‘overwhelming’ constitutional case against appointment of Mueller

[Coach is Back!]

https://www.conservativereview.com/news/mark-levin-presents-overwhelming-constitutional-case-against-appointment-of-mueller-in-a-free-episode-of-levintv/

watch the video

This is picking up steam..

[Coach is Back!]

The only court and judge that agrees with that logic, is this one.
Judge Mike Levine presiding ( brother of Mark)

Oh, you mean a 9th circuit judge.

[Dos Equis]

https://www.conservativereview.com/news/mark-levin-presents-overwhelming-constitutional-case-against-appointment-of-mueller-in-a-free-episode-of-levintv/

watch the video

This is picking up steam..

This could be pretty big.  Levin is right (so to speak) again. 

[Dos Equis]

I think it's a bit too conspiracy minded.

Which part?  The part where he talks about the express language of the Constitution?  Did you even watch the clip? 

[Dos Equis]

of course I didn't watch it 

I try to keep an open mind, but some ranting lunatic , c'mon now , I consider that; "barbaric" LOL

I think it's a bit too conspiracy minded.

Troll.   

[Primemuscle]

https://www.conservativereview.com/news/mark-levin-presents-overwhelming-constitutional-case-against-appointment-of-mueller-in-a-free-episode-of-levintv/

watch the video

This is picking up steam..

Are your only sources those with which you agree and base your political opinions on? -Seems a bit narrow minded. There is no way you can have an honest perspective on issues if you only look at one side of them.

[Dos Equis]

Are your only sources those with which you agree and base your political opinions on? -Seems a bit narrow minded. There is no way you can have an honest perspective on issues if you only look at one side of them.

You should watch the clip and see if what he says makes sense. 

[Primemuscle]

You should watch the clip and see if what he says makes sense.  

Yes I should. I probably need to broaden my perspective as well. So I will do it now.

OK, I watched it. Can anyone (you) tell me to which article of the Constitution he's refering? I would like to read it before I draw any conclusions as to whether his comments and observations are valid.

[Straw Man]

Supposedly the custom when appointing a special counsel hajs always been for the justice department to appoints someone NOT in the same party at the POTUS so there can be no claim of bias

Kenn Starr - Republican

Archibald Cox - Democrat

Robert Mueller - Republican  - so Trump gets a guy from his own party and a guy who most Republicans and many Democrats has nothing but good things to say about him.

BTW - who gives a shit what Mark Levin says.  

[Coach is Back!]

Seems Howard came back in full troll mode

[Dos Equis]

Yes I should. I probably need to broaden my perspective as well. So I will do it now.

OK, I watched it. Can anyone (you) tell me to which article of the Constitution he's refering? I would like to read it before I draw any conclusions as to whether his comments and observations are valid.

Article II, Section 2, Clause 2.  At least you are open minded enough to watch the clip and read for yourself. 

[Dos Equis]

No thanks. I did that once in a USMC recruitment office .

You're not funny.  Not even a little bit. 

[Coach is Back!]

Supposedly the custom when appointing a special counsel hajs always been for the justice department to appoints someone NOT in the same party at the POTUS so there can be no claim of bias

Kenn Starr - Republican

Archibald Cox - Democrat

Robert Mueller - Republican  - so Trump gets a guy from his own party and a guy who most Republicans and many Democrats has nothing but good things to say about him.

BTW - who gives a shit what Mark Levin says.  

I love how you point out that Mueller is a Republican as if means something in this investigation...lol

[Agnostic007]

I love how you point out that Mueller is a Republican as if means something in this investigation...lol

Kind of like "Christians" who will declare anyone who gets caught doing something illegal or morally reprehensible "Not a real Christian". Really? He was last Sunday when he was preaching in church.. now you want to claim he isn't? Mueller is a Republican, but because we don't like what Meuller is doing, the very thing he was hired to do by his Republican boss, its now irrelveant. If Muellar was a Democrat, you can imagine how often that would be thrown out there by Coach and the gang.

[Coach is Back!]

Kind of like "Christians" who will declare anyone who gets caught doing something illegal or morally reprehensible "Not a real Christian". Really? He was last Sunday when he was preaching in church.. now you want to claim he isn't? Mueller is a Republican, but because we don't like what Meuller is doing, the very thing he was hired to do by his Republican boss, its now irrelveant. If Muellar was a Democrat, you can imagine how often that would be thrown out there by Coach and the gang.

You mean how I think liberals that claim to be Christians (ie; Nancy Pelosi) can’t possibly be Christians? I stand by that 10 fold.

[Agnostic007]

You mean how I think liberals that claim to be Christians (ie; Nancy Pelosi) can’t possibly be Christians? I stand by that 10 fold.

not a problem, there are very few actual christians out there. I'd guesstimate less than 5% of those who say they are christian would actually get into heaven if it exists. Which is in line with the Bible. It underscores in many places how few will actually attain heaven.

[mazrim]

He was the first by a long shot to put forth that Mueller could not indict a sitting president. He's been saying that for months and only recently have the others picked up on that.

Not the first with this (as it states) but his platform will allow it to actually be noticed.

[Coach is Back!]

I understand the reasoning of you/coach wanting the naysayers to at least watch the Levine video.
You're not going to sit and actually LISTEN to Nancy Pelosi or Maxine Waters LOL

But c'mon now, we all avoid listening to those we find wrong and/or annoying.
It's doubtful too many conservatives watch Racheal Maddow and few liberals listen to Hannity.

