Schiff: Whitaker must recuse himself on special counsel or Democrats will investigate

[Julian Englis]

Source: NBC

Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., warned acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker that he should recuse himself from oversight over special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe amid concerns about his view of the investigation.

"If he doesn't recuse himself, if he has any involvement whatsoever in this Russia probe, we are going to find out whether he made commitments to the president about the probe, whether he is serving as a back channel to the president or his lawyers about the probe, whether he's doing anything to interfere with the probe," Schiff said Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press."

"Mr. Whitaker needs to understand that he will be called to answer, and any role that he plays will be exposed to the public. We don't want there to be any ambiguity about that."

Whitaker's sudden ascension to the helm of the Justice Department has prompted criticism from Democrats who believe he could undermine the special counsel's investigation, as well as from legal experts who question whether Whitaker is constitutionally eligible to serve in the position.

Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/schiff-whitaker-must-recuse-himself-special-counsel-or-democrats-will-n934916

---

The Hard Line.

[Mr.Bill]

1. A question I have about Whitaker

is has he been formally sworn in yet, and who did the swearing in?

[Izzy Blue]

2. Wouldn't Whitaker have to be

confirmed first before being sworn in?

[Mr.Bill]

3. Well, that's the arguement at hand.

And what judge would swear him in if he hasn't? Although they don't necessarily have to use a judge. The Vice President can swear people in. Joe Biden did it a number of times when he was VP. I would guess other elected officials could do it also.

That's why I want to know if it's happened and who did it.

[underpants]

4. He could be a recess appointment.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211394587


Fox's Andrew Napolitano: Matt Whitaker 'Not Legally Qualified' to Be Acting Attorney General

Video at link

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/foxs-andrew-napolitano-matt-whitaker-not-legally-qualified-to-be-acting-attorney-general/

Napolitano appeared on Fox & Friends Thursday to talk about how Trump picked Whitaker to serve as acting AG after Jeff Sessions resigned at his request. Napolitano said Whitaker is “absolutely” professionally qualified for the job, but that he isn’t “legally qualified” for the job.

“There’s only three ways a person can become acting attorney general,” Napolitano said. He explained: 1. If you are the deputy attorney general, a position currently held by Rod Rosenstein; 2. If you work in the DOJ and have a job that requires Senate confirmation. 3. If there’s a recess appointment.

When Steve Doocy pointed out that Whitaker already swore an oath of office for his previous job in the DOJ and doesn’t have to do it again, Napolitano responded “I believe that’s a political response, not a legal one.” Ainsley Earhardt asked if there was a way for Whitaker to become eligible for AG full time, which prompted Napolitano to say “if he is the acting attorney general he is disqualified from becoming the attorney genera

[reACTIONary]

21. I thimk this is mistaken....

.... a recess apt would make him the ag, not acting ag. The controling law is the federal vacancies act:

1 deputy
2 having already been confirmed in another position
3 working in dept at g13 salery, 130 k

Wit nit is workimg at g 13 salery level, but is not a civil servent, so there may be some wiggle room to challenge is acting capacity .

[reACTIONary]

20. He is in an acting position, he has not been nominated....

.... and will most very likely not be.

He was appointed acting secretary of justice dept under the federal vacancies act. To temporarily fill a cabinet position, you have to have been previously confirmed for some office, or be a G13 civil servent. G13 is 130 K per year. He makes 130 K but is a political apointee not a civil servant, so there is some ambiguity . He can only serve something like 120 days in an acting capacity.

[rurallib]

5. Congress doing oversight. What a novel concept!

[YessirAtsaFact]

6. A threat from a Democrat with teeth

How refreshing!

I'm looking forward to see how the first quarter of 2019 plays out in Congress.

[Julian Englis]

8. Not a threat. A simple statment explaining how things are.

Congress is supposed to oversee such matters. Whitaker and tRump seem not to appreciate this. Schiff has just explained this obvious truth to two fools.

[YessirAtsaFact]

17. Semantics. I say threat, you say statement of how things are.

In either case, after two long years, there is power to back it up.

