the special counsel law allows for additional jusrisdiction....to find what he finds. if it’s outside his scope, he has to present it to the AG and the AG decides
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/600.4
yet, the special counsel law allows the SC to determine what he brings to the AG
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/600.6
yet, who the heck follows any law that doesn’t suit their purpose ?
as an FYI...my FOIA request of 8/7/2017 on how the feds negotiated Muellers background investigation and review of ethics and conflicts of interest...was shuffled to other offices and deferred until 5/7/2021
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/600.3
The bottom line was, a letter of 05/19/2017 by Scott Schools ADAG, citing a different law, was submitted to me. Its essence cited Mueller’s resume as proof of ethics and no conflict of interest.
If you care, I can post it.
A POX on all their houses.
Thank you for your response, and I get what you’re saying. If Durham encounters additional crimes that fall outside the scope of his original mandate he can bring them up to the AG who will then decide how it should be handled. But any such information would have to flow from his original investigation. He can’t, out of the blue, just decide to investigate 2020 Election fraud. I’m still optimistic that Durham’s investigation will eventually bear fruit, but any indictments he comes out with are not likely to have any significant effect on the current Biden regime or lead to it’s removal.