re: Conservative Think Tank: Trump ‘Obstructed Justice’ When He Fired Comey

I'm sure I'm not the first to note this, but Brookings is most certainly NOT a conservative think tank, and it would be a real stretch to even call them center-right.

Without reading the thread, I'll say that any poster who recognizes me would know that I do not like Trump. Also, it does make sense to me that Trump's purpose with canning Comey was to derail exactly what he was investigating.

But it seems plain that unlike every other case where actions that qualify as obstruction are never within the accused's legal authority (let alone part of the duties required by their job) anyway. The President's ability to appoint and end appointments involves pure discretion, for his part. I am not a lawyer but the case does not seem airtight at all to me.

If I'm wrong on that- and I easily could be- and the President is required to demonstrate a reason acceptable within some bounds defined who-knows-where in order to hire/fire officials within the Executive, IMO it's hard to say the Executive is co-equal with Congress. Or that they bear primary responsibility/authority to enforce the law.

Do they have discretion to run their agencies as they see best, with the people they think best, or don't they?

And what about confirmations? Do Congress' yea/nay votes require explanation, and are they subject to being overturned if they are not cast for a valid reason?