Advertisements
The Latest:

Trump effect: POTUS-appointed judge to rule on constitutionality of special counsel Mueller’s probe

(National SentinelThe Trump Judiciary: During the 2016 presidential campaign, ‘conservatives’ who would later turn out to be #NeverTrumpers insisted that Donald Trump wasn’t the ‘right’ candidate for the Republican Party because he wasn’t conservative enough.

To win them over, candidate Trump released the names of several judges who are bona fide constitutionalists he said comprised the list of jurists whom he would consider nominating to the Supreme Court to fill the late Justice Antonin Scalia’s vacancy.

As we know now, Trump was never able to win over this neocon wing of the Republican Party but he has nevertheless has been a true conservative champion when it comes to naming real-deal constitutionalists to the federal bench.

That’s already paid off with the successful appointment of Justice Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, which POTUS Trump is following up with the eventually successful nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh.




But the president’s additional appointments to lower federal courts is also having a positive effect on our country. And now a POTUS Trump-appointed federal judge is set to hear a case challenging the constitutionality of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation after two Obama-appointed judges punted on the case.

As Politico reported:

Lawyers for a Russian company accused of financing a massive political influence operation in the United States urged a federal judge Friday to “be brave” and declare special counsel Robert Mueller’s appointment invalid.

At a federal courthouse just steps from the U.S. Capitol, the Russian firm’s attorney — James Martin, an appellate lawyer with the Pittsburgh-based firm Reed Smith — urged District Court Judge Dabney Friedrich to look past Supreme Court precedent recognizing the appointment of the Watergate special prosecutor in the 1970s.

Okay, but what Politico isn’t reporting is that the current law is different than the law which authorized the Watergate special prosecutor and independent counsel Kenneth Starr who investigated President Bill Clinton.

Current statutes governing special counsels requires an allegation that an actual crime may have occured, but when Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed Mueller he did so without alleging that any crimes occurred.

So by that standard, Mueller’s probe has never been legal, proper, or constitutional.

What’s more, critics of the Mueller investigation say his mandate is far too broad, which is also not permitted under the current special counsel statutes.

Thus far, two far-Left activist judges appointed by Obama — Amy Berman Jackson, who is overseeing the trial of Paul Manafort — and Beryl Alaine Howell have both claimed that the Mueller probe is legitimate and within the confines of the law.

It’s notfor all these reasons.

Three FREE ways you can help us stick around

As such, lawyers for Russian firm Concord Management, named in a Mueller indictment, are now in court arguing that he has no mandate to indict anyone.

And now Judge Friedrich will have an opportunity to rule on the constitutionality of the Mueller probe — and reinstate the rule of law that has been thus far destroyed by Obama, Mueller, Rosenstein, and Obama’s judges.


Never miss a story! Subscribe to our daily newsletter and start receiving Flashpoint Intelligence Review for FREE (while offer lasts)

* indicates required

Email Format

Advertisements

3 Comments on Trump effect: POTUS-appointed judge to rule on constitutionality of special counsel Mueller’s probe

  1. The Left don’t seem to understand how the system works. Well…especially when it’s working against them. Then it’s ALL unConstitutional…ALL “illegal!” LOL! Clowns…

  2. The subject matter and conclusions of the article are perfectly correct and it doesn’t even bother to mention the obvious and blatant conflicts of interest, which abound with Rosenstien and Mueller himself.

  3. Jerry Warrington // August 5, 2018 at 5:11 pm // Reply

    When is the judge’s decision due? To what body does his decision go? What power does he have to see his decision implemented? To where would an appeal go?

Have something to say?

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: