Trump Ordered Mueller Fired, but Backed Off When White House Counsel Threatened to Quit

[wiffleball 4,639]

Im still waiting for wiffs link to his claim that they've not only gone through all the texts, they also found nothing on them.

Or, and here's a crazy thought, you could just check the news?

 

 

Lol

 

See, if you had anything, I'm pretty God damn sure you'd be linking and cutting and pasting all night long. Or, are you waiting for Hannity to do it for you?

[Cdub100 3,380]

Well, apparently not Fox News. Try walking outside of your Echo chamber every once in awhile.

 

I don't watch fox news.

 

Who said this happened?

[Cdub100 3,380]

Or, and here's a crazy thought, you could just check the ###### news?

 

 

Lol

 

See, if you had anything, I'm pretty God damn sure you'd be linking and cutting and pasting all night long. Or, are you waiting for Hannity to do it for you?

 

You tell me to stop watching fox news( which I don't) now you tell this guy to watch the news.

 

which one is it?

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

Still nothing wiff?

 

Baker, Ohr, Page, Strzok, McCabe, Rybicki, Carlin, Priestrap.....

[IGotWorms 3,310]

Pretty good article here from someone who seems to know what shes talking about: https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/27/opinions/trump-wanting-mueller-fired-is-not-slam-dunk-obstruction-polisi-opinion/index.html

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,514]

Pretty good article here from someone who seems to know what shes talking about: https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/27/opinions/trump-wanting-mueller-fired-is-not-slam-dunk-obstruction-polisi-opinion/index.html

 

It was interesting. And it was from cnn too. Thanks!

[Cdub100 3,380]

Still waiting on the source.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

Pretty good article here from someone who seems to know what shes talking about: https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/27/opinions/trump-wanting-mueller-fired-is-not-slam-dunk-obstruction-polisi-opinion/index.html

Firing Mueller doesn't stop the investigation. It would force them (DOJ) to OBJECTIVELY appoint someone.

 

Why not just have the IG review the evidence while he's at it?

[Hardcore troubadour 12,629]

He thought about firing him. He didn't. JFK thought about bombing Cuba. He didn't.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

Bill thought about eating at Hillary's but didn't. Huma did though.....

[SaintsInDome2006 128]

He thought about firing him. He didn't. JFK thought about bombing Cuba. He didn't.

That's not what the report says. The report says Trump ordered McGahn to can him, McGahn refused, and McGahn told Priebus & Bannon to go to tell Trump personally. Trump then backed down.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,629]

That's not what the report says. The report says Trump ordered McGahn to can him, McGahn refused, and McGahn told Priebus & Bannon to go to tell Trump personally. Trump then backed down.

And? Are you saying he should be charged with obstruction for that? Anyone go onrecord yet with this?

[SaintsInDome2006 128]

And? Are you saying he should be charged with obstruction for that?

No I'm not, I'm just saying get the facts straight.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

No I'm not, I'm just saying get the facts straight.

Speaking of getting facts straight, you still feel the FBI/DOJ wasn't conspiring to spy on Trump to affect the 2016 election?

[IGotWorms 3,310]

Firing Mueller doesn't stop the investigation. It would force them (DOJ) to OBJECTIVELY appoint someone.

 

Why not just have the IG review the evidence while he's at it?

Im not surprised you completely missed the point

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

Im not surprised you completely missed the point

Nope just feel Mueller in no way, shape or form can be objective thus SHOULD be fired.

[lickin_starfish 1,480]

Im still waiting for wiffs link to his claim that they've not only gone through all the texts, they also found nothing on them.

He's got Hillary's love juice in his eyes, he can't see the truth.

[SaintsInDome2006 128]

Filthy Fernadez, on 28 Jan 2018 - 12:21 PM, said:

 

Speaking of getting facts straight, you still feel the FBI/DOJ wasn't conspiring to spy on Trump to affect the 2016 election?

Eh, I just want to point something out - I just disputed facts with HT. That's what I wanted him to get right. - Now, as for what you want to say what those facts mean according to your own values? Fine. But just as an example, am I going to dispute with you that Strzok and Page discussed investigating Trump using an 'insurance policy' metaphor? No, I'm not.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

Eh, I just want to point something out - I just disputed facts with HT. That's what I wanted him to get right. - Now, as for what you want to say what those facts mean according to your own values? Fine. But just as an example, am I going to dispute with you that Strzok and Page discussed investigating Trump using an 'insurance policy' metaphor? No, I'm not.

