DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Trump revealed classified info to Russians in White House Meeting!

Putin: I Can Give Congress Records Of Trump’s Talk With Lavrov


Will Racke



05/17/2017




Russian President Vladimir Putin said Wednesday he is prepared to hand over records of President Donald Trump’s meeting with Russian officials earlier in May.

The Russian leader announced that he can provide the House and Senate with transcripts of a conversation between Trump and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, reports Reuters. Trump is alleged to have shared highly sensitive intelligence about an ISIS plot to attack commercial aviation during the talks.

Putin told reporters that he wasn’t aware of any state secrets revealed in the the meeting, joking that his foreign minister would have to be punished for not reporting the valuable intelligence he allegedly received from Trump.

“I spoke to him [Lavrov] today,” he said at a news conference in Sochi. “I’ll be forced to issue him with a reprimand because he did not share these secrets with us. Not with me, nor with representatives of Russia’s intelligence services. It was very bad of him.”



Putin offered to provide the transcript in order reassure U.S. lawmakers that no sensitive intelligence had been improperly shared with Russia. Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov later told reporters that Moscow has a written record of the conversation, not an audio recording, reports Reuters.

Some U.S. intelligence officials believe the disclosures may have endangered a key source involved with the fight against ISIS, according to a Washington Post report that was confirmed by the The New York Times Monday evening. (RELATED: Former Senior Intel Officer: If There’s An ISIS ‘Mole Hunt,’ It’s Because Of The Leakers Running To The Press)

The Trump administration has denied accusations that the intelligence sharing was improper. National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster called the WaPo report “false” and told reporters Tuesday that the president’s conversation with Lavrov was “wholly appropriate.”

Putin said Wednesday that “political schizophrenia” has gripped Washington following revelations about Trump’s intelligence disclosure and subsequent reports that the president encouraged then-FBI director James Comey to close the bureau’s investigation into former National Security Advisor Mike Flynn. He accused U.S. leaders of trying to stoke anti-Russian sentiment and drive a wedge between Washington and Moscow for political purposes.

“Either they don’t understand the damage they’re doing to their own country, in which case they are simply stupid, or they understand everything, in which case they are dangerous and corrupt,” Putin said.


http://dailycaller.com/2017/05/17/putin-...m_medium=Social

Hey, that's what I would do.

Trust Russia with their account. I mean, anything to prop up Trump, right?

Trump is just dragging America's name through the mud. Shame.

When have our leaders not stoked some sort of anti Russian sentiment?
The U.S. has an array of sanctions on Russia. Putin wants them gone.
This administration is helping Putin's cause.

Watched a TYT video last night and Roger stone went on infowars to say that you might hear the word Alzheimer's used referring to Trump in the next several days. He said a report will come out that Trump has earlier onset Alzheimer's but that it will be fake... Cenk from TYT said that is Stone starting to build an insanity defense and that Stone's video is the ONLY report of this.

(Sorry but I won't post TYT vids anymore because they might use a bad word and offend the fragile ears here. I like people who are not banned )

If Jelly beans worked for Reagan than they can work for Trump.

Like the fake reports that came out about Reagan.

jc

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/doj-appoints-special-counsel-in-wake-of-comey-developments/

Robert Mueller appointed special counsel
602 Comment Share Tweet Stumble Email
Last Updated May 17, 2017 6:53 PM EDT


Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein has appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller to serve as special counsel to oversee the previously confirmed FBI investigation of Russian efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election and related matters.

"I have determined that a Special Counsel is necessary in order for the American people to have full confidence in the outcome," Rosenstein said in a statement.

What you need to know about appointing a special prosecutor to investigate Trump
The letter announcing the appointment reads that Mueller is authorized to investigate "any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and...any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation."

The appointment comes as numerous Democratic lawmakers have called for a special counsel, colloquially known as a special prosecutor. Such calls increased in recent days after Mr. Trump fired FBI Director James Comey. On Tuesday, it was revealed the Comey had written a memo alleging that Mr. Trump had asked him to back off from investigation former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. The memo allegedly says that the president said, in a private conversation with Comey at the White House, "I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go."

