The special counsel appointment is a very dangerous thing. Giving a prosecutor unlimited resources and power to dig into somebodyís background is irresponsible at best, and violates the Constitution at worst. Thatís especially true when thereís no oversight or real check on power.Wait, so when a prosecutor uncovers evidence of an unrelated crime in the course of an investigation, they have to duly ignore that because it's not in scope? Is that really how the justice system is supposed to work?
If Cohenís office was raided due to potential campaign finance violations related to Trumpís extramarital affairs, that has absolutely zero to do with collusion with Russia. If Rosenstein isnít reigning that in, ive got no problem with him being fired.
I donít know much about the history of the special counsel and the propriety of its use under Nixon, but in terms of due process Iíve been disgusted by the fishing expedition that both Ken Starr and Mueller have been allowed to undertake.
In this case, where campaign finance violations are generally handled through the FEC? Yeah, referring it to the DOJ, and raiding an attorneyís office, is pretty extreme.
For comparison, Obamaís 2008 campaign was guilty of accepting millions of dollars in illegal donations, much more than Trump or Cohen paid out to Daniels. There were no raids, referrals to the US Attorney, or criminal charges there. Everything was resolved with a large fine.
Trump is being handled in an atypical manner. Buffoon or not, he should be treated the same as similarly situated suspects.