Do you view the FISA abuses as criminal actjvity or just a distraction? Do you support transparency i.e. releasing that information including the Nunes/Gowdh memo?

[Hardcore troubadour 12,629]

Eh, I just want to point something out - I just disputed facts with HT. That's what I wanted him to get right. - Now, as for what you want to say what those facts mean according to your own values? Fine. But just as an example, am I going to dispute with you that Strzok and Page discussed investigating Trump using an 'insurance policy' metaphor? No, I'm not.

Yeah man, thanks for straightening me out. Lol. And what "report"? You say report likes its verified or official. It's not. It's not close.

[SaintsInDome2006 128]

Do you view the FISA abuses as criminal actjvity or just a distraction? Do you support transparency i.e. releasing that information including the Nunes/Gowdh memo?

 

I'll tell you what I believe in - process. So, if the IG comes out with a report detailing what the DOJ considers fireable offenses, I will support that.

 

As for the memo, the DOJ - in a letter written by a Trump appointee, Stephen Boyd - basically told Nunes not to release the memo because it would be a violation of rules on classified activity.

 

Now I would say you and I agree on the need to protect classified information. IMO if the memo can be released without revealing classified methods, sources or other information, then I would say yes release it. I'd like to think you agree with that, considering a lot of this began with an investigation into mishandling of classified information in the first place.

[SaintsInDome2006 128]

Yeah man, thanks for straightening me out. Lol. And what "report"? You say report likes its verified or official. It's not. It's not close.

 

I will give you links if you like but:

• NYT reported Trump fired Mueller.
• Fox reported that it could not explicitly confirm that report but it did confirm that McGahn spoke to Bannon and Priebus about it.
• CBS confirmed the NYT reporting but also reported that Bannon and Priebus went back to Trump to tell him McGahn threatened to resign.

- Look I'm fine if you don't trust anon sourcing and MSM, however if you go that route please don't claim Trump just "considered" firing Mueller because no one has reported that.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,629]

 

I will give you links if you like but:

• NYT reported Trump fired Mueller.
• Fox reported that it could not explicitly confirm that report but it did confirm that McGahn spoke to Bannon and Priebus about it.
• CBS confirmed the NYT reporting but also reported that Bannon and Priebus went back to Trump to tell him McGahn threatened to resign.

- Look I'm fine if you don't trust anon sourcing and MSM, however if you go that route please don't claim Trump just "considered" firing Mueller because no one has reported that.

He didn't fire him or threaten him. That's the only fact there is. Or that matters. The rest is office gossip.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

 

I'll tell you what I believe in - process. So, if the IG comes out with a report detailing what the DOJ considers fireable offenses, I will support that.

 

As for the memo, the DOJ - in a letter written by a Trump appointee, Stephen Boyd - basically told Nunes not to release the memo because it would be a violation of rules on classified activity.

 

Now I would say you and I agree on the need to protect classified information. IMO if the memo can be released without revealing classified methods, sources or other information, then I would say yes release it. I'd like to think you agree with that, considering a lot of this began with an investigation into mishandling of classified information in the first place.

Definitely protect classified stuff.

 

As far as Boyd's request.....meh. He's part of the problem i.e. protest the agency before the citizens. The FBI STILL won't release all those text messages to HIC. They're hiding evidence to create a fire break with Strzok and Page so it goes no further.

[SaintsInDome2006 128]

He didn't fire him or threaten him. That's the only fact there is. Or that matters. The rest is office gossip.

 

Ok fine, then I'd say don't even claim he just "considered" it either.

[SaintsInDome2006 128]

Definitely protect classified stuff.

 

As far as Boyd's request.....meh. He's part of the problem i.e. protest the agency before the citizens. The FBI STILL won't release all those text messages to HIC. They're hiding evidence to create a fire break with Strzok and Page so it goes no further.

Ok, thanks, agreed.

 

Well let's put it this way - Trump is putting these people in place - Sessions, Rosenstein, McGahn, Wray, Boyd, Coates - and they're the ones who are/were pushing back.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

 

Ok, thanks, agreed.

 

Well let's put it this way - Trump is putting these people in place - Sessions, Rosenstein, McGahn, Wray, Boyd, Coates - and they're the ones who are/were pushing back.

