• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Rosenstein says only he has the power to fire Mueller

Got

Banned
If you tried to think of a dumber, clumsier more ridiculous way to handle this you could not beat Trump's own blundering ineptitude.

To think that about 30% of voters actually admire this man's mind!

they see themselves in him.
 

Snwaters

Member
Not only that, why would anyone down the list end the investigation? Unless you were apart of the Russia conspiracy in the first place, wouldn't they be in the same position as Rosenstein: in that "Why would I bring this level of trouble on myself for Donald Trump?"
 

darscot

Member
I expect Session to step down, Trump to appoint a replacement that replacement fire Mueller. Thus they get around Rosenstein.
 
I expect Session to step down, Trump to appoint a replacement that replacement fire Mueller. Thus they get around Rosenstein.
He'd have to get the replacement confirmed by Congress. I don't think it's out of the question for 3 or more GOP senators to object to an attempted run-around to get rid of Mueller.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
I don't think he would be able to appoint someone right away. I believe they would be subject to Congressional approval.

It would go down the line of succession at the DOJ to who would become acting DAG and that person would have to be the one to fire Mueller.

The Senate GOP would approve him/her, after much hand waving and a bit of theater about assurances of proper conduct. They appointed Sessions, FFS.

If find it difficult to over-estimate the level of corruption and malice in the GOP currently, just as it's difficult to over-estimate Trump's ineptitude and hubris. Perhaps that's cynical, but I think at this point it's just realistic.

I don't think he would be able to appoint someone right away. I believe they would be subject to Congressional approval.

It would go down the line of succession at the DOJ to who would become acting DAG and that person would have to be the one to fire Mueller.

He'd have to get the replacement confirmed by Congress. I don't think it's out of the question for 3 or more GOP senators to object to an attempted run-around to get rid of Mueller.

Nah. The Senate GOP would be on board. Who, specifically, would stop it? I can't think of anyone.
 

Foffy

Banned
That's where my mind went as well.

Trump fires Rosenstein.

Then appoints someone who will fire Mueller.

Trump wants yes men, first and foremost. To Trump, the Russia connection with his campaign is a non-story, so anyone arguing otherwise is a liar and needs to be shut up. Just consider how he tried to discredit all of the intel we had in December about the hacking. Just the hacking. He is quick and steadfast on creating an alternate universe in his head, to those around him, and those listening to him.

What's unfortunate is he's likely colluded with the greedy "swamp" of this country and taken advantage of the desperation of some of the precariat class in America to make his narrative a normalized one. This is why the GOP seems very quick and easy, and perhaps even eager, to defend his narrative fully. A year ago they wanted nothing to do with Trump on anything. Today, they can barely step aside from him.

This is all gravely concerning, because Trump has created a vacuum where the GOP can get away with much seedier things in public, because they have a sociopath who uses empathy to prey on his own base. Call the Democrats obstructionists to cabinet picks that don't exist: he's created a fictional world where people believe the feels and dispute the facts. A disgusting bill like the AHCA likely wouldn't even be entertained if literally anyone who was running for Presidency took office instead of him. They've won big by having a hyperbolic con artist bullshit the public, because this allows their doublespeak to be more potent now than it ever was. They hide the Senate version of the bill because the shorter time the public can see it, the more time they can try to shove it out, force it into law, and create the narrative to justify it. This is explicitly what Trump tried to do with the Muslim ban, and you see how he still longs for it...

Give it a week and you most of the GOP run with the "Mueller is corrupt like Comey" narrative, and I mean the majority of the party. If Trump sinks, their vacuum for power plays and possibilities to fuck over the average person go with him, so they are willing to put party over country.

Trump and the GOP will try to numb whatever the Russians did because in Trump's own ego, he and he alone won the right to be king here. What better way to numb that than close most core connections with what the Russians did that involved a campaign they didn't attack and likely colluded with?
 

Maxim726X

Member
Worked great for Nixon.

Of course, Republicans weren't in power in Congress at the time of the Saturday Night Massacre, so who knows?

Yup.

The dangers of having absolutely no control of any branch of government.

