Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Comey firing - Have you considered..

Yes. From the NYT and Washington Post. And even Fox News confirmed this.

What sources would be acceptable to you? Let us know where to go to get the news. Thanks in advance.

Ron Hosko, former chief of the FBI’s criminal division, said the president has placed himself in a potentially “precarious” legal position that also will make a looming interview with Mueller’s investigators even more complicated.
“If Mueller also has evidence that the Trump campaign coordinated with the Russians, the president’s attempt to fire Mueller only invites an obstruction charge,” Hosko said. “And if there is evidence of an underlying crime of collusion, I think you could see Mueller move very quickly.

Ok, here's the thing.

As I've said all along- yep it's here on the thread, several times, go look for yourselves- I'm not some rabid "resistance" member who wants Trump's head on a pike for whatever reason(s) can be drummed up. Obstruction charges, should they arise, need to be be very well grounded. Because, it's not like it's hard to imagine an innocent Trump reflexively lashing out in defense of his people; while that might be stupid, or even criminal, depending on what he did, THAT is not my concern here.

My concern here is that a winning POTUS candidate colluded with our main global adversary for the last 70+ years in order to influence and affect the exercise of democracy that it at the very core of what makes America America. That would be treasonous on its face. Such a POTUS would be utterly compromised. Completely unacceptable.

Dismayingly, what passes for the tattered shreds of the Right are trying like hell to turn this into a partisan thing. Look right straight in the mirror, gentle readers. Because guess what- even if people inside the FBI did think he was a pathological-liar buffoon who was utterly unsuited for the job, it's not because they were WRONG. Most of us thought that, even many who voted for him. And it turns out we were right. THINKING THAT is not evidence of a vast conspiracy. Thinking that is evidence of a functional brain. So, try as you might to turn this into a political shïtshow; at the end of the day it's completely legitimate and proper to get to the bottom of this regardless of what investigators may have thought about Trump under one specific set of circumstances: he and his campaign were in fact in collusion with Russia to affect the due process of American democracy.

So I will reiterate. The bar for my personal opinion as to whether I'll accept obstruction charges against Trump is pretty high: only if there is the underlying conspiracy that was being protected by this obstruction.

My bet (remember? that bet nobody would take?) has been that there was collusion. If, and only if, there WAS, then this ain't about a Deep State coup or whatever other fever-dream bullshït y'all have cooked up. It's about treason, and the proper response of those tasked with monitoring and prosecuting same.