Showing posts with label Rosenstein. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rosenstein. Show all posts

Friday, May 25, 2018

Why Spygate became Liegate

This is  revision of an earlier posting on the subject:

A version of this was published in the Sky Hi News, May 30, 2018

https://www.skyhinews.com/news/muftic-why-spygate-became-liegate/www.skyhinews.com

Update: June 8, 2018: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/06/us/politics/ryan-trump-spygate-spy.html
agrees: no spies...per Paul Ryan.



Last week Donald Trump lit a firecracker in the media, claiming the FBI had planted a spy in his campaign during the 2016 campaign and called it "Spygate, a scandal worse than Watergate". Spygate became Trump's lie- gate, Democrats charged, with good reason.
The challenge was for the Trumpsters  to prove there was a spy embedded in the campaign..just as they were challenged to prove that Trump Tower was wired by the FBI (still waiting) for political reasons. For that reason the White House called a meeting of its most devoted Congressional partisans, Rep. Devin Nunes and  Rep. Trey  Gowdy, to meet with the FBI and Department of Justice to get the evidence they thought would  justify Pres. Trump's inflammatory claims and to unmask the informant. After a great deal of feathers flying, eventually an established select group, "the gang of eight" security cleared bi-partisan Congressional  members, were invited for a second sit-down.
Spygate has turned out to be a farce after the bi-partisan group listened to the details of the FBI' s use of an informant, an American professor in England, to have conversations  in England with  Americans  about whom they already had evidence of connections to both  Russians and the Trump campaign during 2016. There was no FBI embed in the Trump campaign headquarters or staff. The purpose of the informant's use was part of the then ongoing investigation into the Russians' activities. The use of clandestine informants is a fundamental, common practice of our intelligence services and in the case part of an authorized investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 campaign. 
The President tied this accusation about a spy in his midst  to his rhetoric that it was  being undertaken by "a criminal deep state"  and  his charges were quickly embraced and promoted  by his loyal  one-sided media brigades.  However, even those he appointed in the position to know, Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State and recently director of the CIA, said there is no such thing  as deep state in the State Department or the CIA  in testimony before Congress last week.  
That such a charge can be easily believed  by the public without any evidence is not surprising.  A large bipartisan majority feels that national policy is being manipulated or directed by a “Deep State” of unelected government officials, a recent Monmouth poll concluded. There is always been a wariness of the power of the federal government among citizens  in this country, as that same poll found.  
 But now we have reached the unhealthy stage of paranoia with many  ready to believe  the slightest bit of  unproved evidence  to confirm our worst fears or support Donald Trump.  This is  thanks to Donald Trump's demagogic  playing on these fears to protect himself when he is the subject  of a criminal investigation.  He had demanded  unmasking of the  informant and the disclosure of evidence uncovered in Mueller’s investigation of the investigators of him, the investigation’s subject. This is the mother of all mothers of  conflict of interests, because it could be used  to  get his supporters' stories in sync  in testimony  before a grand jury, or to prepare his defense. These demands  took place in the midst of an ongoing investigation  that flies in the face of every norm and rule in criminal cases. Such "disclosure" takes place after an indictment, not before.   As a sop to  put off Trump’s threats of firing Mueller and his boss,  Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, critics charge Rosenstein agreed to the White House demands for the  meeting and to order an inspector general’s investigation of whether  Department of Justice improperly surveilled the Trump campaign in 2016 for political reasons..
_______________________________________________________________________________





Saturday, May 5, 2018

If you can't fire Rosenstein, impeach him?

Update: 5/10/18) At issue: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nunes-subpoena-to-justice-dept-requested-all-documents-about-individual-described-as-longtime-intelligence-source

5/11/18 New bipartisan attempt to protect Mueller's investigation by preserving and reporting fruits of investigation if fired. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/lawmakers-weigh-plan-b-protect-mueller-s-work-n873241

A version of this was published in the Sky Hi News May 7, 2018.
https://www.skyhinews.com/news/muftic-if-trump-cant-fire-him-impeach-rosenstein/


