What If Trump Even Tried to Fire Special Prosecutor Mueller?

Jump to Last Post 1-3 of 3 discussions (26 posts)
  1. My Esoteric profile image90
    My Esotericposted 12 months ago

    President Trump can't fire Mueller directly.  Instead he needs to get the person, Rod Rosenstein, who appointed him (or his replacement) to fire him.  If he refuses, Trump can fire him and keep appointing people until he finds one who will.  (Nixon did this)

    While hiring and firing by the president are well within his power to do, is using a legal power for an illegal purpose a high crime or misdemeanor which is punishable by impeachment?

    1. wilderness profile image98
      wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      You would have to define the legal power being used, the action being taken and the illegal purpose before determining if a crime was committed, let alone whether it is in impeachable offense. 

      But in general I highly doubt that the "high crimes or misdemeanor" will ever be used to impeach a sitting president.  It just doesn't meet the level of criminal activity we require today - if it were to happen it would be with a hugely partisan and one sided congress.

      1. My Esoteric profile image90
        My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        Article II states:  "The President, Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors."

        If lying to a grand jury, as Bill Clinton did, constitutes "high crimes and misdemeanors" for the Republicans to impeach him, then obstructing the investigation into your presidency certainly must be since Obstruction of Justice is normally a felony in any jurisdiction.  Felonies, by definition, are high crimes, an impeachable offense. 

        The only question at hand is whether Trump causing the removal of Mueller without good cause constitutes obstruction of justice (one of the many things he is being investigated for).

        1. GA Anderson profile image82
          GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          I have missed your participation MyEsoteric, good to see you back.

          I posted a response to Wilderness concerning just what High Crimes and Misdemeanors was intended to include. It was an invitation to think about a perspective, rather than a definition argument. I think you might have a perspective on it. I hope you take a look.

          https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/143 … ost2920747

          GA

          1. My Esoteric profile image90
            My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            Been working on my book, GA, and listing in another hub the 1600 lies, etc that Trump has made in the last 300 days.

            Your link goes to another part of this forum (to which I will respond tonight).  Was that intended?

            1. GA Anderson profile image82
              GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              Yep, it was just a quick link to post to Wilderness that I mentioned.

              GA

      2. GA Anderson profile image82
        GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        Wilderness, I have a thought for you to try on. And what a coincidence of timing that you should make your comment now - just after I finished an interesting read that I am still digesting.

        Now, don't take this as a challenge or rebuttal to your comment about "High Crimes and Misdemeanors," but instead as chance to trade views and perhaps refine an opinion.

        I recently came across a reading that discussed the point that, according to Alexander Hamilton and Madison conversations, the phrasing "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" was intentionally used - in lieu of more specific legal descriptions, to be both vague enough and forceful enough to accommodate purely political crimes also, a la Nixon examples.

        The point was that although modern interpretations of the phrase may include defined legal crimes like obstruction of justice, etc., the historical record of the intent of the phrasing also allows the phrase to include non-indictable crimes that amounted to political crimes against the structure of our government and its Constitutional functions.

        So, the point is that High Crimes and Misdemeanors was never intended to be just indictable crimes. Thus giving the House recourse against political actions whose seriousness threatened our nation's foundation - yet were not of an indictable crime's legal nature.

        Now that I think about it, that determination was from a recent read; The Wars of Watergate by Stanley Kutler. The House Judiciary and the Impeachment Committee did the research to see if they could impeach Nixon in the absence of an indictable crime, (remember his Grand Jury status as an unindicted co-conspirator?). Their research said they could.

        What are your thoughts?

        By the way, it is an excellent read. The most detailed Watergate account I have read - even better detail descriptions and supporting background than Woodward and Bernstein's. And, I have an extra hardcover copy I would be glad to give you if the topic interests you. But bear in mind, as interesting as it is, it is not a light read. It demands a 'quiet corner' and your full attention. Let me know by email if you want it.

        GA

        1. My Esoteric profile image90
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          Well put, GA.  In reading "Original Meaning", I found the same thought process you so aptly described about impeachment.

          1. GA Anderson profile image82
            GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            Speaking of Original Meaning, it is a great read that very much matches my interests. I am about half way through it. And if you remember, it was a comment of yours that prompted me to get a copy. I am glad I did. Thanks.

            GA

            1. My Esoteric profile image90
              My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              Well thank you, I am glad you are liking it.  Quite a few surprises and confirmation of many other previously held beliefs.

  2. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 12 months ago

    Although Mueller isn't proving himself neutral  , Trump would be foolish and  even conservatives would be surprised to see him fire Mueller .     What's interesting is seeing the movements on the Clinton side of the potential Investigations , The   Podesta brothers are breaking up their lobbying firm ,    Hilary is being  quiet , Bill hasn't said word one . No one on the left in politics is speaking very loud.

    it seems below the intelligence and observatory ability of the average forum dweller here to understand the nuances of reactionary politics , the stuff behind the scenes ,   There are a few people shaking in their boots in Washington .  The silent ones may be  the guiltiest .

