Trump tried to fire Mueller in June.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oleg Deripaska was at Davos hosting a huge party? Any wonder that Trump went to Davos?

Yep. And, I hear he had Russian dressing on his salad while there. Treason!!!

Don’t be stupid. Trump doesn’t eat salad. He’s a big fan of “special sauce” though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Carter Page wants Nunes memo released because it alleges that Rosenstein illegally approved surveillance of Page based on unvetted claims by Steele/dossier paid by Trump opposition.

Look for Republicans to double down on this narrative.

The problem is, the Steel Dossier would not be close to enough to obtain a FISA warrant, so the suggestion that such a warrant was predicated on the Dossier at all, much less solely is a false narrative.

But it is very complex and those not paying attention to the details will be intentionally mislead.

The FISA warrant was issued several months before Steele met with the FBI in Rome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Carter Page wants Nunes memo released because it alleges that Rosenstein illegally approved surveillance of Page based on unvetted claims by Steele/dossier paid by Trump opposition.

Look for Republicans to double down on this narrative.

The problem is, the Steel Dossier would not be close to enough to obtain a FISA warrant, so the suggestion that such a warrant was predicated on the Dossier at all, much less solely is a false narrative.

But it is very complex and those not paying attention to the details will be intentionally mislead.

The FISA warrant was issued several months before Steele met with the FBI in Rome.

And several months before Rosenstein was at DOJ.

[Anonymous]

Apropos if firing Rosenstein

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/01/29/trumps-most-desperate-move-yet-heres-what-pushing-out-rod-rosenstein-would-mean/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have we heard anything from the elected Republicans who stated that firing Mueller would be a red line for them? Or have they mysteriously decided that red line is more of a warm beige and it's not that big a deal anymore

Mueller works for Trump so it would be perfectly legal for Trump to fire him. Democrats don't understand separation of powers. That why Obama thought he.could legislate things like DACA via executive order when Congress wouldn't pass the laws that he wanted.

Obstruction of justice is illegal. This includes acts taken for the purpose of influencing an investigation. This includes firing Comey. This includes firing the Acting Deputy AG. This includes Sessions pressuring Wray to fire McCabe. This includes ordering the WH Counsel to fire Rosenstein. See a pattern?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oleg Deripaska was at Davos hosting a huge party? Any wonder that Trump went to Davos?

Yep. And, I hear he had Russian dressing on his salad while there. Treason!!!

You can ask Gerald Baker, the WSJ Editor in the tank for Trump. He was a guest of Deripaska.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oleg Deripaska was at Davos hosting a huge party? Any wonder that Trump went to Davos?

Geez. I wonder why Trump didn’t attend??? Nice try, pp.

Hours after President Donald Trump finished up his two-day powwow with the global elite and took off for Washington, many conference participants headed over to a Swiss chalet booked by the billionaire aluminum tycoon

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/russian-billionaire-tangled-mueller-probe-throws-lavish-bash/story?id=52666742

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oleg Deripaska was at Davos hosting a huge party? Any wonder that Trump went to Davos?

Geez. I wonder why Trump didn’t attend??? Nice try, pp.

Hours after President Donald Trump finished up his two-day powwow with the global elite and took off for Washington, many conference participants headed over to a Swiss chalet booked by the billionaire aluminum tycoon

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/russian-billionaire-tangled-mueller-probe-throws-lavish-bash/story?id=52666742

Hint: Trump literally didn’t go for the party. Deripaska has a penchant for showing up at the same place as Trump. He travels to the US on a diplomatic passport and Kellyanne bought a manse adjoining his in DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have we heard anything from the elected Republicans who stated that firing Mueller would be a red line for them? Or have they mysteriously decided that red line is more of a warm beige and it's not that big a deal anymore

Mueller works for Trump so it would be perfectly legal for Trump to fire him. Democrats don't understand separation of powers. That why Obama thought he.could legislate things like DACA via executive order when Congress wouldn't pass the laws that he wanted.

Obstruction of justice is illegal. This includes acts taken for the purpose of influencing an investigation. This includes firing Comey. This includes firing the Acting Deputy AG. This includes Sessions pressuring Wray to fire McCabe. This includes ordering the WH Counsel to fire Rosenstein. See a pattern?

At this point I seriously doubt the ability of your average Trumpster to figure out what shape comes next in a kindergarten level "circle - square - triangle - circle - square - ___” sentence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have we heard anything from the elected Republicans who stated that firing Mueller would be a red line for them? Or have they mysteriously decided that red line is more of a warm beige and it's not that big a deal anymore

Mueller works for Trump so it would be perfectly legal for Trump to fire him. Democrats don't understand separation of powers. That why Obama thought he.could legislate things like DACA via executive order when Congress wouldn't pass the laws that he wanted.

Obstruction of justice is illegal. This includes acts taken for the purpose of influencing an investigation. This includes firing Comey. This includes firing the Acting Deputy AG. This includes Sessions pressuring Wray to fire McCabe. This includes ordering the WH Counsel to fire Rosenstein. See a pattern?

The chief law enforcement officer of the u.s. is trump so firing someone to influence an investigation is actually well within the law and not obstruction. Again you don't understand separation of powers. Still waiting on Mueller to tell us what illegal conduct trump was trying to cover up by firing comey, which then might constitute obstruction. If Trump wasn't covering up a crime by firing comey, then sorry nothing was obstructed.

[Anonymous]

Given Flynn has already plead guilty, your theory is awash in fraud.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have we heard anything from the elected Republicans who stated that firing Mueller would be a red line for them? Or have they mysteriously decided that red line is more of a warm beige and it's not that big a deal anymore

Mueller works for Trump so it would be perfectly legal for Trump to fire him. Democrats don't understand separation of powers. That why Obama thought he.could legislate things like DACA via executive order when Congress wouldn't pass the laws that he wanted.

