In his opening salvo, Conway said Calabresi’s op-ed may have influenced Trump’s thinking on the legal validity of the probe when he tweeted in early June “the appointment of the Special Counsel can be totally UNCONSTITUTIONAL!”
Conway saved some of his most direct criticism for Trump himself.
“in which isn’t very surprising to see the president tweet a meritless legal position,” Conway concluded, “because, as a non-lawyer, he wouldn’t know the difference between a Great one in addition to a bad one.”
Conway argued in which the Mueller investigation has not exceeded its authority under the Appointments Clause of the Constitution, in addition to challenged Calabresi’s assertion in which the special counsel can be acting like a “principal officer,” which Calabresi said would certainly violate the Supreme Court’s precedent.
In a yet-to-be-published response defending his stance on Mueller, Calabresi said Conway “mangles” his argument in addition to “fails to confront the overwhelming evidence in which the Mueller appointment can be unconstitutional.”
The White House did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.
Kellyanne Conway has swatted away questions about her husband’s criticism of the president she directly serves, saying in a CNN interview in April in which asking about his social media use can be “meant to harass in addition to embarrass.”