 

The reason why they're trying to block releasing information is two fold:

1. It's worked thus far (IRS, email investigation, etc....)

2. Their abuses have been going on for years and go beyond just spying on Trump.

[SaintsInDome2006 128]

 

The reason why they're trying to block releasing information is two fold:

1. It's worked thus far (IRS, email investigation, etc....)

2. Their abuses have been going on for years and go beyond just spying on Trump.

Have you looked at Stephen Boyd's bio? He's not a Deep Stater.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

Have you looked at Stephen Boyd's bio? He's not a Deep Stater.

 

I'm saying they're in full protection/defensive mode and desperately want to put a tourniquet around this keeping the losses isolated to Strzok and Page. McCabe is trying to retire (part of the stalling tactic?) and that's where they're wanting to cut their losses.

 

This goes all the way to the top man. IMO the FISA memo details who paid for the Dossier and that might include the $900,000 Obama paid to Perkins Coie shortly after the plot was hatched.

[SaintsInDome2006 128]

 

I'm saying they're in full protection/defensive mode and desperately want to put a tourniquet around this keeping the losses isolated to Strzok and Page. McCabe is trying to retire (part of the stalling tactic?) and that's where they're wanting to cut their losses.

 

This goes all the way to the top man. IMO the FISA memo details who paid for the Dossier and that might include the $900,000 Obama paid to Perkins Coie shortly after the plot was hatched.

Do you mind if I follow up on that point? Why did it cost $900,000? What was that going to?

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

Do you mind if I follow up on that point? Why did it cost $900,000? What was that going to?

 

The Dossier was much more expensive than that. I'm not sure what the $900,000 was going for but Obama's foundation (OFA) paid it.

 

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/10/29/report-obama-campaign-paid-same-clinton-dnc-law-firm-fusion-gps/

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

So now we find out DOJ's Boyd sent Mueller some texts for review and they were redacted. Seriously? WTF is Mueller doing reviewing let alone redacting texts?!!

 

Focking sham.

[SaintsInDome2006 128]

So now we find out DOJ's Boyd sent Mueller some texts for review and they were redacted. Seriously? WTF is Mueller doing reviewing let alone redacting texts?!!

 

Focking sham.

Didn't Mueller fire Strzok? On what basis?

[SaintsInDome2006 128]

 

The Dossier was much more expensive than that. I'm not sure what the $900,000 was going for but Obama's foundation (OFA) paid it.

 

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/10/29/report-obama-campaign-paid-same-clinton-dnc-law-firm-fusion-gps/

Can you unpack why it matters how much Fusion was paid? I get the point about who was paying them, but why is the amount so important?

[Sho Nuff 719]

That and paying a law firm doesnt equal paying Fusion or for the dossier.

Could it mean that?

Sure.

Has much of Fusions testimony been worse for team Trump? Yes.

Will they ever acknowledge that?

No

[Hardcore troubadour 12,629]

Didn't Mueller fire Strzok? On what basis?

So Mueller can fire Strzok and Page but Trump can't fire Meuller. Check.

[SaintsInDome2006 128]

So Mueller can fire Strzok and Page but Trump can't fire Meuller. Check

 

Obviously even if you think that Mueller had to look at some sort of information before making his decision. That was in July. The Mueller investigation has gone longer without him than with him.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,629]

 

Obviously even if you think that Mueller had to look at some sort of information before making his decision. That was in July. The Mueller investigation has gone longer without him than with him.

Meuller never should have been the guy heading up this nonsense investigation in the first place. The people he picked to run it are biased, that's undeniable. He's biased, also undeniable, given his ties to Comey and the rest of the FBI upper echelon. Never mind the make up of the grand jury that he impaneled to deliberate the validity of this case. It's a good old boy network doing their thing, plain and simple. Inside dealing.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

That and paying a law firm doesnt equal paying Fusion or for the dossier.

Could it mean that?

Sure.

Has much of Fusions testimony been worse for team Trump? Yes.

Will they ever acknowledge that?

No

Even if it were worse, why is it important for them to acknowledge it? Snowflake logic.

[SaintsInDome2006 128]

Meuller never should have been the guy heading up this nonsense investigation in the first place. The people he picked to run it are biased, that's undeniable. He's biased, also undeniable, given his ties to Comey and the rest of the FBI upper echelon. Never mind the make up of the grand jury that he impaneled to deliberate the validity of this case. It's a good old boy network doing their thing, plain and simple. Inside dealing.

 

All right. However his getting Strzok's texts (need a link for that but it sounds reasonable) is perfectly understandable considering the fact he fired him from the team.