DOJ refuses to release information Nunes demanded because it asked for disclosure of the redacted information on what the DOJ says is an intelligence source and to release that name would damage national security and imperil the life of the source. The DOJ and Democrats on the the House Intelligence committee which Nunes chairs believes that 1) Donald Trump is looking for a pretext to fire Rosenstein if he does not provide the information and that 2) the information would flow to the White House, giving them inside information, a roadmap, needed for a defense against Mueller findings. Also imperiled in this is Attorney Jeff Sessions as well as Rod Rosenstein, since their refusal to turn over the classified information of ongoing investigations...long policy of the DOJ... This could open up the pretext for the President to fire Sessions and Rosenstein or for the impeachment of Rosenstein and then to close down the Mueller probe. As of 5/10/18, the issue is kicked over until next week. (comments per Ari Melber and guests on MSNBC). Impeachment of Rosenstein would take that off the hands of the President who probably would trigger impeachment for obstruction of justice action if he did it. This way one cannot impeach Nunes and his GOP cohorts who also received backing from Speaker Ryan to day for wanting to expose a secret source..

If Donald Trump cannot fire Rod Rosenstein because it would look too much like obstruction of justice, then the House Freedom Caucus is trying to impeach Rod Rosenstein, Deputy Attorney General, who oversees the Mueller Russian investigation.  Their impeachment attempt begins this week. The House Freedom Caucus is clearly trying obstruct justice by crippling the Mueller investigation to oust his boss, Rosenstein, in hopes that a Trump loyalist would take his place and rein in the Mueller investigation.  Clever. There is no way to impeach the House members for their obstructing justice.


At least three times since the first of the year Donald Trump asserted he wanted to fire Rod Rosenstein. However  a handful of GOP Senators warned him that could lead to his own impeachment for obstructing justice, much like the Nixon Watergate impeachment, when Nixon fired the investigators , special counsels, and Department of Justice ( DOJ ) officials  investigating his connection and cover up.


Why is Rosenstein such an object of this attempt? Rosenstein is the key player. He is the one who can fire Mueller and Mueller’s charge is to give a report to Rosenstein who has the power to decide whether to refer the report to Congress for their decision and power to impeach a president.   Since Donald Trump does not have the power to fire Mueller directly, he needs to replace Rosenstein with a loyalist who will either restrict Mueller’s probe or fire him. To Trump’s rescue comes the Freedom Caucus impeachment attempt.


Both Rosenstein’s  boss, Attorney General Jeff Sessions,  and he were appointed by Donald Trump. Both are Republicans.  Sessions has threatened to resign if the president fired Rosenstein. Sessions heads the Department of Justice (DOJ).Sessions recused himself because he himself had unreported conversations with the Russians during the 2016 campaign so that the task of overseeing the investigations fell to Rosenstein, next in line. . In turn, the DOJ/FBI had  already been engaged in investigating the Russian interference in the 2016 elections since the summer of 2016. When Trump fired the FBI director James Comey, allegedly for not swearing loyalty to him or for refusing to cooperate in the Russian connection investigations. Rosenstein hired a special counsel, Robert Mueller, to investigate whether obstruction of justice, conspiracy  (collusion) with the Russians to fix the elections, or other crimes were found to have been committed. Mueller’s investigators are the FBI, IRS and intelligence services, and any number of other federal investigators led by prosecutors in three jurisdictions. Whatever happens to Mueller, or Rosenstein, these other investigations could continue. So why bother?


A political drama  indeed will be all that will result. The merits of the arguments deserve an entire separate column, but the politics of it are clear.  The chances that the Senate would provide them with ⅔ vote needed to oust Rosenstein will not happen because there are not enough GOP senators . This is purely a political move geared to gin up the Trump base before the 2018 elections or to paint the Department of Justice full of non-Trump loyalists that are  so prejudiced against Trump that any findings and reports would have no credibility. In public addresses made to lawyer groups last week, Rod Rosenstein is holding firm in his support of the rule of law and called the House attempt: “extortion“. “...“We are going to do what is required by the rule of law and any kind of threats anybody makes are not going to affect the way we do our job.”
_____________________________________________________________________


     
This follows in the heels of the GOP Chair of the House Intelligence Committee,  Devin Nunes, abruptly cutting off their committee’s investigation into the Russian interference in the 2016 presidential elections that helped Donald Trump win. That committee was a farce, with  Rep. Devin Nunes caught coordinating actions with the White House in his infamous midnight ride to report to the White House what the White House had disclosed to him. . Nunes then engineered the end of the committee’s investigation without calling on key witnesses and subpoenaing key
documents. The minority Democrats were never consulted and issued their minority report that highlighted those shortcomings. Of course, the Mueller investigation continued in spite of these efforts since Mueller has farmed out his investigations to various agencies and several other prosecutors in other jurisdictions.
Failing that, per the conservative Washington Times,May 1,  “ The House Freedom Caucus, which is chaired by Rep. Mark Meadows, North Carolina Republican, have drafted eight articles of impeachment against Mr. Rosenstein, multiple media outlets reported late Monday. Those drafts reportedly accuse Mr. Rosenstein of abusing his authority when he renewed a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant on Trump campaign aide Carter Page ahead of the 2016 presidential campaign.”  All of these charges are based on the Nunes led committee.