    Mueller's next indictments ; Should fairly include the most corrupt side of politics ever to have shown  it's ugly face in America ......The Clinton International Mafia.

    1. My Esoteric profile image90
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      How is Mueller not proving himself neutral?  I have seen zero evidence or even credible innuendo that he is biased.  Except for hard core Trump supporters among the GOP, nobody in Congress thinks this former, Republican appointed head of the FBI isn't perfect for the job.

      Actually, I don't think it is the Podesta "brothers", it is simply the one brother, not John.  Also, I don't think the lobbying firm is breaking up although he has stepped down, and probably for good reason.  Hilary has hardly been quiet and neither has the left.

      This red herring about a lawyer for the Clinton campaign and the DNC picking up the ball the Republican's put in play by funding oppo research on Trump is plain misdirection.  Of course the Ds started paying the tab to Fusion GPS to dig up dirt, he would be remiss in his duties if he hadn't.  The fact that Fusion GPS hired a British company to find the dirt is neither here nor there.

      Since Mueller is only tasked to track down all activities relating to Russian on our election or collusion with any campaign (which means that could include the Clinton campaign), that would be the limit of his scope, even though it is still very broad.

      My guess is, when the dust settles, they will charge Trump with obstruction of justice and money laundering in connection with his business dealing with the Russian oligarchs (of which Putin is one).  The latter will, I bet, be filed by both the New York AG and the FBI.

      The so-called Clinton International Mafia is a figment of hard-right conspiracy theorists.

      The thing you should really be focusing on that is Clinton related is the Uranium 1 activities.  That one, I think, has legs.  Not necessarily with Clinton herself but with the whole process; something doesn't seem right given the little bit I have read about it.  That one is worthy of a Congressional investigation whether the Ds or the Rs control Congress.  There may be nothing there, but it needs looking at.

      1. Randy Godwin profile image92
        Randy Godwinposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        Does it make any difference the uranium can't be exported by the Russians? It's in the agreement, you know. Or perhaps you think this doesn't make a difference?

        1. GA Anderson profile image82
          GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          Hey Randy, I know, I know,  oooh, oooh, call on me!

          No, it doesn't make a difference.

          GA

          1. Randy Godwin profile image92
            Randy Godwinposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            Why not, GA? We have more than one country owning rights to manufacturing products in the US.

            1. GA Anderson profile image82
              GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              I think it is the 'How it was done" and the 'who was involved', (meaning government), that makes it different. But that is just a perspective, not a declaration of fact.

              GA

              1. Randy Godwin profile image92
                Randy Godwinposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                Gee GA, I called on you for that vague answer? But you did have your hand up....

      2. GA Anderson profile image82
        GA Andersonposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        I should offer a thanks MyEsoteric. It's reassuring to see another perspective on this issue that is similar to mine. I am beginning to worry about getting slotted into a partisan 'for or against' position.

        GA ;-)

  3. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 12 months ago

    The Uranium One issue points far more towards  the selling off of America's national resources by the Clinton    house  for profit , personal , political or otherwise. Especially knowing the Clinton Foundation grey area's .  "Scratch my back , I did yours "    .      Same with the Chinese Missile technologies allegations .   

    Foundations / politics , you know ,  who can trust them ? Does anyone here really believe the political trading hasn't been a pattern of the Clinton's wealth gains ? From Tyson Chicken to Haitian relief funds , from Russian Uranium to Chinese missiles ,  from Whitewater .......... all the rest .

    Ahh , how quickly liberals forget written history in politics . An entire  history of shady Clinton allegations  vs. the hate inspired Trump allegations of this moment in time ?

    Breitbart say's it best , liberals suffer "The History of Now"

    1. Randy Godwin profile image92
      Randy Godwinposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      And Trump is an honest and squeaky-clean role model for our children with no foundation problems of his own.. Wait a minute, he does and has. lol

      1. profile image0
        ahorsebackposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        Yet you deny a 40 year history of allegations AND judge convict and punish Trump in one year ? I already know well where liberal allegiances lay .About where your "History of Now " ends .   

        My advice to liberals ,Learn to think for yourself .

        1. Randy Godwin profile image92
          Randy Godwinposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          My advice to Conservatives, learn to think, period. tongue

          1. Kathryn L Hill profile image78
            Kathryn L Hillposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            They do. And they perceive Reality. What is Reality? Ask a Conservative.

            1. Randy Godwin profile image92
              Randy Godwinposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              lol Kate, that's a good one! smile

          2. profile image0
            ahorsebackposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            Conservatives think .....and liberals follow .
            Fact.

    2. My Esoteric profile image90
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      I seem to recall a Special Counsel investigated all of those Clinton "facts" and came up with ... Nothing.  I seem to remember the only thing of consequence was Bill lying to a grand jury about a personal indiscretion.  The rest is part of the Dark Money inspired Vast Right-wing Conspiracy Theorists.

      On the other hand, at a minimum we have Trump lying, falsifying, misdirecting, and misleading at least 5 times a day since he became, it now seems with the help of Russia, President.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)