How Many More Reasons Do You Need to Fire Robert Mueller?

Current special counsel and former FBI Director Robert Mueller will reportedly announce on Monday who has been indicted by a federal grand jury pursuant to findings of his investigation.

Charges are presently sealed under orders of a federal judge in Washington, D.C. and the public has been told to expect an arrest on Monday for anyone who has been charged.

As the events unfold, many continue to ask in frustration, why is Mueller still in charge of the investigation? (This article will focus on that question alone and not whether anyone else is innocent or guilty of a possible crime.)

Mueller from the beginning has been riddled with potential conflicts of interest.

You may recall Mueller was the former FBI Director who worked with James Comey when Comey served as deputy attorney general. Both men reportedly had a close friendship and working relationship. Mueller was originally appointed by President George W. Bush to lead the FBI but both later worked together under former President Obama, as well.

Obama would eventually appoint Comey to replace Mueller as FBI Director.

Putting aside the potential conflict of interest that Mueller had in questioning Comey during Mueller’s current Russia interference in the 2016 election investigation, the list of conflicts keeps growing.

Fast forward to Mueller’s connection in the Uranium One deal, an agreement that was completed in 2010 when 20 percent of America’s uranium was sold to Russia.

Then Secretary Hillary Clinton served on the Committee of Foreign Investment as did U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and both weighed in on whether the deal should be signed.

During and prior to the uranium deal being negotiated, Mueller was the head of the FBI.

As such, he was in charge and directed current Deputy U.S. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to head the investigation into allegations that the Russians were bribing and extorting American contractors in the nuclear industry with kick backs and threats. National security interests were also said to have been threatened.

Allegations are that Holder’s Justice Department didn’t disclose the Russian “racketeering scheme” before the uranium deal was signed in 2010.

Instead, the DOJ investigation continued for four more years without informing either the American public or Congress.

In 2015, Hillary Clinton declared there was no Russian wrongdoing, no national security threats no reason why the agreement shouldn’t have been signed.

At this point, the question for Mueller becomes what did he know about Uranium One, did he tell the Obama administration about the findings of his Russia investigation and if not, why not? Was there a duty to tell the Obama administration? If so and Obama wasn’t told, is there a penalty for failure to act?

These questions present a potential conflict of interest for Mueller.

Another possible conflict of interest in remaining as special counsel in the current Russia investigation is that Mueller could possibly be guilty of a crime in connection with the uranium deal, have been a co-conspirator to a possible crime or at the very least, is a witness whose testimony could be key to any investigation into possible wrongdoing of Hillary and others within the Obama administration.

Some may say, however, Mueller’s current investigation about the 2016 election has nothing to do with Uranium One.

Even if you decide that Russia interference with the election is a separate issue from the Uranium One deal, isn’t it possible that Russia wanted Hillary to win the 2016 presidential election so they could garner more favorable deals with her, like they did with Uranium One?

Does it prove Russia interfered with the election to make that happen? No, but it should be investigated because Mueller’s prior actions (or lack thereof) connected with Uranium One could have set in motion Russia interference with the 2016 election.

Anything is possible and no stone should go uncovered. After all, isn’t that what Mueller is supposedly doing?

Does Mueller have any connection to the infamous Fusion GPS/Christopher Steele dossier that would present a conflict of interest for him?

Admittedly, it’s a long shot but still possible.

Just focusing on Mueller and not the innocence or guilt of the Clinton Campaign, the Democratic National Committee or Obama’s Organizing For Action group, do we know for certain that the dossier, Uranium One and possible Russia interference in the election aren’t somehow connected?

Until that question has been resolved, Mueller’s involvement in one or all three events raises a possible conflict of interest for him.

In conclusion, most GOP Congress continue to put their trust in Mueller as though he can do no wrong.

Maybe he hasn’t done anything wrong but if he has he certainly isn’t likely to investigate and indict himself, right?

Also, if he hasn’t committed any wrongdoing, at the very least he could be a key witness against Hillary Clinton, Obama, Comey, Eric Holder and many others.

As I have continued to say from the very beginning when Mueller was first appointed special counsel, there are too many conflicts of interest and too many unanswered questions when it comes to Mueller’s involvement.

That being said, Mueller should voluntarily resign or be removed immediately. By allowing him to stay, the GOP Congress is not protecting the best interests of the American public when it comes to ensuring that justice will be served.

If you disagree and believe Mueller should remain as special counsel, then ask yourself, should Eric Holder be appointed as special counsel to investigate Hillary Clinton’s possible campaign finance violations or what she knew when she recommended the Uranium One deal?