What's new
By:
Filters

Donald Fires FBI Director who's investigating Russian Election Hacking

Jeff Sessions has been fired. What happens next? Prominent Republicans such as Lindsey Graham have previously said they would raise hell if Trump were to do this. I will be surprised if that's the case.

 
It's about damn time. I don't see why any sitting president would continue to keep someone on staff that they feel is undermining their ability to be successful. I may not agree with it, but it's his right.
 
Zombie said:
Jeff Sessions has been fired. What happens next? Prominent Republicans such as Lindsey Graham have previously said they would raise hell if Trump were to do this. I will be surprised if that's the case.

Click to expand...


Why would they care? It's Trump's position to fill.
 
Alfalfa said:
Why would they care? It's Trump's position to fill.
Click to expand...
Because that position has oversight of the Mueller investigation, which Sessions recused himself from. Trump has previously expressed disappointment in Sessions because he believes the AGs role is to protect him. The acting AG has previously stated he would limit the special counsels budget to the point it would be completely ineffective, and that he views the presidents finances as outside the purview of the special counsel. This isn't about whether or not the president has the power to decide who is AG (of course he does), it's about Trump installing a toady to head the DOJ who will protect him from his crimes.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Red
tedbundy said:
It's about damn time. I don't see why any sitting president would continue to keep someone on staff that they feel is undermining their ability to be successful. I may not agree with it, but it's his right.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. Depends on motive. The president is NOT legally allowed to fire someone (like FBI director, or attorney general, cabinet secretary, etc.) whom he would normally be allowed to fire, if the motivation in doing so is something illegal such as obstruction of justice or failing to press charges against people he has personal grudges against, or members the opposition party, etc. See this article, for example: https://www.quora.com/Who-exactly-c...et-members-senators-governors-congressmen-etc
 
Zombie said:
Because that position has oversight of the Mueller investigation, which Sessions recused himself from. Trump has previously expressed disappointment in Sessions because he believes the AGs role is to protect him. The acting AG has previously stated he would limit the special counsels budget to the point it would be completely ineffective, and that he views the presidents finances as outside the purview of the special counsel. This isn't about whether or not president have the power to decide who is AG (of course they do), it's about Trump installing a toady to head the DOJ who will protect him from his crimes.
Click to expand...

Ah I see. Makes sense. But ya, of course they'll do nothing.
 
Zombie said:
Because that position has oversight of the Mueller investigation, which Sessions recused himself from. Trump has previously expressed disappointment in Sessions because he believes the AGs role is to protect him. The acting AG has previously stated he would limit the special counsels budget to the point it would be completely ineffective, and that he views the presidents finances as outside the purview of the special counsel. This isn't about whether or not the president has the power to decide who is AG (of course he does), it's about Trump installing a toady to head the DOJ who will protect him from his crimes.
Click to expand...

Whitaker is bad news...

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/07/jeff-sessions-out-as-attorney-general-972776

"As Mueller's boss, Whitaker will have control over the special counsel’s budget, as well as his decisions on subpoenas, indictments and the public disclosure of a final report.

While Whitaker, a former federal prosecutor from Iowa who joined the Justice Department under Sessions last September, has spoken highly of the special counsel himself, he has also been an outspoken critic of the Russia probe.

He’s suggested Mueller’s budget could be tightened to placate the president and he’s also argued on cable television that Trump should be cleared of wrongdoing for his decision to fire FBI Director James Comey in May 2017.

“There is no criminal case to be made on an obstruction of justice,” Whitaker said on CNN.

Whitaker has also written that Mueller’s probe should not include any examination into the Trump Organization and the president’s finances.

“The President is absolutely correct. Mueller has come up to a red line in the Russia 2016 election-meddling investigation that he is dangerously close to crossing,” he wrote in a CNN op-ed.

Whitaker's past commentary drew immediate calls for him to recuse himself from the Russia probe, although there was no indication that would happen as of Wednesday afternoon."
 
tedbundy said:
It's about damn time. I don't see why any sitting president would continue to keep someone on staff that they feel is undermining their ability to be successful. I may not agree with it, but it's his right.
Click to expand...

You mean, "undermining their ability to be successful" by not interfering with the job of the Special Prosecutor, as is required by ethical practice?
 
I'd like to see how it works out. There's a set of rules that govern his investigation, and it's been signed and agreed upon.

Whitaker: Hey bob, I know we said you could XYZ, but we'll be more comfortable with just Y. kthx.
 
The Thriller said:
Distraction? Distraction from what? I thought Trump and the repubs won last night? I mean, that’s what the repubs on this board were telling us.
Click to expand...
Haha riiiight

I was thinking of a distraction from the Sessions firing, but there's no shortage of bad news in Trumpland today
 


This has got to be the low point for Sarah Sanders. Doctoring a video to distort the truth of what happened to further their assault on the free press.

This kind of Orwellian **** is terrifying.
 
I imagine the thing those who believe a president is not above the law should be most concerned about is that, during the two months period that a lame duck Congress is controlled by the Republicans, is that acting AG Whitaker, who has himself called the Mueller probe a "witch hunt", and who has himself suggested that probe could be ground to a halt by simply defunding it, will in fact act to do just that.

I think a couple of things can be said regarding the appointment of Whitaker as acting AG.

One, it would seem clear, especially if Whitaker acts on the things he himself has suggested, that Trump appointed him in order to obstruct justice.

And two, if that is the case, appointing Whitaker as acting AG is a further declaration by Trump that he believes there should be no independence of the Justice department in our system of government. Rather, the AG serves to protect the president and his interests.

The AG owes allegiance to the president, not the Constitution.

Yet, this is the equivalent of saying the president can act outside the law, be above the law, and expect the Justice department to protect him. This is a move toward dictatorial powers. Please educate me, if you can, as to why I should not interpret the appointment of Whitaker in this light.

Before acting AG Whitaker can cripple the Mueller probe during a two month lame duck Congress, he should recuse himself from overseeing the Mueller probe, and Congress should pass some legislation protecting the Mueller probe.

I'm not holding my breath that the above precautions against the president existing outside the law will happen. But the new Congress, the new House, will be able to call Mueller in for hearings, and to ensure that the results of his investigation to date will be made known to the public.

Bottom line here is that it appears that the president is attempting to put himself above and outside the law, by possibly crippling the Mueller probe(don't think for one second that he is not concerned Don Jr. is about to be indicted), and by signaling that he intends to eliminate the independent status of the Department of Justice in our system of government. This is to be expected of an authoritarian, and is an attack on our system of government.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...t-hes-still-a-dangerous-authoritarian-madman/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top