Chapter 29485729 in Elections- They Matter.
 

hobozero

Member
Said in the other thread, Trump has understaffed the DoJ so I doubt he would have loyalists under the Dep Ag. If Trump fires him it would have to be a long string of people also fired to get someone willing to do so.

You forget, he already HAS.

On March 31, trump signed an executive order changing the order of succession for the Department of Justice. In the event Rosenstein is fired or quits, next in line is Dana Boente, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. (If I am reading this right). Boente is a Trump appointee.

Presidential Executive Order on Providing an Order of Succession Within the Department of Justice

So after Rosenstein, assuming there isn't a Deputy Deputy, succession falls to a Judge appointed by Trump (and based on reports, he filters his appointees for loyalty first).
 
i%2520have%2520the%2520power.gif

Hehe.
 

MogCakes

Member
So after Rosenstein, assuming there isn't a Deputy Deputy, succession falls to a Judge appointed by Trump (and based on reports, he filters his appointees for loyalty first).
Regardless of who, it must be for good cause, of which would have to be manufactured - which I doubt they could scrounge anything on Mueller. Nothing credible.
 

hobozero

Member
Regardless of who, it must be for good cause, of which would have to be manufactured - which I doubt they could scrounge anything on Mueller. Nothing credible.

I think the potential is that Trump orders Rosenstein to fire Mueller without cause, then either Rosenstein refuses and Trump fires him for non-compliance (which he can do. not saying it wouldn't be obstruction but he CAN do it), or Rosenstein resigns - after either of which Boente takes over and fires Mueller. Basically the Nixon Massacre thing all over again. The question is, will anyone care enough for this to goad Republicans into doing anything (jury is out).

Of course its all just speculation, which is probably what the White House wants by getting the story out that Trump is 'considering' the firing in the first place. It's all endless distractions :(

Edit: i guess when i say "without cause" I mean "with a flimsy made-up bullshit cause that Bannon came up with"
 
You forget, he already HAS.

On March 31, trump signed an executive order changing the order of succession for the Department of Justice. In the event Rosenstein is fired or quits, next in line is Dana Boente, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. (If I am reading this right). Boente is a Trump appointee.

Presidential Executive Order on Providing an Order of Succession Within the Department of Justice

So after Rosenstein, assuming there isn't a Deputy Deputy, succession falls to a Judge appointed by Trump (and based on reports, he filters his appointees for loyalty first).
No, Boente was an Obama appointee in 2013, and was briefly the acting Attorney General between Sally Yates' firing and Sessions being confirmed, and then acting Deputy AG after that until Rosenstein was confirmed. Also, there's an Associate Attorney General, Rachel Brand, who would be the first in line to take over for Rosenstein. She's a Republican, but worked for both the Bush and Obama administrations, so I doubt she's someone particularly eager to take a bullet for Trump.
 
Polling approval of Nixon in Congress was super high right before they decided to move against him. The Saturday night massacre changed that.

It's hard to say if I have the faith of current congress doing the same now but this is started to read like the EXACT same process.


I can't imagine even Trump would do that exact same fucking thin Nixon did. He would be pushing his way through a mob of advisers telling him not to and what happened the last time it was done.

It's potentially so similar to Nixon now, it's just weird.

Fucking flat circle man.
 

hobozero

Member
No, Boente was an Obama appointee in 2013, and was briefly the acting Attorney General between Sally Yates' firing and Sessions being confirmed, and then acting Deputy AG after that until Rosenstein was confirmed. Also, there's an Associate Attorney General, Rachel Brand, who would be the first in line to take over for Rosenstein. She's a Republican, but worked for both the Bush and Obama administrations, so I doubt she's someone particularly eager to take a bullet for Trump.

Ah, thanks for clarification. I misread the info on Boente from an article on thehill.com. Should have been more careful. I still think Trump might try the firing (anything is possible), but it's good to know there are more people involved who can say no to him.
 
fuuuu I want to fire up my twitter to Tweet at Donald

"Democrats crying and disrupting the Country again!
Obama would never have had the balls to fire Rosenstein to make sure crooked Muller was excused."

Edit: Screw it, I did
 
Top Bottom