Former high-ranking FBI officials on Andrew McCabe's alarming admissions

Your question is morphing into several questions, because this is what Liberals do folks, try to muddy things up. He claims he and Rosenstein discussed how many cabinet members they could get to join them in pushing the President out with the 25th amendment. It could be a thought crime that McCabe is creating it could be legit, he needed to go take it to Sessions. Listening to his 60 minute interview this is guy who's disgruntled so he's out of line.

 

Cool. You still haven't explained how following the Constitution is a crime or a coup.

 

Where in the Constiution does it authorize the Deputy Director of the FBI to take any action, let alone wiretap, the President in regards to the 25th Amendment?

 

And you're not a constitutional lawyer so you don't know 100 percent if he's in trouble or not.

 

He thought he was the Resistance's super hero.

 

I know that following the Constitution isn't a crime, therefore discussing it can't be a crime either.

Although, I do understand that Conservatives would jump at the chance to start imprisoning people for thinking things they don't like.

 

What action in regards to the 25th Amendment was taken exactly?

 

The FBI's duty is to investigate the commission of a crime, especially if the criminal is President of the United States.

Trump fired Comey to prevent Mueller from investigating.

This is obstruction of justice.

 

None...he was however conspiring to get a wiretap in the White House under some pretex of the 25th...by his own admission

 

What action? Where does the 25th provide for an FBI tweeker to unseat a president by producing either scandal or investigatory noise?

 

That's not what Comey said....he said under oath he never felt obstructed....moreover numerous Dems were calling for his remmoval as well. Trump has every right to fire him,

 

Sure. Now, tell us what the "crime" was. Also, what constitutional remedy would the 25th provide given the potential legal compromise? That isn't covered in the 25th. Is it? So why purposefully lie about it?

 

Cool, and if that wiretap had been legally approved, what crime would he have committed?

 

Did anyone involved in this say that the FBI was going to invoke the 25th themselves or were they going to use the legal Constitutional method of getting Cabinet Members involved?

 

§2385. Advocating overthrow of Government
Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or

Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or

Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in this section, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

As used in this section, the terms "organizes" and "organize", with respect to any society, group, or assembly of persons, include the recruiting of new members, the forming of new units, and the regrouping or expansion of existing clubs, classes, and other units of such society, group, or assembly of persons.

http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title18/part1/chapter115&edition=prelim

 

Only IF the vice president and a majority of the cabinet are in agreement to proceed with the 25th, that is, persons far above a mere deputy FBI director. These people far above that low position might have called him in for consultation of some aspect, but they didn't.

 

No.

You should go back to listening to his testimony before the Congress.

Not if the motive was to terminate an investigation into him.

 

Obstruction of justice.

 

First, Pelley failed to ask him the screamingly obvious questions: What about Russia did Trump want included in Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s memo supporting Comey’s dismissal? McCabe obliquely said Trump wanted Rosenstein “to put Russia in” the memo about Comey (I’m quoting from memory). But Pelley never asked what in particular about Russia Trump wanted included. What about Russiawas Trump referring to when he spoke — in conversations with NBC News and Russian diplomats — of Russia’s part in Comey’s firing? Pelley highlighted the word “Russia,” but he sidestepped what Trump was concerned about regarding Russia.

The viewer was thus left to conclude, from McCabe’s other comments, that Trump must have fired the FBI director because he was fearful of the Bureau’s investigation of Russia’s interference in the election; because he was concerned that the FBI would find that Russia intended to benefit Trump and would therefore deduce that Trump was complicit.


But that is misleading. We know that what Trump wanted made public was something very specific about Russia, namely, that Comey repeatedly told the president he was not a suspect in the Russia investigation. Trump was frustrated — over time, ballistic — over the fact that Comey was privately telling him that he was not under investigation, yet making statements that would lead the public to believe Trump was suspected of conspiring in Russia’s hacking operations. Trump wanted Comey to state publicly that he was not a suspect; Comey’s refusal to do so made no sense to the president, especially after Comey gratuitously implied, in his stunning March 2017 House testimony, that Trump was a suspect.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019...y-russia-factored-in-james-comeys-firing/?amp

 

Its good to see liberals take a sudden interest in the constitution.

 

Which, of course, had nothing to do with Comey's firing and never touched the investigation which the WH has fully cooperated with.

 

What do you know about that?

Do you really think everyone who works around Trump thinks he's sane?

Over the past two years, he has fired 70% of the people he appointed himself.

And he tried to smear the reputation of many of them.

 

It shows us that the Trumpsters don't know it at all.

 

The president can constitutionally fire the FBI Director for not liking the way he winds his watch or for being a smoker or for being a porn addict. All and any reasons are constitutional.

Did the president fire Mueller to stop him from investigating? Nope.

 

He lied to Congress for starters.