I argued in a column two weeks ago that Rosenstein’s reported plot to overthrow the president was the equivalent of a coup attempt and should not go unpunished. Now there is even more incriminating evidence coming from Baker, McCabe, and Page that Rosenstein sought to overturn the decision of the American people to elect Donald Trump as our president.

President Trump may feel that firing his deputy attorney general just weeks before the midterm elections would be politically imprudent or unwise.

But Attorney General Sessions has both a moral and legal duty under federal regulations (28 U.S.C. 528) to direct Rosenstein to step aside from overseeing the Mueller investigation.

Sessions’ failure to remove Rosenstein as supervisor of the Mueller probe undermines the rule of law. Americans can have little faith or confidence in the fairness of the special counsel’s investigation if Rosenstein – the man who oversees it – stands credibly accused of harboring a severe bias against President Trump.

Moreover, Rosenstein has a conflict of interest so acute that no sincere debate could be waged on whether he should have recused himself at the outset. As explained in Chapter 11 of my book, “The Russia Hoax,” ethical rules demand Rosenstein’s disqualification.

Rosenstein volunteered to author the memo recommending that Comey be terminated as FBI director. Since the firing is part of Mueller’s inquiry into potential obstruction of justice, Rosenstein is a witness in a key matter under investigation – and could potentially be charged with a crime by Mueller if he gave any testimony that was false or misleading.

Indeed, Mueller or his deputies interviewed Rosenstein last year. How can a pivotal witness in a case continue to play an instrumental role in an investigation over which he presides – the outcome of which is likely dependent on his own testimony?

How can Rosenstein sit in judgment on whether action should be taken by Mueller not just against President Trump, but possibly even against Rosenstein himself?

It is fundamentally wrong and unethical for Rosenstein to supervise a case in which he is a chief witness and to simultaneously judge whether a prosecution should be brought. That is tantamount to a prosecutor putting his boss or himself on the witness stand to testify in the very case he is prosecuting.

No one can be an investigator, witness, prosecutor and judge all rolled into one. Rosenstein plays each of these roles in a single case.

This is not the way the American system of justice is supposed to work.