Rosenstein's letter announcing the appointment of Mueller says, "If the Special Counsel believes it is necessary and appropriate, the special counsel is authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters."

CBS News' Paula Reid reports that the FBI investigators who are currently on this case may stay on the case. Mueller will have discretion on who he uses in his probe.

Democrats on Capitol hill are embracing this as a victory, and many of them, along with a small number of Republicans have been calling for a special prosecutor. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, said in a statement that Mueller's appointment is "a good first step" and said that "there's no better person who could be asked to perform this function. He is respected, he is talented and he has the knowledge and ability to do the right thing."

Mueller was appointed FBI director in 2001 and served in the position until 2013. FBI directors are appointed to ten-year terms, but President Barack Obama added two years to his tenure.

A career prosecutor and veteran of the Marine Corps during the Vietnam War, Mueller is a widely respected figure in Washington. He had been in private practice since 2014 at Wilmer-Hale, a Washington, D.C.-based law firm known for securities enforcement and white collar work.

CBS News' Paula Reid contributed to this report.

Today is a "historic day" for our country...

Special counsel appointed in Russia probe

By Jeremy Diamond and Laura Jarrett, CNN
Updated 7:48 PM ET, Wed May 17, 2017
link

Washington (CNN)The Justice Department on Wednesday appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as special counsel to oversee the federal investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, including potential collusion between President Donald Trump's campaign associates and Russian officials.

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed Mueller to the position in a letter obtained by CNN. Attorney General Jeff Sessions previously recused himself from any involvement in the Russia investigation due to his role as a prominent campaign adviser and surrogate.

As special counsel, Mueller is "authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters," according to the Justice Department order Rosenstein signed.
Mueller's appointment aims to quell the wave of criticism that Trump and his administration have faced since Trump fired FBI Director James Comey last week in the middle of the FBI's intensifying investigation into contacts between Trump campaign associates and Russian officials.
In a statement, Trump said an investigation will confirm that "there was no collusion" between his campaign and Russia.
"As I have stated many times, a thorough investigation will confirm what we already know -- there was no collusion between my campaign and any foreign entity. I look forward to this matter concluding quickly. In the meantime, I will never stop fighting for the people and the issues that matter most to the future of our country."
In a brief statement, Mueller said, "I accept this responsibility and will discharge it to the best of my ability."
News of the special counsel announcement was closely held. The White House received a heads-up less than an hour before the news broke at 6 p.m. ET. House Speaker Paul Ryan and key congressional leaders also were not notified.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, a member of the Senate intelligence committee, said the appointment was needed.
"I think it was the right thing to do and I believe they saw it as the right thing to do otherwise they're going to have a fight and it's not worth the fight," Feinstein said. "There (is) mutual suspicion of one side and the other. This clears that up and has a person whose reputation is as good as it gets and he'll be very good."
White House didn't want special counsel
Calls for a special counsel or prosecutor were rising after The Washington Post and then CNN reported on excerpts of a memo Comey wrote in February, in which Comey wrote that Trump asked him to drop the FBI investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn. Demands intensified from Democrats on Capitol Hill for the Justice Department to appoint a special counsel or prosecutor to oversee the case. Republicans on Tuesday night began to join those calls.

Trump was meeting with FBI director candidates when the White House was formally told that a special prosecutor had been named in Russia investigation. The White House counsel informed the president.
"It's still sinking in," one administration official said, describing an air of uncertainty in the West Wing. "We were told about it. Not asked about it."
White House spokesman Sean Spicer on Monday dismissed the idea of a special prosecutor.
"There's, frankly, no need for a special prosecutor. We've discussed this before," Spicer told reporters. "You have two Senate committees that are looking into this, the FBI is conducting their own review. And -- and I think if you even look at what Acting Director (Andrew) McCabe said last week, he made it very clear that they have the resources that they need and that the work continues."
Beyond allegedly asking Comey to quit his investigation into Flynn -- who has been a central focus of the FBI's investigation into contacts between Trump associates and Russia -- Trump said in an interview with NBC last week that he considered the "Russia thing with Trump and Russia' when he decided to fire Comey.
Trump has called the FBI investigation into Russia a "hoax" and "taxpayer funded charade."
Rushed to Ashcroft's hospital room with Comey
The appointment could be seen as a signal from Rosenstein. His independence was quickly praised as news of his appointment spread, with many recalling his famous refusal to bow to the demands of West Wing officials during the Bush administration.
When George W. Bush's White House chief of staff and White House counsel sought to get an ailing Attorney General John Ashcroft to reauthorize a warrantless domestic surveillance program that the Justice Department had ruled illegal, Mueller and Comey rushed to the hospital to prevent the Bush officials from taking advantage of Ashcroft.
Comey made it there first, but as Mueller rushed to the hospital he called Ashcroft's security detail and ordered them to prevent the top Bush officials from kicking Comey out of the room.
Mueller later threatened to resign alongside Comey, who was then serving as deputy attorney general, over Bush administration officials' continued attempts to reauthorize the program. They ultimately did not resign as Bush sided with the Justice Department officials.
'Necessary' for 'full confidence' in investigation

Rosenstein said he believes a special counsel "is necessary in order for the American people to have full confidence in the outcome."
"In my capacity as acting attorney general, I determined that it is in the public interest for me to exercise my authority and appoint a Special Counsel to assume responsibility for this matter," Rosenstein said in a statement, adding that the decision is "not a finding that crimes have been committed or that any prosecution is warranted."
"What I have determined is that based upon the unique circumstances, the public interest requires me to place this investigation under the authority of a person who exercises a degree of independence from the normal chain of command," Rosenstein said.
Mueller was appointed FBI Director by President George W. Bush in 2001 and served until 2013, when Comey took over as head. He will resign from his private law firm WilmerHale to avoid any conflicts of interest, the Justice Department said.
This story is breaking and will be updated.
CNN's Dana Bash, Jeff Zeleny, Phil Mattingly, Ted Barrett, Lauren Fox and David Shortell contributed to this report.

I don't know, just found it interesting that Trump's good buddy Roger Stone was putting this out on infowars and he's the only one mentioning it that I can find. Now today a special counsel... This could easily be insurance in case Trump needs a defense for his actions.

As I understand it, Trump can NOT fire the special counsel, he is fully independent of the chain of command, has sole discretion of who should and will be prosecuted.

I wish I was enthused about this, I'm so burned out on our elected 'representatives' being who they are it's not funny.

Trust is at an all time low.

Agreed. Trust is gone. I never trusted Trump, but I don't trust most dems either. Everything is so much about the two parties, money, donor class interests, taking care of the rich first... screw the poor and middle class... Just sick of all of it.

I think this is why Bernie has so much appeal and is by far the most popular politician in the country now because he's authentic and real, seems to care deeply about the people, and actually listens to opposing views without being derogatory. I'm not pimping him here, just saying this is why he is so popular on both sides regardless if you agree with his politics.

I think we need a clean sweep of the old guard in congress, Trump needs to go sooner rather than later, the bipartisan gap needs to close, and the government needs to focus on making the middle class strong again.

This is why I support term limits. These people insulate themselves from the legislation they impose on us. I'm tired of it.

Bro you would think congress should've been the one position the founding fathers made sure had term limits.

Different times. But man, it sucks because we have to hope that congress would place term limits upon themselves. I don't ever see that happening.

The founding fathers made no term limits on any position. Just to be fair.

The odds are better that I dunk on Lebron...

I really wish you conservatives would've at least put kasich or Jeb bush in office.

At least we wouldn't be talking about collusion with Russians.

To be fair, the democrats/liberals are just as guilty of putting Trump in the White House.

Maybe now we'll start to unite as citizens and start holding our elected officials accountable to our interests instead of their own now.

Eeehhhhhhh, I dunno.

If we're talking straight policy and some of the social issues, then...sure? I can agree with that to an extent.

But you can't blame liberals for conservatives voting for trump out of anger, hatred, and fear, with little facts involved.

As of right now, everything happening in DC, liberals told conservatives this was gonna happen during the election. People were already calling trump a Russian puppet, as well as a whole bunch of other issues that didn't involve Russia, such as his character.

So you can't blame liberals for conservatives inability to listen. Feelings over facts, remember?

And look where feelings has currently got us.

Oh, I can absolutely blame them. Please don't try to play word games with me, like "feelings over facts" I'll grow quickly tired of that crap. I have no interest in that kind of conversation. The number one piece of blame is not being able to come up with a candidate who could beat Trump. That is an embarrassment. The democratic party, just like the republican party, has done it's best to alienate a great number of people in this country. Until one of them, or both, gets back to truly addressing the things that matter, we will end up with worse and worse candidates.

Democrats most entitled party. They believe everyone should vote for them and theirs, but doesn't want to work for a vote. HRC should have been able to beat Trump. However, not visiting the midwest, instead going for Georgia and Arizona, and not being able to develop a campaign message in the eight years she's been silently working on this campaign gave Trump the win. Probably the biggest sign of hubris in electoral politics in a century. Then again hubris has been HRC's calling card since 92.

Hillary lost states that hadn't gone red since Reagan. I wouldn't be so quick to say that it was just conservatives that put Trump in office.

And you can't blame us for being angry. I've already listed (there's that damn Duluth underwear commercial again) the reasons for the anger elsewhere.

Hatred, not real conservatives. Sure you've got your fringe wannabes that were your typical racists and what not, but no one 'hated' Hillary for being a woman, maybe a Clinton, but not a woman.

Fear? Sure, when you tell the coal industry that their job security (which was already threatened under Obama) that it wasn't going to get better under Hillary what do you do?
Will Trump bring coal back? (We'll wait to see if he's even around first). Don't know, but he didn't say he'd be active in taking coal out either.

Yes they did, elections.

We can't feasibly go back to coal, blue collar jobs, etc. Technology, science, and a host of other factors show how damaging coal can be to the environment.

Hillary, as well as Bernie, failed at educating the American populace on the importance of altruism. JFK once asked "what can you do for your country". Well, we can best serve each other in doing whatever we can, in a meritocratic way, to lift others up who get a raw deal in life.

She did herself in with email talk, only supporting policies when they were "safe" (where did that get her, again?), and ignoring a large swath of the country.

We need to transition our country to the new future. This future must involve highly educated citizens; however, the power brokers don't want this as it will spread the power out much more than currently is established.

Only for two branches The other branch of government was appointed and confirmed for life.

Either way none of those are term limits. Term limit wasn't introduced until the 1950's.

That transition will happen when the market allows for itand necessity demands it. As it is the alternatives are still too expensive, not practical on a large scale as of yet. Going back to coal? We're still on it, whether we burn it for energy or not, coal still makes steel doesn't it? Never gonna run out of a need for that.

Altruism? Wait till you have kids, get back with me then and tell me what altruism is. Every parent in this country is doing everything they can to provide for their families (some have it easier than others of course) as it is.

That's the trouble with you dreamers (especially you dreamers without families yet)...you have no real world experience with how tough it is just to get by, let alone get ahead. It's HARD AS HELL.

JFK? That whole what can you do for your country went out the window when Johnson tried his 'great society' thing didn't it?

What is meritocratic? Wouldn't that be advancing by earning your advancement?

Yeah, we need to impose an honest to goodness 'this long and no longer' rule that no one can get around.

Umm...I'm not playing word games. That came directly out of newt gringich mouth. So with all due respect I dunno why you're getting upset over something I thought was starting to be a decent conversation.

So don't turn up on me, turn up on the guy who said it.

but since we want to go there, let's have this discussion. And i'm going to say this as nice as i possibly can, and i hope you respond:

I think you're a mod.

that's not a shot. that's me saying that i think you lurk the boards and you see what's posted.

which means you should've seen the multiple post i made about Hillary losing the election on her own. as a matter of fact, i said as much not even a couple days ago, where i said that i don't know why Trump needed to get involved with the russians when he would've won all on his own.

So i don't know what your point is, seeing how every liberal - at least on this board - has said as much.

Here's my beef with people on this board, specifically you since we're having a discussion: Whatever reason we decided to put Hillary on the main ticket, that ISN'T an excuse as to why Trump made it out of the primaries.

and that's the issue. you can complain all you want about who the dems decided to roll with in the general's. but liberals/dem had NOTHING to do with Trump making out of the republican primary.

that will ALWAYS be on the conservative voter. they had how many candidates to choose from?

