Started By
Message

re: Trump Ordered Mueller Fired, but McGahn Refused Order and Threatened to Resign

Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:27 pm to
Posted by Jbird
In Bidenville with EthanL
Member since Oct 2012
73408 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:27 pm to
Ghazi welcome back.
Posted by WeeWee
Member since Aug 2012
40070 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:28 pm to
quote:

Despite internal objections, Trump decided to assert that Mueller had unacceptable conflicts of interest and moved to remove him from his position, according to the people familiar with the discussions.

In response, McGahn said he would not remain at the White House if Trump went through with the move, according to a senior administration official.

The president, in turn, backed off.


So let me get this straight. The President decides says that he wants to fire someone (who he has the Constitutional authority to fire btw), his advisors tells him that would be a bad idea, the President listens to that advisor and doesn't fire the person.

























What is the problem here?
Posted by BigAppleBucky
New York
Member since Jan 2014
1807 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:30 pm to
Tonight Maddow was implying McGahn was some sort of hero, but really all he was doing was protecting his boss, as was his job.
Posted by Redleg Guy
Member since Nov 2012
2536 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:30 pm to
Trump absolutely has the right to fire the SC. The “story” is the matter of intent and how that plays into the investigation.
Posted by HailHailtoMichigan!
Mission Viejo, CA
Member since Mar 2012
69227 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:30 pm to
quote:

BigAppleBucky
Dude...... why do you out yourself as a hack by admitting you watch maddow? You want to be seen as some authority on here but you are a madison loon. Period
Posted by Redleg Guy
Member since Nov 2012
2536 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:33 pm to
Furthermore, below is Article 3 of the Clinton impeachment which is what is being cited.
quote:

Article III
In his conduct while President of the United States, William Jefferson Clinton, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has prevented, obstructed and impeded the administration of justice, and has to that end engaged personally, and through his subordinates and agents, in a course of conduct or scheme designed to delay, impede, cover up and conceal the existence of evidence and testimony related to a Federal civil rights action brought against him in a duly instituted judicial proceeding.
Posted by WeeWee
Member since Aug 2012
40070 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:34 pm to
quote:

Trump absolutely has the right to fire the SC. The “story” is the matter of intent and how that plays into the investigation.




But he didn't fire Mueller. So trying to prove intent would be as useless as trying to do artificial fertilization on Caitlyn Jenner.
Posted by HailHailtoMichigan!
Mission Viejo, CA
Member since Mar 2012
69227 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:35 pm to
quote:

Redleg Guy
Now that you are back on board, care to admit you were lying and/or mistaken about tax law taking money from the poorest income cohorts, like the graphs you posted showed?
Posted by Redleg Guy
Member since Nov 2012
2536 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:37 pm to
How long was the order to fire Mueller out there before it was pulled? Was it 5 minutes or 5 days of his order being refused? That changes the story.
Posted by bencoleman
RIP 7/19
Member since Feb 2009
37887 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:37 pm to
quote:

For being a nothing story, it is sure plastered all over the front of conservative websites. Go check out foxnews or drudge


Reading comprehension not your thing huh. I addressed all of this in my post.
Posted by Plx1776
Member since Oct 2017
16144 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:38 pm to
Lol Anonymous sources?
Posted by Redleg Guy
Member since Nov 2012
2536 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:39 pm to
Not sure which charts you are referring but I’ll always be willing to admit I was wrong with presented compelling evidence. I’ll take your word that the charts I presented could have been proven incorrect.
Posted by WeeWee
Member since Aug 2012
40070 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:41 pm to
quote:

How long was the order to fire Mueller out there before it was pulled? Was it 5 minutes or 5 days of his order being refused? That changes the story.


He wanted to fire Mueller, his advisor advised him not, he took some time, and decided to take his advisors advice, and he didn't fire Mueller. The amount of time that it took doesn't affect the facts of the story at all. The only thing that it affects is the spin that the biased media (liberal and conservative) put on the story.
Posted by Redleg Guy
Member since Nov 2012
2536 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:47 pm to
Wanting Mueller fired and ordering Mueller fired are two separate things.

If it was Trump talking with advisers saying he wants to fire Mueller but then they talked him out of it, then there is no story.

An order that was refused is a story.
This post was edited on 1/25/18 at 10:50 pm
Posted by Govt Tide
Member since Nov 2009
9111 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:52 pm to
Can someone please tell me how Trump considering but not actually firing Mueller is a big deal?
Posted by Turbeauxdog
Member since Aug 2004
23130 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 10:56 pm to
quote:

has prevented, obstructed and impeded the administration of justice, and has to that end engaged personally, and through his subordinates and agents, in a course of conduct or scheme designed to delay, impede, cover up and conceal the existence of evidence and testimony related to a Federal civil rights action brought against him in a duly instituted judicial proceeding


Yeah you'd have to be a retard to think trump did this.
Posted by TigerDoc
Texas
Member since Apr 2004
9893 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:00 pm to
quote:

Can someone please tell me how Trump considering but not actually firing Mueller is a big deal?


The language of the Times story is "ordered the firing" and that McGahn refused and threatened to resign. The language in the Post story that followed was "sought the firing". That's a bit bit stronger than "considering". I don't think McGahn would threaten to resign for Trump "considering".
Posted by BigAppleBucky
New York
Member since Jan 2014
1807 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:17 pm to
Too subtle for you, I guess.
Posted by AUstar
Member since Dec 2012
16980 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:18 pm to
quote:


An order that was refused is a story.


If it was an order it wouldn't have been refused. You're not the sharpest knife in the drawer are you?
Posted by NIH
Member since Aug 2008
112544 posts
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:18 pm to
Classic Cucky
This post was edited on 1/25/18 at 11:19 pm
first pageprev pagePage 9 of 11Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram