I'm sure we're all shocked she'd make such a claim :1orglaugh
Mueller and his 15 democrap bitches have proven nothing so far regarding the so called collusion which is in fact a witchhunt funded and paid by Hillary Rotten Clinton and Obama in order to undermine Trump's presidency
https://dailycaller.com/2018/09/12/...ush&utm_source=daily_caller&utm_campaign=push
FBI officials discussed about a coordinated media leaks against Trump
https://dailycaller.com/2018/09/10/...ush&utm_source=daily_caller&utm_campaign=push
How can one have trust in Mueller when the whole investigation was bogus to start with and the fact that Jeff Sessions recused himself????But more importantly the fact that all the fbi and doj were rotten, crooked and corrupted apples from the Obama adminsitration how then too one can have trust in them?? I know your forever and permanent love for Obama but let's get real.
I don't always speak about law but I know enough about this aspect regarding Mueller's firing matter.
If a court decided Mueller’s appointment and firing then it was governed by congressional statute rather than the Reno rules, then Trump would have the power to fire Mueller directly.
That’s because unlike the Justice Department regulations, which require Mueller be fired for good cause, the congressional statute contains no such protection.
If Trump's firing of Mueller were challenged in court, a last source of legal authority would come into play: constitutional law.
While this exact question of presidential power has never been litigated, previous Supreme Court precedent strongly suggests Trump cannot fire Mueller unilaterally, according to Simmons, of The Ohio State University. "The Supreme Court has stated (outside the special counsel context) that only the government official who appointed an employee has the power to fire that employee," Simmons said. Simmons said Mueller would certainly have standing to challenge his firing."If Trump's firing is challenged in court (which I imagine it would be), the court would likely grant an injunction that would at least temporarily suspend the firing, which would mean that Mueller could keep working for at least a few months while the litigation progressed," Simmons said.
Short of firing Mueller, one possibility is for Trump to urge Sessions to rethink the scope of his recusal.
If, for instance, Sessions were to narrow his recusal — saying it applied only to the investigation of Russia-specific ties to the campaign, and not to elements that didn’t involve alleged Russian involvement — then he might be able to curb the scope of Muller’s probe. Instead, career Justice Department prosecutors could be assigned to these "tangential matters," said Douglas Kmiec, who held senior positions in the Justice Department under presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. This could mean, for instance, that potential financial crimes by associates of Trump such as Paul Manafort that were unrelated to Russia or the campaign would be beyond the scope of Mueller’s investigation, making it harder to pressure witnesses who knew about both those matters and ones involving Russia
