Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Legal or not, we won't be seeing the establishment SC resign anytime soon. I bet $1

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

---

Quote:

---

28 CFR 45.2 - Disqualification arising from personal or political relationship.

(a) Unless authorized under paragraph (b) of this section, no employee shall participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship with:

(1) Any person or organization substantially involved in the conduct that is the subject of the investigation or prosecution; or

(2) Any person or organization which he knows has a specific and substantial interest that would be directly affected by the outcome of the investigation or prosecution.

---

Quote:

---

28 U.S. Code § 528 - Disqualification of officers and employees of the Department of Justice
The Attorney General shall promulgate rules and regulations which require the disqualification of any officer or employee of the Department of Justice, including a United States attorney or a member of such attorney’s staff, from participation in a particular investigation or prosecution if such participation may result in a personal, financial, or political conflict of interest, or the appearance thereof. Such rules and regulations may provide that a willful violation of any provision thereof shall result in removal from office.

---

Quote:

---

28 CFR 600.7 - Conduct and accountability.

(a) A Special Counsel shall comply with the rules, regulations, procedures, practices and policies of the Department of Justice. He or she shall consult with appropriate offices within the Department for guidance with respect to established practices, policies and procedures of the Department, including ethics and security regulations and procedures. Should the Special Counsel conclude that the extraordinary circumstances of any particular decision would render compliance with required review and approval procedures by the designated Departmental component inappropriate, he or she may consult directly with the Attorney General.

(b) The Special Counsel shall not be subject to the day-to-day supervision of any official of the Department. However, the Attorney General may request that the Special Counsel provide an explanation for any investigative or prosecutorial step, and may after review conclude that the action is so inappropriate or unwarranted under established Departmental practices that it should not be pursued. In conducting that review, the Attorney General will give great weight to the views of the Special Counsel. If the Attorney General concludes that a proposed action by a Special Counsel should not be pursued, the Attorney General shall notify Congress as specified in § 600.9(a)(3).

(c) The Special Counsel and staff shall be subject to disciplinary action for misconduct and breach of ethical duties under the same standards and to the same extent as are other employees of the Department of Justice. Inquiries into such matters shall be handled through the appropriate office of the Department upon the approval of the Attorney General.

(d) The Special Counsel may be disciplined or removed from office only by the personal action of the Attorney General. The Attorney General may remove a Special Counsel for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies. The Attorney General shall inform the Special Counsel in writing of the specific reason for his or her removal.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Just so people don't think that JEWEL is bullshitting, here are the relevant passages from the linked sites

US Code 28 CFR 45.2
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/45.2

Quote:

---

28 CFR 45.2 - Disqualification arising from personal or political relationship.

(a) Unless authorized under paragraph (b) of this section, no employee shall participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship with:

(1) Any person or organization substantially involved in the conduct that is the subject of the investigation or prosecution; or

(2) Any person or organization which he knows has a specific and substantial interest that would be directly affected by the outcome of the investigation or prosecution.

---

US Code 28 CFR 528
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/528

Quote:

---

28 U.S. Code § 528 - Disqualification of officers and employees of the Department of Justice
The Attorney General shall promulgate rules and regulations which require the disqualification of any officer or employee of the Department of Justice, including a United States attorney or a member of such attorney’s staff, from participation in a particular investigation or prosecution if such participation may result in a personal, financial, or political conflict of interest, or the appearance thereof. Such rules and regulations may provide that a willful violation of any provision thereof shall result in removal from office.

---

US Code 28 CFR 28 CFR 600.7
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/600.7

Quote:

---

28 CFR 600.7 - Conduct and accountability.

(d) The Special Counsel may be disciplined or removed from office only by the personal action of the Attorney General. The Attorney General may remove a Special Counsel for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies. The Attorney General shall inform the Special Counsel in writing of the specific reason for his or her removal.

---

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Riverlove:
Mueller AND the 40 Hillary-donating Democrap lawyers he hired to nail Trump?

That's a real shame.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Interesting trick Trump may have accomplished - and Kelley can't really take credit for.

His new FBI Director appointment just got confirmed by the Senate, and Senators claim it was because the nominee stated that he would not direct Mueller to Resign as SC.
BUT now that he is in place, it is pointed out that Mueller is leggaly required under Federal Law to resign as Special Counsel.


US Code 28 CFR 45.2
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/45.2

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/granule/CFR-1999-title28-vol2/CFR-1999-title
28-vol2-sec45-2/content-detail.html


US Code 28 CFR 528
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/528


US Code 28 CFR 600.7
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/600.7

https://www.lawserver.com/law/country/us/cfr/28_cfr_600-7

---

Quote:

---

Interesting trick Trump may have accomplished - and Kelley can't really take credit for.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Shinygoodguy:

Quote:

---

Interesting trick Trump may have accomplished - and Kelley can't really take credit for.

---

Can I ask you a question?

What exactly is the trick that the Donald pulled off?

SGG

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Shinygoodguy:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Interesting trick Trump may have accomplished - and Kelley can't really take credit for.

His new FBI Director appointment just got confirmed by the Senate, and Senators claim it was because the nominee stated that he would not direct Mueller to Resign as SC.
BUT now that he is in place, it is pointed out that Mueller is legally required under Federal Law to resign as Special Counsel.

---

---

Quote:

---

Where do I get this from?, why from the very cites you posted. Only the AG, or in this case, the acting AG, can remove or fire the Special Counsel were he to violate any of those rules and regs listed in the statutes. Not the president, not the FBI Director...not anyone, but the AG.

28 CFR 600.7 - Conduct and accountability.

(d) The Special Counsel may be disciplined or removed from office only by the personal action of the Attorney General. The Attorney General may remove a Special Counsel for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies. The Attorney General shall inform the Special Counsel in writing of the specific reason for his or her removal.

So the FBI Director correctly stated "he would not direct Mueller to Resign as SC." Well, he could ask him to, but he has no legal standing to remove him from his post as SC. Besides resign means to quit and the statute reads that he could be removed (fired) by the AG for misconduct or violation of the US Code. In other words, there must be good cause to be determined by the AG. And soon by Congress, if they are able to get enough votes as part of their passing legislation to review said removal; as part of the Judicial Committee's jurisdiction.

How do I know of the above statement regarding Congress's, and in particular, the Judicial Committee's possible future role in determining the Special Counsel's removal by the AG, or anyone else for that matter.
I saw an interview with the head of the Judicial Committee where he stated such a move was being considered based upon the speculation and actions by the Trump Administration.

Now, I'm assuming that at the end of the SC's investigation and possible trial, that his services would no longer be needed, and so the AG would disband or dismiss the SC and whomever he hired as part of his investigation. But he's still not "required" to resign, he serves at the pleasure of the AG, who serves as the top cop in the land. You know, the rule of law, American law, requires it.

---

Quote:

---

28 CFR 45.2:...a Justice Department employee shall not participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship with...an elected official, a candidate (whether or not successful) for elective, public office, a political party, or a campaign organization.

---

Quote:

---

Section 600.7 has two provisions on redressing misconduct by special counsel...Special Counsel and staff shall be subject to disciplinary action for misconduct and breach of ethical duties under the same standards and to the same extent as are other employees of the DOJ.
Grounds for removal are limited to misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies.

...the AG's regulation provide that a SC may be removed from office "only by the personal action of the Attorney General and only for good cause" or physical or mental impairments.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Shinygoodguy:

Quote:

---

Interesting trick Trump may have accomplished - and Kelley can't really take credit for.

---

Can I ask you a question?

What exactly is the trick that the Donald pulled off?

SGG

---

Senate thought they had the Director by the balls, and with his pronouncement, they had Mueller protected. Not realizing that the Administration's "ace-in-the-hole" was that Mueller is legally required to recuse or remove himself. By not revealing this prior to the Confirmation of the Director, Senate "got snookered" in effect. Classic bait-and-switch known to eons of salesmen, which most people consider The Donald to be.

May sense?

Kelley can't really take credit for, because any intentional withholding of the relevant statutes from the public discussion occurred prior to Kelley moving jobs.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Shinygoodguy:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Shinygoodguy:

Quote:

---

Interesting trick Trump may have accomplished - and Kelley can't really take credit for.

---

Can I ask you a question?

What exactly is the trick that the Donald pulled off?

SGG

---

Senate thought they had the Director by the balls, and with his pronouncement, they had Mueller protected. Not realizing that the Administration's "ace-in-the-hole" was that Mueller is legally required to recuse or remove himself. By not revealing this prior to the Confirmation of the Director, Senate "got snookered" in effect. Classic bait-and-switch known to eons of salesmen, which most people consider The Donald to be.

Make sense?

Kelley can't really take credit for, because any intentional withholding of the relevant statutes from the public discussion occurred prior to Kelley moving jobs.

---

Okay, you got my attention....so where is this little known statute that "requires" Mueller to "resign" as you so eloquently stated. I'm betting that the Senate and Mueller know a little more about federal statutes than Trump, all day every day and twice on Sunday.

If it's the statutes you have cited in this thread....then no, that's not, as I have pointed out, what the statute says. I repeat my statement, the federal statutes you posted DO NOT state that the Special Counsel must "resign." It states clearly that the AG, or acting AG, can "remove" the SC if the rules and regs were to be violated. In other words, the AG can "fire" the SC for misconduct, etc.