Kasich and Bush were easily the best. and i maintain through all of this that either of those two would've beat Clinton, kasich probably easily. because there was no scandal attached to them. there were no character concerns with those two.

even after all that during the debates and him trashing other republican candidates, Trump made it out.

So Jules, i don't understand why you conveniently decided to start your point with the election, when it starts further back.

also, sure, both parties have alienated segments of their voting base.

and yet.....the same people keep getting voted in.

also, Hillary was the better candidate. it was clear to me then, and it's absolutely clear to me now.

so please don't come at me with the "both candidates" suck.

that's not an excuse to vote for someone like Trump. and you can't convince me otherwise.

Trump got all these alt-right, white nationalist riled up. he was the ringleader of the birther movement. he got on staged and encouraged foreign organizations to hack his opponents. he wouldn't, and still hasnt released his tax returns like every other presidential candidate in the last 40 years.

and guess what, Jules? conservatives still voted for him anyway. So how is that my fault?

and that's why i get annoyed with posters like you, CHS, and others who go "ohhh well its everybody's fault, party sucks blah blah blah"

they suck so bad that everybody keeps voting for the same people?

am i the only one who sees how ridiculous that statement is?

so if you want to blame liberals for why Trump won, go ahead. i agree, just for different reasons. one was the bernie bro's deciding not to show up. the other was the constant fake news coming out...oh my bad, #alternativefacts.

I didn't vote for Trump, Jules. you know why?

because part of Trump's strategy was the good ole southern strategy: blame minorities for the state of the country.

He blamed people that look like ME as a catalyst to get the white vote. illegals, muslims, etc.

i can go on and on about that. but i won't.

so while you're talking about word games or whatever the hell it is, the reality is that everytime you decide to post, you seem to take responsibility away from the people who actually VOTED for trump, and want to place the blame on liberals who didn't.

i didn't vote for the guy who motivated the racist segment of conservative ideology. i didn't vote for the guy who was already been linked to the russians before the general election. i didn't vote for the guy who trashed women, including his fellow republican candidate Carly Fiorina. i didn't vote for the guy who called our president a muslim and questioned whether he was even american.

the conservative voter did. so it would be nice, Jules, if you checked the people on this board who DID vote for trump. because all of that information was out there.

and they voted for him anyway.

let me repeat that: they voted for him anyway. Conservatives didn't HAVE to pick Trump out of the republican primaries. so as i said before, it was absolutely feelings over facts. you getting upset about that reality doesn't change the FACT that it's the reality.

so don't blame liberals. we didn't vote for the the guy colluding with the russians. we voted for the chick that got stupid with her email handling.

and man oh man, jules, do i WISH that was the biggest problem we had right now.

So i'll be waiting for you to check the people that actually voted for trump. cause blaming liberals for conservatives inability to fact check and see things for what it is isn't gonna fly with me. take some responsibility for that vote.

i take responsibility for my vote.

because unlike conservatives, i can readily tell people why i voted for clinton WITHOUT mentioning Trump once. and have before last year.

but conservatives can't do that. everytime we tried to ask people on this board "why", they ALWAYS bring up clinton. they couldn't vote for Trump based off of his own merit.

that says a lot.

One would think that 27 years, going on five years of solid employment serving an at-risk population, working in a various of diverse situations in my pre-professional situations would give me a few rungs above most in my generation...

I live a life of altruism. I take cuts to do what I do out here. People can look up Alaska teacher pay and say "woah, you make soo much more there!" Guess what? My pay would be equal or less to what I make in Ohio. I give up a lot of myself to do what I do.

(In before a rant about me bragging. Sorry, this is ethos. Look up the definition of ethos.)

Yep. Never going to happen though. Would need it to pass the congress by 2/3rds? to get on the Constitution. I would love a President to put that on his campaign promise list. I get that they don't want to pick fights with co-workers, but a senator serves a 6 year term. How many of those does one need to have completely represented their constituents?

Most everyone thinks their job is more important than it really is.

You're doing something you like. Good for you. That is the best way, ever, to make a living. That's not altruistic though. If you weren't there, someone else would be.

What is this "at risk" population you speak of? All population is "at risk".

