BREAKING: President Trump believes he has the authority to fire Special Counsel Robert Mueller

to be clear, Mueller didnt conduct the raid but he did give a tip to the FBI but the subpoena and the raid was different departments then what he is on.

but the evidence collected could intersect.

thing is, this Stormy Daniels case could very well be what gets him first.

well that's no good

Uhhh that's breaking news?

Sad thing is he probably could. I know there's a chain of command here, but Trump could theoretically instruct someone to fire Mueller who would then fire Mueller. I know everyone who has the power to fire him keeps saying they won't, but I don't think that's ever been tested. And Republicans keep saying that firing him would be crossing a line, but they seem to have caved on all other things Russia so far. Is there any reason to think they would impeach him if he did manage to get Mueller fired? I don't think so.

Good 'ol CNN... He probably does though. Boring story either way... Got anything good on Trump besides who he sleeps with 10 years ago? (Yes I know this is about some hush money... No one cares.)

hahaha do it trump fire Muller and you are finish has the president of the United States

So, of course, Trump as the president has the power to fire Mueller

The question is not if he has the power but whether if it would be a good idea, so not sure why you are posting this.

This is a case of "nothing news"

@joshrmeyer: Clearly someone cares. A judge appointed by Trump looked at the evidence and granted a warrant for the FBI to raid the office of the president of the United States’ personal attorney, stepping on the highest executor in the land and the most powerful man in the world, stepping over attorney client privilege, and risking his own disbarment.

None of that resonates with you? Or are you so far down the “deep state” conspiracy rabbit hole that you can’t even see straight anymore?

Shows how uninformed you are. This is all over different news media, including fox news you favourite network. This is the first time Trump has said he has the authority to fire muller.

He does have the authority to fire Muller, but doing so would probably prompt enough political backlash to get himself impeached. Maybe not removed from office, but there are enough Republicans sick of his crap for an impeachment.

1. And every major news network around the world.

2. He does, but it would be political suicide.

3. No one cares about campaign finance law and banking fraud? Citation on this absurd analysis? Mueller and Rosenstein seem to care.

It's the first time Trump says he has the authority of firing Mueller. So it's breaking news. Next step is to actually fire him.

@needhealing: CNN is the only news network I watch... They show some bias especially Lemon, but the rest are ok... And it's somewhat entertaining.

@Baconstrip78: Ok, I should have just put, "I don't care"... Tired of hearing about it. I hope they do find something so this isn't just all a waste of time.

Mueller hasn't found anything on Trump, 2 years and all he's got is Russian Facebook ads that aren't even connected to trump. What a joke, entire investigation is BS. It's obvious they are only dragging this out to sway the mid terms. They might as well just focus on the porn star at this point because the trump Russia collusion is a crock.

How do you know it's a waste of time? I bet you would have said the same thing during Wategrate.

@needhealing: It's a waste of my time. It does feel like everyone is out to get Trump though. I'm all for it, if he really has serious stuff that needs to be brought to light. Maybe I'm missing something in all this. And how exactly does this compare to Watergates level? That was before my time, but I'm pretty sure it was way more serious than this.

@jeezers: do you know know much of an idiot you sound?

The Mueller investigation hasn't been going on for two years. Get back to use when his investigation goes for at least as long as Watergate... and then is followed by 7 frigging more investigations.

@resevl4rlz: Facebook ads, trump colluded with Russians to make Facebook ads lulz. Where's the proof trump colluded with russia. Meanwhile there is actually proof Hillary phones destroyed by hammers.

This is always said, but given past offenses, look where we are now.

@jeezers: typical trump supporter..... but but but Hilary

@resevl4rlz: why people like you love the establishment I'll never understand. Trump's not perfect, not even close, if it was up to me Ron Paul would be president. So sick of the left and right. Trump is basically a liberal anyway, besides random Paul I wouldn't want anyone else who ran over trump. A bunch of puppets reading teleprompters. Bernie wasn't to bad but he would have ran the economy into the dirt. W/E maybe next election you'll get another establishment puppet like a Clinton or a Bush or a Kennedy. But as of now I'm enjoying Trump. Enjoy your pornstar cnn jerk off fest lol Hey did you guys know trump banged a pornstar 10 years ago? Pretty awesome am I right lol. MAGA

Yeah the Republicans who are leading this investigation are dragging it to the mid-terms.

