In a recent episode of “Two Mikes,” co-hosted by Dr. Michael Scheuer and Colonel Mike, the focus was on America’s foremost authority on Watergate, Geoff Shepard. The discussion revolved around an amicus brief authored for the Supreme Court’s consideration by President Reagan’s Attorney General, Edward Meese, along with associates Steven Calibrese and Gray Lawson.
The conversation centered on the amicus brief challenging the qualifications of the Biden Administration’s chief Special Prosecutor, referred to as Mr. Smith. According to Meese’s argument, Smith’s appointment lacks Senate approval by vote, rendering him disqualified for the position. The argument is not centered on Smith’s academic credentials or bar admission but on the constitutional requirement for Senate approval.
Meese contends that Mr. Smith, despite being a Department of Justice employee, was not serving as an attorney at the time of his appointment. This, Meese argues, necessitates Senate approval for Smith to serve as a special prosecutor. Notably, this raises concerns about the appointment process, echoing similar issues with the appointment of Robert Mueller in the Russia investigation.
Geoff Shepard, an expert on Watergate, highlighted the vagueness of the Appointments Clause of Article III of the U.S. Constitution. However, he suggests that Meese’s document aligns with both the Article III clause and other federal laws. This, he believes, gives the document merit and makes a compelling case for a hearing before the Supreme Court.
Shepard concludes that the document presented by Meese and his associates has merit and should be seriously considered by the Supreme Court. The constitutional ambiguity surrounding the Appointments Clause adds weight to the argument, raising questions about the legitimacy of Mr. Smith’s role as the chief Special Prosecutor.
The implications of this discussion are far-reaching, as it challenges the appointment processes for special prosecutors and their qualifications. The need for Senate approval, as argued by Meese, brings into question the authority of prosecutors appointed without the required consent.
As the Two Mikes delve into the constitutional concerns raised by Edward Meese’s amicus brief, it becomes evident that the appointment of special prosecutors is not a mere formality. The constitutional nuances and requirements highlighted in this episode add depth to the ongoing debate over the legitimacy of the Biden Administration’s efforts to find legal grounds against Donald Trump. The prospect of a Supreme Court hearing further intensifies the scrutiny on the appointment processes, setting the stage for a crucial legal battle.
Indulge in the finest quality with Freedom First Beef – sous vide, freeze-dried, and ready to savor today or in a decade. Get premium, lab-grown meat-free, mRNA jab-free, and All-American beef for a delicious and secure future. Order now using code TWOMIKES for a 15% discount.