Jack Smith hearing question left Merrick Garland shuddering in sheer panic

Merrick Garland Photo by The White House via Wikimedia public domain

Jack Smith is under a white-hot spotlight for his witch hunt against Donald Trump.

Now the Justice Department is in the hot seat over his rogue investigation. 

And one question about Jack Smith left Merrick Garland shuddering in sheer panic.

Merrick Garland gets grilled during a Congressional hearing 

Attorney General Merrick Garland testified before the House Judiciary Committee in an explosive hearing.

He was grilled over the weaponization of the federal government against former President Donald Trump.

Representative Thomas Massie (R-KY) had the Attorney General on his heels over whether Special Counsel Jack Smith’s appointment was constitutional.

“What gives you the authority to appoint a special counsel to create…you’ve created an office in the U.S. government that does not exist without authorization from Congress,” Massie asked.

The Kentucky lawmaker referenced a legal argument made by former Reagan Attorney General Edwin Meese and conservative legal scholars that Garland’s appointment of Smith to be Special Counsel was unconstitutional.

U.S. Attorneys are normally appointed to serve as Special Counsels who are subject to confirmation by the Senate.

Smith – a former Obama Justice Department official – was a private citizen when Garland appointed him to serve as Special Counsel.

The vast powers of the Special Counsel’s office means that Smith is subject to the Constitution’s appointment clause.

Merrick Garland sputters trying to defend the constitutionality of Jack Smith’s appointment

Meese filed amicus briefs with federal courts arguing that Smith’s appointment was unconstitutional and that he should be removed.

“Not clothed in the authority of the federal government, Smith is a modern example of the naked emperor,” Meese’s brief states. “Improperly appointed, he has no more authority to represent the United States in this Court than Bryce Harper, Taylor Swift, or Jeff Bezos.”

Massie cited Meese’s work to Garland which put him on his heels.

“There are regulations under which the Attorney General appoint Special Counsel, they have been in effect for 30 years, maybe longer, under both parties. The matter that you’re talking about, about whether somebody can have an employee of the Justice Department serve as special counsel has been adjudicated,” Garland said.

But the regulations he pointed to don’t authorize the appointment of a private citizen to be Special Counsel.

“It seems like you’ve created an office that would require an act of Congress, yet there’s not an act of Congress that authorizes that,” Massie said. “And even if it didn’t require an act of Congress, and you’ve already admitted that there was no act of Congress that established this office, it would still require, according to the Constitution, a nomination by the President and confirmation by the Senate.”

Jack Smith was appointed to serve as Special Counsel against Donald Trump because he’s a political hack who confirmed during the Obama administration that he’d twist the law to help the Democrat Party.

He had a corruption conviction against former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell (R) overturned by the Supreme Court in a unanimous 2015 decision.

Judge Aileen Cannon, who is presiding over Trump’s classified documents case, agreed to a hearing over the constitutionality of Smith’s appointment.

Jack Smith’s witch hunt could implode if a court finds his appointment was unconstitutional.

Stay tuned to Unmuzzled News for any updates to this ongoing story.

Total
0
Shares
Leave a Reply

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

Previous Article

Biden just set fire to the country with one shocking move

Next Article

Trump impeachment lawyer just threw cold water on Democrats' celebration

Related Posts