Peter Strzok and Andy McCabe file wrongful termination lawsuits

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:McCabe was a political appointee. They do not have the same rights as a regular fed. He served at the pleasure do the president and the president has the right to dismiss him for any reason. A finding, even if only preliminary, that the director of the fbi has been less than forthcoming would be sufficient to overcome any allegation that his firing was politically motivated but in any event the ability to be fired for any reason includes the belief that the fbi director and president do not see eye to eye. McCabe seems to have forgotten he was no longer a regular fed. Strosck has a better argument.

At what point did McCabe become a political appointee? McCabe says in the lawsuit that Wray wouldn't tell him why he was demoted from the job. He says "Wray and Sessions had agreed not to discuss the specific reason" with him. Sounds fishy.

[Anonymous]

He leaked memos. That is an action that violates a lot of things and would result in firing in every level of government. He is going to lose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He leaked memos. That is an action that violates a lot of things and would result in firing in every level of government. He is going to lose.

Actually, that was his job as media liason.

He retired and had his pension improperly taken from him. Wrongfully and not by the proper procedure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He leaked memos. That is an action that violates a lot of things and would result in firing in every level of government. He is going to lose.

Actually, that was his job as media liason.

He retired and had his pension improperly taken from him. Wrongfully and not by the proper procedure.

You are kidding right. A Deputy director of the FBI is not a media liaison and leaking memos is not how media liaisons actually work. And pause a moment. He had not retired yet. He had not yet achieved 20 years of service. Those things didn’t happen because he got fired for dishonesty and leaking memos. Seems like maybe he was counting chickens before they hatched AND shitting where he eats. Most people have learned those lessons much earlier.

[Anonymous]

This will get thrown out of court before any discovery happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:McCabe was a political appointee. They do not have the same rights as a regular fed. He served at the pleasure do the president and the president has the right to dismiss him for any reason. A finding, even if only preliminary, that the director of the fbi has been less than forthcoming would be sufficient to overcome any allegation that his firing was politically motivated but in any event the ability to be fired for any reason includes the belief that the fbi director and president do not see eye to eye. McCabe seems to have forgotten he was no longer a regular fed. Strosck has a better argument.

That’s not actually the legal standard. What you’re describing is a post hoc rationalization.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This will get thrown out of court before any discovery happens.

Highly unlikely, but keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:McCabe was a political appointee. They do not have the same rights as a regular fed. He served at the pleasure do the president and the president has the right to dismiss him for any reason. A finding, even if only preliminary, that the director of the fbi has been less than forthcoming would be sufficient to overcome any allegation that his firing was politically motivated but in any event the ability to be fired for any reason includes the belief that the fbi director and president do not see eye to eye. McCabe seems to have forgotten he was no longer a regular fed. Strosck has a better argument.

That’s not actually the legal standard. What you’re describing is a post hoc rationalization.

No that is what you are doing. He broke rules and got fired for it. You are justifying what he did because you think he was justified because you hate trump. That is a post hoc rationalization.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not illegal to have an affair.

No idea about here, but it could be, in some contexts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He leaked memos. That is an action that violates a lot of things and would result in firing in every level of government. He is going to lose.

Actually, that was his job as media liason.

He retired and had his pension improperly taken from him. Wrongfully and not by the proper procedure.

You are kidding right. A Deputy director of the FBI is not a media liaison and leaking memos is not how media liaisons actually work. And pause a moment. He had not retired yet. He had not yet achieved 20 years of service. Those things didn’t happen because he got fired for dishonesty and leaking memos. Seems like maybe he was counting chickens before they hatched AND shitting where he eats. Most people have learned those lessons much earlier.

This was the "leaked memos":

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-disciplinary-office-recommends-firing-former-deputy-director-andrew-mccabe/2018/03/14/c1d0dc1a-208a-11e8-86f6-54bfff693d2b_story.html

Yes, authorizing meetings with reporters was his job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not illegal to have an affair.

No idea about here, but it could be, in some contexts.

Like, if you are running for, and become President?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:McCabe was a political appointee. They do not have the same rights as a regular fed. He served at the pleasure do the president and the president has the right to dismiss him for any reason. A finding, even if only preliminary, that the director of the fbi has been less than forthcoming would be sufficient to overcome any allegation that his firing was politically motivated but in any event the ability to be fired for any reason includes the belief that the fbi director and president do not see eye to eye. McCabe seems to have forgotten he was no longer a regular fed. Strosck has a better argument.

That’s not actually the legal standard. What you’re describing is a post hoc rationalization.

No that is what you are doing. He broke rules and got fired for it. You are justifying what he did because you think he was justified because you hate trump. That is a post hoc rationalization.

His firing was improper, didn't follow procedure. He is also asserting that it was also wrongful, illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:McCabe was a political appointee. They do not have the same rights as a regular fed. He served at the pleasure do the president and the president has the right to dismiss him for any reason. A finding, even if only preliminary, that the director of the fbi has been less than forthcoming would be sufficient to overcome any allegation that his firing was politically motivated but in any event the ability to be fired for any reason includes the belief that the fbi director and president do not see eye to eye. McCabe seems to have forgotten he was no longer a regular fed. Strosck has a better argument.

That’s not actually the legal standard. What you’re describing is a post hoc rationalization.

No that is what you are doing. He broke rules and got fired for it. You are justifying what he did because you think he was justified because you hate trump. That is a post hoc rationalization.

No, what he really got fired for was investigating Trump.

[Anonymous]

I don't know that there's a place for this but I just wanted to say it: Andrew McCabe is SO hot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:McCabe was a political appointee. They do not have the same rights as a regular fed. He served at the pleasure do the president and the president has the right to dismiss him for any reason. A finding, even if only preliminary, that the director of the fbi has been less than forthcoming would be sufficient to overcome any allegation that his firing was politically motivated but in any event the ability to be fired for any reason includes the belief that the fbi director and president do not see eye to eye. McCabe seems to have forgotten he was no longer a regular fed. Strosck has a better argument.

That’s not actually the legal standard. What you’re describing is a post hoc rationalization.

No that is what you are doing. He broke rules and got fired for it. You are justifying what he did because you think he was justified because you hate trump. That is a post hoc rationalization.

This exactly. Thank you.