President Grant and Truman Both Fired Special Prosecutors

"Firing Mueller would be an insult to the Founding Fathers."

That's a Ken Starr op-ed in, where else, the Washington Post. Starr makes frequent references to the Constitution in defense of an office that has no constitutional basis. 

"The good news is that the American people are being well served by structural arrangements put in place at the founding of the nation and augmented through the experience of succeeding generations... Structural evolution has resulted in the Justice Department’s creation of a unique office, the special counsel."

The Founders had never heard of a special counsel, special prosecutor, independent counsel, or whatever else you might want to call it, and would have had little use for it. We're talking about an "ancient institution" that dates back to the Grant administration. And President Grant fired the first special prosecutor ever because he suspected him of trying to undermine his administration.

Harry Truman fired another special prosecutor for overreaching his authority.

It's been done before. And whatever objections there are, let's not pretend that a setup whose current nature, as Starr points out, dates back to the Clinton administration, is some sort of hallowed Constitutional institution.

There are good arguments for having such a thing. And, as Starr points out, for not letting Congress wield such a blunt instrument. But at the same time, we elect leaders. And setups like these allow assorted interests to overturn the will of the voters.

And that's exactly what's going on here.

As for insulting the Founders, has Starr forgotten Jefferson's approach to the Judiciary Act? 

Share