Obstruction of justice is illegal. This includes acts taken for the purpose of influencing an investigation. This includes firing Comey. This includes firing the Acting Deputy AG. This includes Sessions pressuring Wray to fire McCabe. This includes ordering the WH Counsel to fire Rosenstein. See a pattern?

The chief law enforcement officer of the u.s. is trump so firing someone to influence an investigation is actually well within the law and not obstruction. Again you don't understand separation of powers. Still waiting on Mueller to tell us what illegal conduct trump was trying to cover up by firing comey, which then might constitute obstruction. If Trump wasn't covering up a crime by firing comey, then sorry nothing was obstructed.

False. One can still obstruct justice without an underlying crime. That’s not an element of any of the federal obstruction statutes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have we heard anything from the elected Republicans who stated that firing Mueller would be a red line for them? Or have they mysteriously decided that red line is more of a warm beige and it's not that big a deal anymore

Mueller works for Trump so it would be perfectly legal for Trump to fire him. Democrats don't understand separation of powers. That why Obama thought he.could legislate things like DACA via executive order when Congress wouldn't pass the laws that he wanted.

Obstruction of justice is illegal. This includes acts taken for the purpose of influencing an investigation. This includes firing Comey. This includes firing the Acting Deputy AG. This includes Sessions pressuring Wray to fire McCabe. This includes ordering the WH Counsel to fire Rosenstein. See a pattern?

The chief law enforcement officer of the u.s. is trump so firing someone to influence an investigation is actually well within the law and not obstruction. Again you don't understand separation of powers. Still waiting on Mueller to tell us what illegal conduct trump was trying to cover up by firing comey, which then might constitute obstruction. If Trump wasn't covering up a crime by firing comey, then sorry nothing was obstructed.

I guess...but even Graham said that firing Mueller is the red line.

Other than that, you should probably leave the Constitutional analysis to the experts. You do not quite have command on how the whole separation of powers/impeachment thing works. And yes, firing someone who is investigating people close to you to derail an investigation is textbook obstruction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have we heard anything from the elected Republicans who stated that firing Mueller would be a red line for them? Or have they mysteriously decided that red line is more of a warm beige and it's not that big a deal anymore

Mueller works for Trump so it would be perfectly legal for Trump to fire him. Democrats don't understand separation of powers. That why Obama thought he.could legislate things like DACA via executive order when Congress wouldn't pass the laws that he wanted.

Obstruction of justice is illegal. This includes acts taken for the purpose of influencing an investigation. This includes firing Comey. This includes firing the Acting Deputy AG. This includes Sessions pressuring Wray to fire McCabe. This includes ordering the WH Counsel to fire Rosenstein. See a pattern?

The chief law enforcement officer of the u.s. is trump so firing someone to influence an investigation is actually well within the law and not obstruction. Again you don't understand separation of powers. Still waiting on Mueller to tell us what illegal conduct trump was trying to cover up by firing comey, which then might constitute obstruction. If Trump wasn't covering up a crime by firing comey, then sorry nothing was obstructed.

+1

"You cannot charge a president with obstruction of justice for exercising his constitutional power to fire Comey and his constitutional authority to tell the Justice Department who to investigate, who not to investigate. That's what Thomas Jefferson did, that's what Lincoln did, that's what Roosevelt did. We have precedents that clearly establish that,"

Dershowitz warned that in order to go after a president for obstruction of justice, "clearly illegal acts" would have had to have been committed."

Even in the case of former President Bill Clinton, who influenced potential witnesses not to tell the truth, there was no obstruction of justice charges ever seriously considered, the liberal-affiliated attorney added.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have we heard anything from the elected Republicans who stated that firing Mueller would be a red line for them? Or have they mysteriously decided that red line is more of a warm beige and it's not that big a deal anymore

Mueller works for Trump so it would be perfectly legal for Trump to fire him. Democrats don't understand separation of powers. That why Obama thought he.could legislate things like DACA via executive order when Congress wouldn't pass the laws that he wanted.

Obstruction of justice is illegal. This includes acts taken for the purpose of influencing an investigation. This includes firing Comey. This includes firing the Acting Deputy AG. This includes Sessions pressuring Wray to fire McCabe. This includes ordering the WH Counsel to fire Rosenstein. See a pattern?

The chief law enforcement officer of the u.s. is trump so firing someone to influence an investigation is actually well within the law and not obstruction. Again you don't understand separation of powers. Still waiting on Mueller to tell us what illegal conduct trump was trying to cover up by firing comey, which then might constitute obstruction. If Trump wasn't covering up a crime by firing comey, then sorry nothing was obstructed.

+1

"You cannot charge a president with obstruction of justice for exercising his constitutional power to fire Comey and his constitutional authority to tell the Justice Department who to investigate, who not to investigate. That's what Thomas Jefferson did, that's what Lincoln did, that's what Roosevelt did. We have precedents that clearly establish that,"

Dershowitz warned that in order to go after a president for obstruction of justice, "clearly illegal acts" would have had to have been committed."

Even in the case of former President Bill Clinton, who influenced potential witnesses not to tell the truth, there was no obstruction of justice charges ever seriously considered, the liberal-affiliated attorney added.

If Trump clearly fired Comey in order to stop the Russia investigation, then that would be obstruction. And while a President has the constitutional authority to fire someone, he does not have the authority to obstruct. Just as you have the power to fire an employee, but not for being black.