A case for expanding Mueller's probe

Greg Richards:
The way for President Trump to handle the newly energized collusion investigation by is massive retaliation...

1. Trump should advocate in public, and then if necessary assert through his authority, that the investigation of the election by Mueller is to be expanded to include all participants and all activities in the campaign without limit.

Mueller's new charge would be "to determine whether there were any irregularities of any nature whatsoever in the 2016 campaign from any source whatsoever," with a special focus and separate report on the violence at Trump rallies. This separate report will include a description of the participants in the violence; their method of organization and transportation; their leadership – including the roles of Robert Creamer and Scott Foval, if any – and how, by how much, and from whom they were financed.

The point is that Trump doesn't fire Mueller, but rather, in the interest of justice, expands his remit.

2. Then the second thing Trump does is to get a special counsel appointed to investigate whether the use by Hillary Clinton as secretary of state of unsecured communications did any damage to the national security and national interests of the United States in any way whatsoever and to prosecute any violations of the law found in the course of that investigation, including any irregularities in past investigations.

Also investigate how, if at all, the joint income of Hillary and Bill Clinton of $85 million during Hillary Clinton's tenure as secretary of state was related to her official duties and to prosecute any illegalities therefrom.

3. Then the third thing Trump does is to get a special counsel appointed to investigate whether the payoffs by Congress to persons charging sexual misconduct by congresspeople were in-kind contributions to their campaigns at any point in time and whether they covered up any crimes by congresspeople and to prosecute those crimes. Also investigate any possible involvement by their associates and families, and prosecute them if involved.
...
I would add that in doing such an expansion it should require Mueller to hire a bipartisan staff, instead of just his gang of angry Democrats.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more