The real key is to find ONE voice you can stand , that's on the other side.
I tend to be more democratic now, but, I often watch Hannity.
For whatever reason, I like his voice and delivery style.
I may not agree with him much, but I feel informed about the conservative view pt when I watch his show.
I

I’ve listened to Pelosi defend MS-13, illegals crossing the border and aiding and abetting violent criminals using fake Sanctuary city laws. I’ve heard (and it’s the only thing she says) whack job Maxine Waters repeat herself by saying “impeach 45” with ZERO reason. Frankly, I couldn’t careless if you heard Levin or not.

[Coach is Back!]

You missed my point.Most conervatives can't stand to hear Pelosi, Maxine or Hildabeast, c'mon.

The idea is to pick one , just one , on the other side, you'd listen to and consider their view.
We all have pundits and journalists we can't stand and often ridicule.
BUT, try listening to ONE source with an alternate perspective that you can stand to hear/read.

Just because we can’t stand to listen to them doesn’t mean we don’t. Listening to these clowns is what keeps us more than the left and the reasons why we won. Tell me Howard, what does the left have to run on besides socialism?

[Straw Man]

I love how you point out that Mueller is a Republican as if means something in this investigation...lol

yep, it means that Trump started out with an advantage that other Nixon and Clinton did not have

Trump gets a guy from his own party that virtually everyone on both sides of the aisle agreed was a great choice

Try really hard to keep in mind that the law is not supposed to be bias toward a political party and choosing an opposing party as special counsel was a way to demonstrate this

Justice is blind....remember

The law in this country is above politics.   

I know that's really hard for you to understand since you're a blatant partisan hack and you think anyone who doesn't share your political point of view is a traitor

[Dos Equis]

I understand the reasoning of you/coach wanting the naysayers to at least watch the Levine video.
You're not going to sit and actually LISTEN to Nancy Pelosi or Maxine Waters LOL

But c'mon now, we all avoid listening to those we find wrong and/or annoying.
It's doubtful too many conservatives watch Racheal Maddow and few liberals listen to Hannity.

The real key is to find ONE voice you can stand , that's on the other side.
I tend to be more democratic now, but, I often watch Hannity.
For whatever reason, I like his voice and delivery style.
I may not agree with him much, but I feel informed about the conservative view pt when I watch his show.
I

I'm not asking you to watch the clip.  I don't care what you think.  You're a troll. 

[Board_SHERIF]

Muller was a well respected man and considered fair by both dems and GOP.
By playing it straight and fair, he's now hated by team Trump for refusing to be "their guy".

Organized crime always hated an honest cop.

Wrong, Mueller is deep state.........

[Primemuscle]

Article II, Section 2, Clause 2.  At least you are open minded enough to watch the clip and read for yourself. 

Thanks. I just read it.

Unfortunately, the answer to the question of Mueller's appointment by Rosenstein being unconstitutional is complicated. If special counsel Mueller is considered a principal officer, than it appears his appointment was unconstitutional. However, an assistant U.S attorney is considered an inferior officer, who is appointed by a principal officer, (U.S. deputy attorney general Rosenstein). Mueller is supervised by principal officer Rosenstein, which deems him an inferior officer. In this scenerio, his appointment was constitutional.

Another view considers the scope of assistant U.S. attorney Mueller's investigation. Some would argue that his investigation puts him in a principal officer position because he is acting as a U.S. attorney. Does Mueller answer to his supervisor Senior Officer Rosenstein or is he operating on his own?

This issue has been argued in Morrison v. Olson and other cases. My guess is that this issue will be argued in the U.S. Supreme Court before it is settled. And there is always the possibility that Trump will go 'off script' and order Rosenstein to fire Mueller. This would not be a politically savvy move on Trumps part.

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_skills/2018/05/was-muellers-appointment-unconstitutional-under-the-appointments-clause.html

[Dos Equis]

Thanks. I just read it.

Unfortunately, the answer to the question of Mueller's appointment by Rosenstein being unconstitutional is complicated. If special counsel Mueller is considered a principal officer, than it appears his appointment was unconstitutional. However, an assistant U.S attorney is considered an inferior officer, who is appointed by a principal officer, (U.S. deputy attorney general Rosenstein). Mueller is supervised by principal officer Rosenstein, which deems him an inferior officer. In this scenerio, his appointment was constitutional.

Another view considers the scope of assistant U.S. attorney Mueller's investigation. Some would argue that his investigation puts him in a principal officer position because he is acting as a U.S. attorney. Does Mueller answer to his supervisor Senior Officer Rosenstein or is he operating on his own?

This issue has been argued in Morrison v. Olson and other cases. My guess is that this issue will be argued in the U.S. Supreme Court before it is settled. And there is always the possibility that Trump will go 'off script' and order Rosenstein to fire Mueller. This would not be a politically savvy move on Trumps part.

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_skills/2018/05/was-muellers-appointment-unconstitutional-under-the-appointments-clause.html

Definitely a complicated question.  But Levin is all over it.  Regardless of what you think about his politics, he knows the Constitution as well as anyone.  I don't like the way he treats his liberal callers on his show, but his analysis of almost everything is on point. 

[Primemuscle]

Definitely a complicated question.  But Levin is all over it.  Regardless of what you think about his politics, he knows the Constitution as well as anyone.  I don't like the way he treats his liberal callers on his show, but his analysis of almost everything is on point. 

Of course legal eagles don't necessarily agree on interpretation of the law. Explains why so many issues end up in court. Knowing the Constitution as well as anyone isn't all that special. Scholars and some politicians have made a career out of studying and understanding the Constitution. Levin is all over this, its put him in the limelight. Mark Levin is an American lawyer, author, and radio personality. What he isn't is a legal scholar.