This could get ugly fast

[angrychair]

I expect trump to fire Sessions, Rosenstein and Mueller and make Nunes the interim AG (or someone similar)

Rules?
There really more like guidelines, there isn’t any actual penalty for not following those conflict rules.

Republicans?
They will “gosh” and “golly” and shrug their shoulders and kick the dirt saying “what ya going do?”

Protest?
He has a couple thousand national guard at his fingertips right now, most from red states. Sure they won’t mind coming to DC to help their president.

Next couple weeks will decide everything.

[dameatball]

1. well crap. I was hoping it was just me that was worried.

[lame54]

2. Here is an interesting take...

https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/kzxpp3/why-trump-cannot-stop-the-investigation-of-michael-cohen
By Taylor Dolven Apr 10, 2018
Angry over the FBI raids on Michael Cohen's offices, President Trump is taking aim at Robert Mueller, with press secretary Sarah Sanders saying Tuesday he “believes he has the power” to fire the special counsel. But the investigation of Trump’s top lawyer and confidant is now in the hands of someone Trump cannot fire: an acting U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York.

That’s because, like Attorney General Jeff Sessions, U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman recused himself from the Cohen investigation before Monday’s raids, according to ABC News. Trump hand-picked Berman for the job, which presumably presents the appearance of a conflict of interest now that Berman’s office is investigating Trump’s personal lawyer.

[angrychair]

5. Statement is not true

Trump cannot fire: an acting U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York.

They work for the executive branch, he can fire them or order someone to fire them.
There is no law that says trump is not allowed to fire an AG or unconfirmed acting US attorney

[lame54]

6. bummer

[LanternWaste]

11. The end-result of your premise seems entirely predicated on too many spinning plates

"or order someone to fire them..."

That being the relevant difference. He can order someone who could refuse. Rinse. Lather. Repeat. We Americans call this form of political suicide The Saturday Night Massacre.

In the autumn of 1973, Nixon ordered Attorney General Richardson to fire Special Counsel Cox. Richardson refused and resigned in protest. Nixon then ordered Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus to fire Cox. Ruckelshaus also refused and resigned.

It took firing everyone until he finally reached The Bork Limit. When Bork signed the termination notice, it took just over a month before federal district judge Gesell ruled firing Cox was illegal absent a finding of extraordinary impropriety as specified in the regulation establishing the special prosecutor's office.

The end-result of your premise seems entirely predicated on too many spinning plates-- or loyalty to Trump in this case.

[angrychair]

14. That trump could do is not my opinion

I didn’t say it was smart or politically correct but talking heads and legal experts have stated for weeks that he could still do it.
People take for granted how fragile our form of government really is, a great deal is predicated on people doing the right thing. Voter apathy and a listless congress make the whole thing a house of cards waiting for a bump of the table.
A strong republic requires voter and civil participation and a respect and desire for good government.

Unfortunately a plurality of people care more about what happened on The Bachelor last night than they do about what happens in DC or their own city hall for that matter.

[NCTraveler]

15. You have thrown me for a loop. Who are you? Nt

[angrychair]

17. Sorry

I don’t understand the question but I’m a little tired

[NCTraveler]

22. My reply was to LanternWaste.

My reply was to LanternWaste.

Just having a little fun. Probably because I have been a bit nervous at all of that around me. The consequences of where we are at could be enormous. They are enormous. This doesn’t end well under the best of circumstances outside of short-term electoral gains.

[marylandblue]

13. I think he means the civil servant acting for the acting US Attorney

Need a showing of cause to fire a civil servant and even then, he would just be replaced by another civil servant.

[tableturner]

3. Nunes also must recuse. See link...

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210475306

[angrychair]

7. Those are rules, not laws

As I said “guidelines”. There is no penalty of law if he or she chooses not to recuse. It may not be a good idea politically but no one has committed a crime if they choose not to recuse.

[tableturner]

19. Look at post #9 in that thread.

[angrychair]

21. You make good points

I am a little jaded about the outcomes. I think more hinges on voters than lawyers but unfortunately I don’t have a lot of faith in voters.

I hope I’m wrong and surprised by voter turnout. We have a racist rapist as a president. That fact will taint my opinion of voters for the rest of my life.

[Hekate]

4. I'm still going to protest, but locally. DC is inconveniently distant for most citizens...

...unless we have a lot of advance warning. The Mueller/Rosenstein protests are timed for the day of and/or the day after firing.

[angrychair]

9. So am I

I will still do the right thing but I have the benefit of living in a blue state. Those that protest in red states or in DC would be the real heroes

[elocs]

8. Ultimately rules are what the courts say they are and how they are applied.

And the top court is in Trump's pocket.
Trump has done a lot of things that nobody thought he would or could do and has gotten away with it. He loves chaos and will certainly create more if he can.

[FakeNoose]

10. Whomever he picks for AG - must recuse

... unless he chooses someone who doesn't swear their undying loyalty to Donald J. Trump.

For example he could hire Eric Holder, or Sally Yates. They wouldn't need to recuse themselves. But neither of them would pass the loyalty test, would they?

[angrychair]

12. As I said in post #7 rules not law

There is no penalty of law if he or she chooses not to recuse. It may not be a good idea politically but no one has committed a crime if they choose not to recuse.

[FakeNoose]

16. Yes I get it, but Giuliani had already turned him down

... and he gave that very reason, i.e. the recusal. Giuliani could have used the "no penalty for non-recusal" defense but he didn't.

He's a snake in the grass if there ever was one, so why didn't he take the job? Giuliani already knew Trump was going down even before he was ever inaugurated. Old Rudy was the one who told Cambridge Analytica that they couldn't interfere with US elections, so he knew what they were doing even in the summer of 2016. I'm sure he knew about the Russians, the emails, the money laundering, and a lot more besides.

It's clear to me that Chris Christie knew the same, even though he's never said so. These guys both knew the wheels would come off, very quickly, and they weren't going to be a part of it.

[angrychair]

18. I agree

I’m not sure what may or may not happen but I am worried about how much can really be done about it and how much people will actually care.

I may be surprised but the problem is not trump but what got us trump. To many people care more about the idea of good government than then they do about the work needed to have a good government.
If Democrats vote, Democrats win. It’s really that simple.

[honest.abe]

20. Agree... and I suspect this is all going to end up in the SCOTUS.

To determine the limit of Presidential power.

[lostnfound]

23. Given how well they did with Bush v. gore, what could possibly go wrong? Nt