And yeah man, BS investigation. No indictments. No guilty pleas. No forcing Congress to force Trump to place sanctions. Nothing.

The over-reaction to a non-issue is typical leftwing MSM.

Trump does not need to say the obvious and Trump also won´t fire Mueller

The problem is as the law is written Trump actually does NOT have the authority to fire Mueller.

Not sure what haywire book you are reading but yes Trump does actually have the authority to fire Mueller.

The Law

source:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/600.7

600.7 Conduct and accountability section d

The Special Counsel may be disciplined or removed from office only by the personal action of the Attorney General. The Attorney General may remove a Special Counsel for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies. The Attorney General shall inform the Special Counsel in writing of the specific reason for his or her removal.

Are you drunk?

That is the same as Trump having the power.

You do know right that the president does not actually do everything himself but delegate right? we do not have to begin a 101 civics lesson for you?

when talking about the law the details actually matter, dont be lazy about saying what is legal and what is not legal.

it is like that for very specific and very important reasons i might add

Eh?

We are talking about Trump having the power. And clearly, he does.

the reason the law is as follows

The Special Counsel may be disciplined or removed from office only by the personal action of the Attorney General. The Attorney General may remove a Special Counsel for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies. The Attorney General shall inform the Special Counsel in writing of the specific reason for his or her removal.

and the reason forcing the Attorney General to do it for you which can lead to obstruction of justice as was what happened in Watergate is because......

it does not make sense for a person to have authority to fire someone who is investigating the person in question.

its WHY the FBI is protected as it is.

Again Trump has the power and him telling the AG to fire him does not lead to Watergate.

What led to Watergate was because of the reason, not simply because the president within his power asked the AG to do his job.

Sure the AG can refuse but like any job, if the boss asks you to do something and you don´t you can be fired.

what you are suggesting is exactly what happened in Watergate and its exactly what brought Nixon down.

The reason the law is as it is, is for very specific and important reasons and its important to not gloss over them.

1. he can not directly fire Muller for specific and meaningful reasons.

2. if he directs AJ to do it he will be guilty of obstruction of justice. This is similar to 'yeah I 'can' fire her' but if its found out that I fired her because she would not have sex with me then I am in deep trouble.

so if you care at all about at least appearing to be correct in what you say its better to stop fighting me on this and accept the detailed correct as relevant.

or continue to advertise how wrong you are

No, you are not understanding Watergate.

What happened was Nixon trying to hide his crimes and doing so by removing the person who was investigating this. Trump has committed no crimes and so far after 2 years, nothing the special counsel has done has led him to any evidence that would hold up in an impeachment situation.

So let´s say that Trump does fire Mueller, simply firing him will cause a stir, but that in itself is not enough to impeach, And as to the president's power to fire a special counsel, again delegation does not remove his power. And it´s moronic to argue semantics here.

really?

that is what you want to go with? you think that will sell...

lol

moving on, the legal construct is how it is for a good reason, try not to go out of your way to say it incorrectly

You make no sense, but hey nothing new right.

I mean seriously dude you are fighting and going OUT of your way to defend saying it in the most incorrect manner as possible instead of crafting it to be correct and yet at the same time not affect your point.

some weak &&&&& right there

also just so you know, your understanding of Obstruction of Justice is ALSO incorrect.

obstructing of justice does NOT mean a person has to be guilty, that is only determined AFTER an investigation.

LOL , again you are just posting a bunch of nonsense.

First of all nothing I have said is incorrect, Trump has the power end of the story and no need to debate that further.

And as to your "obstruction of justice" well you seem to miss a key component in our legal system the "innocent until proven guilty" So not sure what you are on about there, and yes to determine if there is enough evidence to find someone GUILTY in a court , requires some investigation.

As in Trump have to intent to "obstruct" justice, What exactly is Trump obstructing? Again Mueller's scope was Russia and collusion, not all the small things that have no relation to Russia and collusion at all.

1. he DOESNT have the power and I have illustrated where it is in law and explain why its in the law as such. you want to fight extra hard to be wrong instead of just changing your statement from 'trump can fire muller' to 'trump can have muller fired'. the latter would be correct and acceptable but..no you want to spend extra effort in being exactly...WRONG

2. you are making the argument that 'obstruction of justice' does not exist in ANY case,,INCLUDING Watergate. Obstruction of Justice is NOT related to a person being guilty, its related to due process ot find out if a person is guilty. that is the ENTIRE POINT of an investigation in the first place. you dont 'investigate' if you know the person is guilty that is absurdly stupid

you are unbelievable absurdly wrong about these things its hysterical. and you are actually using extra effort to remain wrong

I dont know why i keep helping the Right. I should be encouraging you to continue to say it wrong so that every media outlet out there can continue to explain how you are wrong.

Helping? you are not helping anyone.

You keep saying the same errours thing, again and again, repeating it again and again does not make you right.

This is a pointless debate since you just keep repeating the shit you think is correct despite what I say. It´s getting kinda ridiculous even for you.

But again Trump has the power, and if he does fire Mueller that does not simply equate to Watergate. So please go read up on Watergate before you again claim untruths.

if you go around telling people that Trump can fire Muler it makes you look not informed and it encourages media to write more articles illustrating how wrong the Right in in their claims.

so yeah...it helps me.

READ THIS PART VERY CAREFULLY bolded words most important

Watergate.

when the investigation was happening they did not know if Nixon was guilty or not. only after the investigation did they know that.

what is that similar to?

every FBI investigation ever made in this history of mankind.

you do not know the guilt or innocence of a person WHILE investigating them and its unbelievably idiotic to say otherwise.

More over

'Objustrction'

'of'

'Justice'

are three words that to not in any way even imply that guilt is a requirement. There is justice for the innocent and that too can be obstructed, which is why the term exists.

LOL you are simply a joke. Trump can fire Mueller, what part of that is so hard to understand for you?

All Trump has to do is say AG fire Mueller and it will be done.

And as to Watergate what are you rambling about? Nixon fired the special counsel when it was getting so close that he tried that as a last attempt to hide his guilt. Trump does not have anything even remotely to that, Mueller is not even close to finding anything that links him to any crime. So if Trump fires Mueller, it does not equal "obstruction of justice" since even Mueller himself has come out and said that he is not able to link Trump to a crime as to Russian meddling.

1. all you have to do to not appear like you have no clue is to say the following 'Trump can have Muller fired' saying 'Trump can fire Muller' instead show a huge lack of understanding and makes you look stupid. I am not saying this again.

2. no...by law you do not know if a person is guilty or innocent while the investigation is going on. NO EXCEPTION PEROID, not even a millisecond before its over. In fact technically you only know after the judge has had a trial which is WAY after an investigation.

3. Obstruction of Justice is a protection for the INNOCENT more so then a question for the guilty.

@tryit: Trump just has to tell the AG to fire him. He should fire him, investigation has been one long dragged out nothing burger. Why do you think they are switching to the pornstar. They don't have anything on Russian collusion. They just want trump out and Mueller will run this investigation for 6 more years if they let him. I still believe the only reason he's still pushing it is to sway midterms away from trump. It's sad this is what the Democrats have to rely on since they don't have a good candidate or good policy to push.

if there's no collusion, then why not let it run its course and clear Trump, rather leaving questions about it if they were to cut it short

Why should the Democrats care? They've gone over a year doing little more than being a thorn in Trumps side, and it's working. They have a clear upper hand in the midterms. If Trump fired Mueller, Dems would just scream "obstruction of justice" even louder than they already are, and the media would play along. This investigation is turning into a fishing expedition, and Trump has every reason and authority to fire Mueller, but he should just let it play out.

Besides, no one really cares if the President is friendly with Russia, violates campaign finance rules, or data mines voters during elections. If we did, we wouldn't have re elected Obama.

@drlostrib: I believe Mueller knows the Russian collusion is BS. I think he's keeping it open hoping he might come across anything worthwhile so he doesn't look like a complete idiot. Also to sway mid terms "look he's under investigation". All I'm saying is if I was trump I'd fire him too, what good is he to him. The guys entire job has been just to pretend he's got something on Trump but here we are going "wheres the beef". This investigation has everything to do with political gain. Not actually solving corruption. Its Obvious. If anyone thinks this is genuine, they just really hate trump and eat up the BS regardless that there's no evidence. The entire investigation was started on false information, even the Clinton foundation was involved. Why do people pretend this is Watergate. There was

evidence in Watergate.