.
    Why can't he release his income Tax. Prove me wrong.
    I don't see my comment. Why will you not post it.

  • Joseph Durham

    07/22/2017 05:46 PM

    The real question is what crime has been committed? There is no statutory law against collusion that could possibly apply even if everything the Democrats are saying is true. It's just not against the law. If you think it's against the law, then you don't know the law as good as you think you do.

  • Janice C

    07/22/2017 05:20 PM

    Governor Huckabee,
    Since President Trump and others seem to embrace the Internet, why not take this to the people? I propose an informal "vote" using survey polling asking folks from all walks of life in the US to chime in. Some constituents just don't want to write, but might be willing to click on a box. I would pose the question of whether the investigation should continue on as is, have the investigation continue on with a deadline, or stop the investigation now to hear what they Mueller has to say at this time. I think another question would be if everyone feels the composition of his team is fair and impartial.

    It's really a shame that all folks casting a vote in the last election did not have the opportunity for a provision to elect an email address associated with their vote for such purposes as going direct the voters. It might even encourage more folks to vote!

  • Susan Watson-Smith

    07/22/2017 11:36 AM

    Governor Huckabee, what would you suggest as a way to reign in Mueller? Rosenstein appointed him (and I believe he has the same agenda as Mueller) so how do we bypass Rosenstein? Charles Krauthammer says that firing Mueller would be political suicide. I am not so sure. I think if Trump did so now, he would have his follower's support. If he waits until Mueller finds hints of things, it will be almost impossible. How does Trump reign this in? Your feedback would be most helpful.