Democrat Senators have filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, claiming that the Presiden’ts appointment of acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker is unconstitutional.
According to Fox News, “Three Democratic senators (Richard Blumenthal, Sheldon Whitehouse, and Mazie Hirono) on Monday filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging the constitutionality of President Trump’s appointment of Matthew Whitaker as acting attorney general.”
Constitutional violation? What constitutional violation?
So what part of the constitution did Trump violate? None of the Senators can say.
“Americans prize a system of checks and balances, which President Trump’s dictatorial appointment betrays,” Blumenthal said.
“Donald Trump cannot subvert the Constitution to protect himself and evade accountability,” said Hirono, who was one of the Senators that led the witch hunt against Brett Kavanaugh.
“The stakes are too high to allow the president to install an unconfirmed lackey to lead the Department of Justice – a lackey whose stated purpose, apparently, is undermining a major investigation into the president,” said Whitehouse.
Their lawsuit does cite a potential Constitutional violation, arguing that Whitaker needs to be confirmed to the “Acting AG” position. The Department of Justice certainly doesn’t see a problem with anything Trump did, citing the 1988 Federal Vacancies Reform Act as justification.
Democrats don’t even officially take over the House until January, and we already know their agenda will be to obstruct, obstruct, and obstruct some more. After all, they won’t even control the Senate at all and are already doing as much.
Whitaker will not obstruct Mueller
The talking point invented by Democrats is that Whitaker will interfere and obstruct Robert Mueller’s special counsel, which is already in its final steps, with Mueller writing his final report.
Does that make any sense? If Trump wanted Mueller gone, why wouldn’t he have simply fired him at any time since the special counsel began in 2017?
And what does Trump have to fear, exactly? The Democrat hysteria is predicated upon the thesis that Mueller actually has proof of collusion or some other kind of dirt on Donald Trump. Given every innocuous detail is leaked from the Trump administration, if Trump did indeed collude with the Russians, is it even possible we wouldn’t already know about it?
Is there any precedent for this?
The only recent comparable opposition I can find is when Republicans opposed Obama’s recess appointments. A recess appointment is when the President can nominate and essentially confirm someone to a high-level position without Senate approval, but only if the Senate is in recess.
It’s only natural that Republicans would oppose such nominations, as a President would mainly attempt a recess appointment if they know their nominee is unlikely to be confirmed. Republicans will only control the Senate by a larger margin than they currently do come January, so Whitaker wouldn’t be under threat of not being confirmed by either Senate.
Liberals hated Sessions, until they didn’t
Whitaker’s name could be replaced with *insert name here* and Democrats would oppose the man. After all, just look at the 180 they did on Sessions. When Trump hired Sessions, liberals were hysterical and called for his immediate firing.
When Trump fired Sessions, those exact same Democrats used the opportunity to be even more hysterical. If Trump came out tomorrow to declare the sky blue, Kamala Harris would declare it red.
Just look at how transparently crooked these Democrats are:
I look forward to the day Trump fires Whitaker, just so I can see these same liberals rally behind him.
