Garland was too cute by half in that questioning. He referred to rules, not law. Then, he changed tact and talked briefly about DoJ employees becoming Special Counsels, which Jacko is not. My take away from Garland is he is smart enough to know he is caught on this. He danced around some internal DoJ rules which cannot Constitutionally create a new office by referring to assigning DoJ employees, which as stated Jacko is not.
One does not need a law degree to understand the very simple and straight forward logic involved. Yes, DoJ could take an existing employee who has been nominated and Senate approved, like a US Attorney and reassign that person to a position with the title of Special Counsel. The AG has no authority whatsoever to make private citizen Jacko the equivalent of a super-empowered US Attorney, That is illegal.
Therefore, Jacko be dismissed immediately. All fruits of his actions are illegal also because they are fruits from a poisoned tree, imho. Anything Jacko touched is poison fruit because he himself is illegally involved.
What should happen is Jacko immediately dismissed. All evidence he has collected is poison and cannot be used. All indictments, search warrants, filings of any kind are dismissed and forbidden from future use because they are illegally derived.
Yeah, I recall the same logic from the public statement of Ed Meese and others.
In their closing, they said Jack Smith had as much authority to prosecute PDJT as Taylor Swift.
Big LOL!
the whole issue was more simply presented, relying only on Article II appointments clause, on Life Liberty & Levin, pointing out that Garland is relying on Smith being an “inferior” officer. but of course US attorneys require Senate confirmation - and the most powerful prosecutor is considered an “inferior” officer? only in the Logic for Libs manual.