I also give up a lot of myself to do what I do. I wouldn't be able to count the dollars I have "given away" by not charging some people. So do nurses, give up a lot of themselves. So do so many in so many other professions. You aren't special in that regard.

Teachers, here in Ohio, give up a lot of themselves. So do cops. And emt's/paramedics, and people that volunteer at soup kitchens, etc etc etc.

I get it, I really do. My mom was a teacher. I know many, many teachers. I know many firemen. All of them think of themselves as altruistic. Doesn't mean it's so.

We're in a post-industrial age, yet our country is so large that we haven't completely crossed that line. Safe to say that absolutely no one is giving us any economic plan on what to do. On one hand you have people who have made careers in industries, that have been moved or replaced by machines, for 20+ years now doing menial labor. On the other hand you have a large group of new labor, who have put themselves into debt, as a way to work in the post-industrial age. No one in America has offered a good solution for either group. It's why everyone is so anxious.

Don't know how accurate this is Rocket, you tell me.

http://www.teachingdegree.org/alaska/salary/

Then tell us about the benefits. Health care, retirement, etc.

Wow, you get fired up really easily, don't you? You are way off base on a number of things in that post. I do read the boards more than I post, and I don't visit here daily like I used to, but that's because the Browns suck and the conversations have been absolutely pathetic for some time in the other non-football forums. I have no idea what that had to do with this brief conversation though.

First off, I'm not in the least bit upset. I assure you, no little quip or remark you make on this board could possibly upset me. That seems to be a trend with some of you who pretend to want to discuss, but then label any disagreements as crying or whining, or calling them a mod. Lol. Like I said, I get bored with game playing. You are into it, that's fine, I'm not.

You seem to think I'm somehow sympathetic to Trump supporters or republicans. I've called them out constantly.

I made a couple of posts tonight after reading, and saw your's. I think blaming one side given what is happening in this country is being simplistic and ignoring reality. So I made a simple post, you responded with a one sided opinion, and I responded. Your response to that post I find to be fascinating and amusing. I just happened upon your post and responded. You went off the rails.

I don't have time to go into everything you posted, nor do I feel the need. This is one of the reasons I don't post much here anymore. Everything is a major drama, and it's just not enjoyable. Maybe I'll have time to pop in tomorrow. Not that it matters.

The retirement is trash compared to Ohio. We basically get a glorified 401k. Pay is greater out in these remote districts, but I easily spend an extra 5k+ (Plane tickets round trip from Anchorage to village which is a distance of 500 miles or so tuns about 1200....flight from Cleveland to Anchorage which is 3000 miles turns out to be 700 dollars...added food costs due to the shipping costs...etc) year on added expenses of bush Alaska life. Rent is decent, and I don't pay for utilities. It's much worse for housing in the more developed areas, I.E. Anchorage, as the housing market is expensive. Healthcare is comparable to Ohio teachers.

My parents gave up a lot to help me and my sister. They helped us however they could, and they live a life of altruism for the two of us. I'm paying back my own loans, and they've offered to help a little for grad school...they do want to see me continue to do well and I appreciate it. I give back in whatever manner I can. So Ted, I truly know what you mean about parents. They did a ton for me.

Salary: road system starts around 48K
Bush starts around 53k

How did i go off the rails? I'm completely chill while posting that.

just like i am now.

you can't say this:

"That seems to be a trend with some of you who pretend to want to discuss, but then label any disagreements as crying or whining, or calling them a mod."

and yet say this:

"Wow, you get fired up really easily, don't you?" "You went off the rails."

i'm discussing issues with you, and then you label me and assume what i'm doing. that's a contradiction.

so obviously you are into word games. you just made an entire post doing as much. all i ever asked on the board is: What is the standard?

and that's the big issue. i would love to move on and address the points you made.

but instead of countering any of the points i made with the actual discussion we was having, you instead make a lengthy response about how i post and that you don't have time to go through the points.

well you had plenty of time to write a lengthy response when it comes to word games. so what's up?

you're part of the problem, just like the rest of us. hope you're aware of that.

I was wrong here, turns out the law now allows for the President to fire him, although that would certainly be catastrophic for him and his presidency.