<< Comey Fired | Main | News Scan >>

The Checkered History of Special Prosecutors

Callum Borchers has this post at The Fix, the WaPo's political blog, titled "Want a special prosecutor to replace James Comey? History might change your mind."

With James B. Comey out as FBI director and President Trump holding the power to nominate his replacement, calls for a special prosecutor to take over the bureau's investigation of Russian election meddling are all the rage. Dozens of Senate Democrats have said they want an independent probe to determine whether Trump's campaign colluded with Russia.

The idea makes sense, in theory. In practice, some investigations headed by special prosecutors have rung up huge tabs while producing modest results.


Every reasonable person from both sides of the aisle (and in America) believe that "Russian election meddling" must be thoroughly investigated in an objective and fair manner untainted by politics.

Does anyone seriously believe that such an investigation can be accomplished by the House or Senate committees?

Does anyone seriously believe that, after everything that has transpired over the last year or so, such an investigation can be accomplished by an FBI that will soon be run by a political appointee of Trump -- a person who according to Comey's testimony last week was not per se beyond the potential scope of an FBI investigation?

Yes, special prosecutors have a checkered history. But is there another person or body that can carry out this vital task in a manner that all reasonable persons believe it should be accomplished?

Does anyone seriously believe that if it was Madame President Clinton that you would be making the complete opposite argument?

This issue HAS been investigated for months (including by the Obama DOJ) now and I have yet to see a shred of evidence come forth.

Leave a comment

Monthly Archives