As I have mentioned previously, the senate is about to introduce legislature regarding the removal of the SC. They are looking to create a panel of 3 judges to determine, pre-"firing" if there is just cause, and, in addition, a panel of judges post-"firing" (same as above). This is according to Senator Swawell of the Judiciary Committee (for those of you interested in cites).

P.S. In regards to any DOJ attorney "recusing" him or herself for conflict of interest (such as in the case of Sessions, which he was correct in doing), that's pretty much standard procedure in the DOJ. Here is the DOJ regulation that "required" Sessions to recuse himself...

Quote:

---

28 CFR 45.2:...a Justice Department employee shall not participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship with...an elected official, a candidate (whether or not successful) for elective, public office, a political party, or a campaign organization.

---

Perhaps that is the cite to which you refer regarding resigning or recusal. Upon further research into the matter, I discovered that there are rules & regs regarding the Special or Independent Counsel. It is called the Independent Counsel Act that gives the AG the authority to choose a Special Counsel that provides such things as: Appointment of Counsel, Jurisdiction and Budget, The Extent of Independence of Special Counsel, Removal of Special Counsel and Termination of Investigations and Reports.

As far as removal of the SC is concerned:

Quote:

---

Section 600.7 has two provisions on redressing misconduct by special counsel...Special Counsel and staff shall be subject to disciplinary action for misconduct and breach of ethical duties under the same standards and to the same extent as are other employees of the DOJ.
Grounds for removal are limited to misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies.

...the AG's regulation provide that a SC may be removed from office "only by the personal action of the Attorney General and only for good cause" or physical or mental impairments.

---

There's more, but I think that the above should be sufficient for the purposes of this response.

P.S.S. After posting my response, I saw that Siggy had posted the Section 600.7 of the IC Act. So I stand corrected.

SGG

---

Quote:

---

It sounds like you are saying that nobody in the Justice Department can ever be prosecuted for violating Federal Law. Is that your excuse for not allowing Mueller to be prosecuted for his refusal to abide USC 28 CFR 45.2?

---

Quote:

---

How do you reconcile that it is proper for Sessions to abide CFR 45.2 but it is proper for Mueller to refuse to abide the same CFR 45.2?

---

Quote:

---

28 CFR 45.2:...a Justice Department employee shall not participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship with...an elected official, a candidate (whether or not successful) for elective, public office, a political party, or a campaign organization.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:

Quote:

---

It sounds like you are saying that nobody in the Justice Department can ever be prosecuted for violating Federal Law. Is that your excuse for not allowing Mueller to be prosecuted for his refusal to abide USC 28 CFR 45.2?

---

Before I answer, I advise you to re-read my post. At no time do I say for anyone to violate the law, that's first and foremost. Secondly, what I clearly state is that the law does not "require" anyone to resign, but, more correctly, that the AG has the final word for hiring and firing the SC. There is a BIG difference. When you resign, the person, in this case the S.C. is in control. That is not the case with this statute, CFR 45.2.
If anyone, as it clearly states in CFR 45.2, violates any section of the law, the AG has grounds to dismiss. Period, end of story.

Quote:

---

How do you reconcile that it is proper for Sessions to abide CFR 45.2 but it is proper for Mueller to refuse to abide the same CFR 45.2?

---

Okay, simple. There is a section in the code that states that the AG must recuse himself if he has a personal or political relationship...it is the whole reason why Mueller was picked as Special Counsel. The moment the acting AG picked Mueller, he became subject to the rules & regs of CFR 45.2.

I know there are those that say that Mueller and others that he chose to run the investigation, donated monies to the Clinton campaign and that should be grounds for recusal. Donating money to a campaign is neither a personal or political "relationship" with a candidate. Sessions not only participated in Trump's campaign, he was chosen to be the AG. That's two strikes because he was intimately involved. He didn't just donate money, he helped run his campaign. There's nothing wrong with that, but he just can't be involved in a "criminal investigation or prosecution," especially since he was right in the middle of the alleged violation/misconduct. Hence the conflict of interest, Sessions, once he recused himself, could never be accused of cheating to clear his name of any charges because he's not involved in the case.

Quote:

---

28 CFR 45.2:...a Justice Department employee shall not participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship with...an elected official, a candidate (whether or not successful) for elective, public office, a political party, or a campaign organization.

---

Sessions was involved directly in the campaign of one Donald J. Trump. Plus he was involved with communicating with a Russian and did not reveal it in his documents regarding security clearance. A serious matter. He had both personal and political relationship with Trump and his campaign. Sessions was directly involved. Period, end of story. He knew that there was no way he could fight it because Congress would have hung him out to dry.

Now, you want Mueller to be removed; let Trump fire him. Go ahead, write to your congressman and insist that Mueller be disqualified on the grounds that he......what!? What are your charges? Donations to Clinton? That he was improperly chosen to lead the investigation? Don't you think that Trump's attorneys haven't thought of that? Don't you think that they are plotting at this very moment to find a loophole or some caveat that will get their client off the hook?

