I started this as a reply in the "Trump is awake and tweeting" thread in response to Starsandstripes saying Trump needs to stop tweeting and start acting, but figure this is better as a stand alone thread, and am curious as to how much latitude Trump has to act at this point:

---

@starsandstripes: Serious question (I find you to be far more knowledgeable than me in the political / military sphere and respect your takes):

Do you think he could legit clean house in the DOJ and what do you think the potential fallout for him would be?

With hindsight, if I were him, upon taking office I would have:

1) Immediately evaluated who major players in the DOJ were (FBI, CIA, etc.) and determined how they acted in matters related to Clinton, Obama, Bush, etc.

2) Quickly fired Comey, McCabe, Rosenstein and others in the FBI alone under the pretext of cleaning house and implementing new direction. It would have been practically and optically (in the public view) along the lines of "draining the swamp", which would have had a lot of support (in contrast to now, when it could be viewed as a vendetta or possible obstruction). There might have been an uproar in the short term from the press, but it would probably be less damaging in the long term than letting your enemies slowly and publicly weaken you day after day.

It bears mentioning again-- WITH HINDSIGHT-- this is what I'd have liked to have done if it were at all legal. (I'm not 100% sure he can just fire other top people the way he fired Comey... which is another question?) But the Russian collusion narrative was already being pushed as Trump assumed office, so I think it would have been smart for him to identify all potential angles for "them" (whoever they be) to come after him and to have drained those parts of the swamp with everything at his disposal.

Do you think he can still effectively do something to this end? (some sort of cleaning house at the top levels) Or, has he waited too long and given "them" the upper hand? I almost think he has. He would've been fine if Mueller were restricted to investigating Russian collusion (a non-issue / an issue for which Clinton has far dirtier hands), but as Bannon somewhat predicted, the special counsel for collusion seems like a subterfuge to dig for other dirt (finances, etc.).

With regards to Sessions, I think I've heard some posters here say not to fire him because that practically puts Rosenstein in charge of the FBI since Congress would slow play or deny any new appointee. This doesn't quite make sense to me:
1) Isn't Wray technically in charge? (though his name is curiously never mentioned... no idea what's going on there or where his allegiance lies... what has he been up to?)
2) Sessions isn't checking Rosenstein as it is.
3) Why not fire both Sessions & Rosenstein (or re-assign Rosenstein)? Congress might not like him firing Sessions and might not approve someone new, but what can they really do if he just fires or re-assigns top level people until he has people he wants in place?

So, what are Trump's best options at this point in time and what are the consequences? And what are the better odds: Let your enemies continue to investigate and hope they don't find anything to avoid a potential attempt to impeach if the House of Reps gets the numbers (and they may try regardless) - or - fire everyone you can who doesn't share your vision and weather the backlash with a slightly higher likelihood that you might face impeachment down the road?

FWIW, full disclosure on my personal stance: I'm only mildly pro-Trump, as I generally have been with outsiders who try to jump from business to politics out of frustration of incompetence and corruption. I have no doubts that Trump is dirty and has skeletons (business & personal) that could get him into trouble. But, if allowed to operate, I think he would try to do what's best for the country just to prove he could do it and be remembered as a good President... Pride is generally a self-interested sin, so it's ironic that Trump's pride could motivate him to be a good public servant, but that's how I see it.