[–] Trumpocrat2020 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Mueller didn't handle the Clinton case or project timelines for it. Not so with Trump. Apples to oranges.
[–] Trumpocrat2020 ago
No, Ken Starr's title lapsed with the law that authorized it. These men are investigating, from entirely different sources of authority, two wildly different fact sets.
[–] Thisismyvoatusername ago
I actually do think the Clinton special prosecutor was a witch hunt and I happen to respect Ken Starr and even supported Clinton's impeachment because I thought lying under oath was unacceptable for the nation's chief executive. It should have never come to that. Clinton never should have been made to testify. Although that was set up by what I consider a mistake by the Supreme Court (allowing civil cases to be brought against the President in his personal capacity rather than being tolled), it still would not have arisen without the special prosecutor.
Special prosecutors are an institutional abomination which should never be used, ever. Having been put in place, they have no easy end point without bringing cases against at least someone for something. Even if set up to investigate something, they should never have prosecutorial power or discretion.
[–] p0ssum 2 points -1 points 1 point (+1|-2) ago
Yeah, well, welcome to the real world. They shouldn't be necessary, unfortunately they are. In the case of Clinton, it was PURELY a political hit. In the current case, the Russians did their level best to have a hand in our last election, and if Team Trump coordinated or colluded with them, to do so, it needs to be brought to light. That, if true, would certainly be disqualifying. If Trump obstructed the investigation, that would also be disqualifying. Neither of those is a political target ... they protecting our democracy.
[–] Thisismyvoatusername 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
I disagree Clinton was purely a political hit. But leaving that aside, can you think of a single special prosecutor from the 1970s to now who did less harm than good? I cannot. The system is not built for it. It does structural harm far greater than any ill which it is trying to address. If the executive has done something wrong, the legislature can impeach. Only then under a new administration should a criminal investigation amd prosecution be brought. If Congress refuses to do that because of politics or cowardess, then that problem should be dealt with by voters not ignored by using an extra-Constitutional special prosecutor.
A special prosecutor is never necessary. It is an imposition of a new branch of government outside of the three called for in the Constitution and which operates outside of the checks and balances set up therein. It is as bad as the administrative state that courts have allowed to grow under (and even apart from) the Administrative Procedure Act. Frankly, it is possibly worse. While executive agencies are essentially legislating without the safeguards of the Constitutional system, at least they are usually done pursuant to rule making procedures and underlying legislation. Special prosecutors act almost like ad hoc tyrants subject only to their own appetites.