[FakeNoose]

7. Nuts in a vise, that's how you do it!

I'm gonna love every minute of Adam Schiff as chairman of the House Judicial committee.

[reACTIONary]

22. And I'm going to love every minute...

.... of Elijah Cummings on the oversight committee! My rep!

[Onward AND Upward]

9. What A Relief To Hear This News. Thanks. nt

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

10. If he recuses like Nunes....whats the point?

[Onward AND Upward]

12. You asked: If Whitaker Agrees To Recuse Himself From the Mueller Investigation...

WHAT are you smoking?

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

14. Nunes "recusesd" to satisfy the public...then went on to still do shit

to sabotage the house committee. The guy needs to be replaced...not allowed to just say hes recused. What are you smoking?
New to DU? Id say welcome, but,....

[Onward AND Upward]

18. Get your information straight...

You need to do some further reading. For one, recusal is not in the cards, THAT is what Trump has been whinning about with Sessions from the start, and why he fired him. He chose Whitaker, BECAUSE he will not recuse. Whitaker is now fine, right where he is. Schiff has already fired the necessary warning shot accross his bow, and he will now have to sit, take up the space that Noel Franciso might have moved into (much worse for us), and just twiddle his bigoted thumbs. No wonder Rosenstein said "he was a superb choice", with a smile and cherry on top.

[Quixote1818]

11. Seems they could also challenge his legitimacy on legal grounds. nt

[Izzy Blue]

13. Thanks for the replies.

Yoo, Thomas and Conway all say unconstitutional BUT

???

Snip:

"When alsed for comment, the DOJ pointed Axios to the Vacancies Reform Act. Here’s the text, which isn’t long. If I’m reading it correctly, this is the section Trump is claiming authorizes Whitaker’s appointment. If an officer dies, resigns, or can’t perform his duties, then…

“(2) notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct a person who serves in an office for which appointment is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity subject to the time limitations of section 3346; or

“(3) notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct an officer or employee of such Executive agency to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity, subject to the time limitations of section 3346, if

“(A) during the 365-day period preceding the date of death, resignation, or beginning of inability to serve of the applicable officer, the officer or employee served in a position in such agency for not less than 90 days; and

“(B) the rate of pay for the position described under subparagraph (A) is equal to or greater than the minimum rate of pay payable for a position at GS-15 of the General Schedule.

In other words, if you’re a big cheese in the same agency where the vacancy has opened up (Whitaker was Sessions’s chief of staff, remember) then you’re eligible to fill that vacancy temporarily. Note the distinction between sections (2) and (3). Per section (2), POTUS can fill the vacancy if he wants with an employee of any agency so long as that person has been confirmed by the Senate. But per section (3), if POTUS is choosing a temporarily replacement from within the same agency he doesn’t need to worry about that Senate “advise and consent” stuff. That’s why he chose Whitaker instead of a lawyer in some other department.

The counterargument made by Conway, Yoo, and Thomas is simple: The president always has to worry about that “advise and consent” stuff. It doesn’t matter what the Vacancies Reform Act or any other statute says. The Appointments Clause in Article II of the Constitution says that “principal officers” must be confirmed by the Senate, period. (“Inferior officers,” who work under principals, can be appointed without confirmation.) For good reason.

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/11/08/john-yoo-whitakers-appointment-acting-attorney-general-unconstitutional/

[Julian Englis]

15. Also, the bottom line was that tRump fired Sessions. n/t

[Scruffy1]

16. He's already been exposed as an incmpetent hack and the R's don't care.

I'm hoping the Postal Inspectors charge him with criminality in the ongoing patent scam. The FBI already gave him a pass. He was "aked" to pay back his fees. Some punishment. this is what we have for justice if you are a loyal Republican. He abused his office when he was US dirict Attorney in Iowa to harass Democrats with the FBI's. help.https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/11/11/matthew-whitaker-iowa-witch-hunt-222408

[Kurt V.]

19. autocrat tRump checking his boundaries