Congressmen Trey Gowdy and Bob Goodlatte appeared on Fox News with Bret Baier Bill Hemmer to talk about appointing a second Special Counsel.  I’ve heard it said that a Special Counsel or Prosecutor is generally a bad thing on the grounds that it signifies that the regular justice process has failed or can’t be relied upon.  What, then, does it say when having a Special Counsel already isn’t good enough?

Baier Hemmer didn’t ask the one question that I can’t move past.  It’s fine and probably correct that IG Horowitz doesn’t have the tools he needs to fully investigate the Justice Department’s actions with regard to the Steele Dossier, but why can’t Mueller do it?  What’s wrong with the Special Counsel we already have?

This is confusing coming from Gowdy, because he has consistently defended Mueller and his mission.  Why doesn’t Gowdy have confidence in Mueller to investigate something that is well within his purview?  The Steele Dossier is one of the core components of the whole Trump Russia narrative that led to Mueller’s appointment in the first place.

I don’t understand why it’s just accepted that Mueller is doing his job by going after Paul Manafort on money laundering Ukrainian funds in 2013 but someone else needs to investigate something that was a factor during the election.  The Steele Dossier included information about Trump and Russians and even involves a criminal referral that the Senate Judiciary Committee has made.  Mueller should be handling this.  Am I missing something?

It’s very difficult for me to come to any other conclusion than that Gowdy doesn’t have as much faith in Mueller as he claims.  The fact that he’s calling for a second Special Counsel is as clear an indicator as I can find that he knows Mueller isn’t pursuing it.  It makes no sense to me why he isn’t either criticizing Mueller for not following such an obvious lead or demanding that he simply be replaced.

It’s frustrating enough that we already have one Special Counsel who won’t tell anyone what he’s doing, isn’t clear on what he is or isn’t supposed to be investigating, won’t tell us how much longer he’s going to be at it, and won’t even tell us his budget.  We don’t need two.


  1. That was Bill Hemmer who was doing the interview.

    I think Goodlatte is wrong in his lack of urgency, they gotta do this now before the November elections.

    As a general rule, I think special councils need to be on a tight leash. It was absolutely disgraceful how Fitzgerald went after Scooter Libby. Tasked with finding out who leaked Plame’s name, he found out at the onset that it was Armitage. The investigation should have ended right there. But Fitzgerald needed a scalp, any scalp so he got Libby for lying when it was actually his bad memory, telling the FBI (after he already knew Armitage had revealed her identity) the he told one guy when it fact it was another guy. Then Fitzgerald did not release all exculpatory evidence to Libby’s attorney, withholding Judith Miller’s testimony which would have exonerated Libby.

    Maybe Gowdy feels that Mueller has enough on his plate already. Given his close ties to Comey, McCabe, Orr, Stryok, and Yates, Gowdy probably feels that someone independent would be a better fit.

  2. That was Bill Hemmer who was doing the interview.

    Well, if I ever needed to prove that I don’t pay much attention to or watch Fox News, there it is.

    Maybe Gowdy feels that Mueller has enough on his plate already.

    Mueller would have less on his plate if he’d quit going after old Ukrainian money laundering, Russian bots that won’t be extradited, and interviewing Steve Bannon who didn’t even work on the campaign when any of the supposed collusion was happening.

    Really don’t understand how Gowdy can think he’s doing a good job when he isn’t doing his job.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


%d bloggers like this: