Posted on 06/11/2018 4:52:27 PM PDT by boycott
White House counselor Kellyanne Conway's husband on Monday released an article defending the constitutionality of special counsel Robert Mueller's probe into alleged ties between the Trump campaign and Russian election meddling.
The piece, titled "The Terrible Arguments Against the Constitutionality of the Mueller Investigation," takes aim at President Trump's recent Twitter attacks on the probe, in which the president argues the investigation is unconstitutional.
Conway points out the initial spelling errors in the tweet and said he most likely got his argument from conservative legal scholar Steven Calabresi.
"Unfortunately for the president, these writings are no more correct than the spelling in his original tweet. And in light of the president’s apparent embrace of Calabresi’s conclusions, it is well worth taking a close look at Calabresi’s argument in support of those conclusions," he writes.
Calabresi has argued that Mueller's probe is "null and void" because it violates the Appointments Clause of the Constitution, Article II, Section 2, Clause 2.
"The 'constitutional' arguments made against the special counsel do not meet that standard and had little more rigor than the tweet that promoted them. Such a lack of rigor, sadly, has been a disturbing trend in much of the politically charged public discourse about the law lately, and one that lawyers — regardless of their politics — owe a duty to abjure," Conway said.
This is not the first time Conway has criticized his wife's boss.
Conway previously shared commentary by a Politico reporter critiquing Trump’s claim on the constitutionality of the probe:
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
It’s unthinkable. This is the president he’s going after.
She’s not working at Dairy Queen. He’s way out of bounds.
>>The guy is a unstable immature nut job .
******************************************
He’s a beta male with small hands.
Wicked dandruff for one.
>>Couch, my ass-if he were my husband, he’d be picking his s*** up off the front porch where I’d thrown it and packing it into his vehicle-and he’d be served with divorce papers by the end of the week. A husband of wife that nastily jealous of their spouse’s success is just mean and petty-he’s an adult, so she’s not responsible for what he does/says-but he is certainly not a supportive partner...
Reminds me of an old joke about getting rid of 300 lbs of ugly fat...
*******************************************************
Well said.
No husband who truly loved their wife (and kids) and put them FIRST, would ever remotely consider doing what he did.
He deserves to happen exactly what you describe.
Conway’s critique of Calabrese’s Constitutional argument is accurate. But he ignores the Achilles Heel of Mueller’s appointment: it does not comply with the statutes that govern appointment of SC’s.
1) The statute allows SC’s only for criminal matters. The FBI investigation explicitly given to Mueller was, and was stated to be even by James Comey, a counterintelligence investigation. The statute makes no provision for counterintelligence investigations by SC’s.
2) The statute requires specification of specific crimes to be investigated, to avoid unleashing witch hunts. But “collusion with the Russians by the Trump campaign regarding the 2016 election” is not a crime under any known statute. Rosenstein’s authorization letter(s) are crafted to create a wide-tanging witch hunt.
3) The statute requires the AG or acting AG to assure that the appointee has no conflicts of interest. Mueller has massive conflicts of interest. Evaluation his conflicts seems to have been omitted by Deputy/Acting AG Rosenstein.
What a rotten piece of garbage he is.
“No. Grounds for divorce.”
As a Christian, I don’t believe in divorce.
However, killing may be an option.
Of course, I’m only kidding... a little.
If she smothers the guy in his sleep, I’d bet the president would seriously consider a pardon.
Again... just kidding... a little.
“No. Grounds for divorce.”
As a Christian, I don’t believe in divorce.
However, killing may be an option.
Of course, I’m only kidding... a little.
If she smothers the guy in his sleep, I’d bet the president would seriously consider a pardon.
Again... just kidding... a little.
It’s an argument about legal technicalities. I don’t know why he’s getting involved, but it’s possible to disagree with the probe without finding it violates the Constitution.
Thank you-I’d bet that the man has serious self esteem issues-he’s let himself turn into a whale while she is attractive, far more successful, etc-I wouldn’t feel safe in the same house with someone that out-of-control vicious-he needs psychotherapy and anger management...
Georgie needs to STFU!! WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH HIM??? WHY SABoutage YOUR WIFE, GEORGIE???
In my opinion Conway is a big leaker.
Why Trump keeps her, is beyond me.
I don’t want to re-litigate the primaries, but this may be relevant:
http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/25/cruz-super-pac-ad-hits-trump-does-this-sound-conservative-video/
Keep The Promise 1, a super PAC supporting Sen.[crscore]Ted Cruz[/crscore], released two ads Monday in Iowa and South Carolina attacking Donald Trump on his previous support for partial-birth abortions and show him heaping praise on Cruz for fighting against Obamacare.
The ads titled “I Like Ted Cruz” and “EXTREME” are part of a previously announced $2.5 million TV buy in the two early primary states, and will be airing throughout this week.
Kellyanne Conway, president of Keep the Promise 1, said, “The life of a child at 8 or 9 months gestation is not a political football; it is a matter of principle and conscience.”
She would be smart to us a "my pillow" with the patented fill.
It's interlocking quality prevents air flow, making it effective until the kicking subsides.
(just kidding ...a little)
Outside of the sort of backstabbing of the spouse ... and returning to the constitutionality of the appointment.
Per Wiki:
The Court listed in Morrison v. Olson (1988) certain factors as hallmarks of “inferior Officer” status, such as removability by a higher executive branch official other than the President, and limitations on the officer’s duties, jurisdiction, and tenure. In Edmond v. United States (1997) the Court stated that “‘inferior Officers’ are officers whose work is directed and supervised at some level by others who were appointed by Presidential nomination with the advice and consent of the Senate.” Among those officers recognized as “inferior” are district court clerks, federal supervisors of elections, the Watergate Special Prosecutor, and an Independent Counsel appointed under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978.
This would lead me to believe that the defense of Mueller’s appointment as constitution would rest on determining if Mueller was being supervised by someone at the DOJ. Since Sessions has recused, the only person left to supervise would be Rosestein.
Also, if firing / removing Mueller is “Obstruction of Justice” then he is NOT an inferior officer and his appointment was unconstitutional in the first place.
So, if the appointment is constitutional, then Rosestein or the President can remove from office without it being obstruction.
Just my take.
What a tubby creep. I’m always suspicious when I see a woman with any type of decent looks married to a guy like that
Have the divorce papers been issued?
He’s got ear lobes that go all the way down to his neck.
Yech! Frankenstein’s brother?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.