Before you answer, stop and think a moment.

SGG

---

Quote:

---

28 CFR 45.2:...a Justice Department employee

---

Quote:

---

...shall not participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution

---

Quote:

---

...if he has a personal or political relationship with

---

Quote:

---

...an elected official, a candidate (whether or not successful) for elective, public office, a political party, or a campaign organization.

---

Quote:

---

CFR 45.2 specifies that he is violating the law, regardless of whether anybody chooses to fire him. Knowingly violating the law does not mean that he is not violating the law.

---

Quote:

---

28 CFR 45.2 - Disqualification arising from personal or political relationship.

(a) Unless authorized under paragraph (b) of this section, no employee shall participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship with:

(1) Any person or organization substantially involved in the conduct that is the subject of the investigation or prosecution; or

(2) Any person or organization which he knows has a specific and substantial interest that would be directly affected by the outcome of the investigation or prosecution.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Riverlove:
Mueller AND the 40 Hillary-donating Democrap lawyers he hired to nail Trump?

That's a real shame.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Again, the lines of communication have failed. Let's start from the beginning, shall we?

Since you state that Mueller is violating federal law, in your opinion CFR 45.2.....can you tell me what exactly did he do that has you making that statement?

Let me see if I can break it down and go step-by-step:

Quote:

---

28 CFR 45.2:...a Justice Department employee

---

Mueller became a DOJ employee the moment the acting AG Rod Rosenstein hired him as Special Counsel (do we agree on that?)

Quote:

---

...shall not participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution

---

Pretty self explanatory; can't be involved in the investigation or court trial if...stay with me, here's the tricky part

Quote:

---

...if he has a personal or political relationship with

---

Again self explanatory; DOJ employee personally knows or is friendly with a politician

Quote:

---

...an elected official, a candidate (whether or not successful) for elective, public office, a political party, or a campaign organization.

---

More self explanatory; Does Mueller personally know anyone in the Trump White House? Did he help with the campaign? If he did Rosenstein could not hire him, he would be in breach of the federal statute mentioned above. Rosenstein knows this so he hired Mueller. He has no ties to anyone, personal or political, in the Trump Administration.

The fact that he donated money to Clinton's campaign, or Santa Claus for that matter, has nothing to do with the Russian case. If Clinton were being investigated, then he would not be able to run the investigation. Simple.

Sessions, on the other hand, had a personal and political relationship with Trump and his campaign. Sessions also worked with the Trump Campaign, plus Trump chose him to be the AG. So, because he worked on the Trump Campaign, he could not run the investigation because he was involved in the campaign.
It would be a conflict of interest - in other words he could not investigate himself, he was involved with the campaign.

Rosenstein hired Mueller as an independent counsel to oversee and head up the investigation into the possible collusion with Russia.

So, tell me what federal law did Mueller violate? What did he do that has you all upset, and why are you accusing me of ignoring the statute? I understand perfectly what the law is and I know that Mueller has not violated that law. It's there in black and white.

Since you know what he did to violate that law...please enlighten me!
Once you do that, then I could understand and if he did so then, and only then will I know what you know.

Quote:

---

CFR 45.2 specifies that he is violating the law, regardless of whether anybody chooses to fire him. Knowingly violating the law does not mean that he is not violating the law.

---

Here you state that he's violating federal law, but you never say what he did; you never say why you think he violated the law. Of course, no one is above the law...no one. If he did something to break the law, then he should be removed as Special Counsel.

What did Mueller do to break the law?

SGG

---

Quote:

---

28 CFR 600.7 - Conduct and accountability.

(d) The Special Counsel may be disciplined or removed from office only by the personal action of the Attorney General. The Attorney General may remove a Special Counsel for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies. The Attorney General shall inform the Special Counsel in writing of the specific reason for his or her removal.

---

Quote:

---

28 CFR 45.2 - Disqualification arising from personal or political relationship.

(a) Unless authorized under paragraph (b) of this section, no employee shall participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship with:

(1) Any person or organization substantially involved in the conduct that is the subject of the investigation or prosecution; or

(2) Any person or organization which he knows has a specific and substantial interest that would be directly affected by the outcome of the investigation or prosecution.

---

Quote:

---

Are you saying you are in the dark about the relationship between Comey and Mueller?

---

Quote:

---

Conflict of interest means there’s some financial or pecuniary benefit that could come one’s way [as a result of an investigation]. For example, If I had worked at a business and business has something at stake, that’s a conflict. But just people being friends and knowing each other, that’s not a conflict.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Are you saying you are in the dark about the relationship between Comey and Mueller?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Are you saying you are in the dark about the relationship between Comey and Mueller?

---

Are you in the dark about the special relationship between Special Counsel Mueller and Trump?

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---