In the meantime, a handful of Senators made it clear they would not approve attempts to oust Mueller, enough given the closely divided Senate to stop amy impeachment attempts of Rosenstein. Bills have been introduced to protect Mueller, but have gotten nowhere because the Senate GOP leader refuses to bring the bills up to a vote, claiming it was unnecessary since the White House had no plans to fire Mueller. Whether those same senators would oppose impeaching Rosenstein is not known, but given the close partisan balance in the Senate, getting a 2/3 vote to convict and oust would still be an impossibility.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/11/trump-mueller-republican-senate-516431


https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/01/rosenstein-justice-department-extortion-563167

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/04/18/read-my-lips-no-new-bill-to-protect-robert-mueller-mitch-mcconnell-basically/?utm_term=.362139c0e3f3

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/385587-conservative-house-lawmakers-draft-articles-of-impeachment-against

















The is a replication of a prior blog post , updated, providing more details. Why firing Rod Rosenstein would be like   firing Robert Mueller, 2/ 7 /18
This post was written the last time rumors were Donald Trump was threatening to fire those investigating him, but it is a relevant now as rumors are rampant now, 4 11 18
Revised February 8, 2018


Update: April 20, 2018: AG Sessions threatens to quite if Rosenstein is fired:


Rosenstein's tenure is in jeopardy. CNN quotes  President Trump as having said of Rosenstein, “Let's fire him, let's get rid of him,” but was talked out of it.  Soon after the Nunes memo  came to the public's attention, it was seen by critics  as an attempt to create a pretext for the President to fire him. Mr. Trump revived the possibility. When asked if he would fire Rosenstein,  Trump answered "you figure it out".  In a letter to President Trump, Democratic Congressional leaders wrote "Firing Rod Rosenstein, DOJ Leadership, or Bob Mueller could result in a constitutional crisis of the kind not seen since the Saturday Night Massacre." They were referring to  similar actions Richard Nixon took in Watergate. Even Paul Ryan, House Majority Leader, said : "Rod Rosenstein is doing a fine job."


Donald Trump has his own self-interested reasons to want to fire Deputy Attorney General Rod  Rosenstein. Assuming President Trump believes firing Special Counsel Robert Mueller would certainly trigger serious impeachment attempts, firing Rosenstein would be a tempting  alternative. Rosenstein has already indicated he was not a Trump team player when his Department of Justice objected to the release of the Nunes memo.The Nunes memo was also viewed by many as an attempt to provide  Donald Trump with a public rationale to fire Rosenstein for alleged “deep state bias” and for FBI alleged incompetence in a single court filing to renew a FISA warrant for surveillance of Carter Page. The Nunes memo was also seen as an attempt to damage the credibility of the FBI so that their findings would be viewed as biased.  Polls show that strategy is working with the GOP rank and file


Some senators have warned him  firing Rosenstein also could backfire on him just as did the the firing of FBI Director James Comey. Comey was investigating President Trump's associates' with contacts with Russians. That firing  resulted in the appointment of Mueller to investigate if the President or his associates were obstructing justice or they conspired with Russians to interfere in the 2016 elections, or even if financial crimes were committed, all possible impeachable offenses.


Another possible temptation  for Donald Trump to fire Rod Rosenstein  would be to limit the scope of Mueller’s report.  The Deputy AG has the power to put the report in a desk drawer if he does not see release of it would be in the public's interest, whatever that means. A new deputy AG could take money laundering off the table or out of the report, for example. Mr. Trump has made it clear that subject was a red line he thought Mueller should not cross.


The game could then become delay, delay, delay until after the November Congressional elections. Firing Rosenstein and replacing him with a Trump loyalist could a result in drawn out  court challenges, congressional hearings, and a confirmation vote of the Senate, though it would not halt the investigation since it could continue under Rosenstein's deputy. Donald Trump could also  contend his reason try to avoid testifying to the Mueller team or taking the 5th was that the FBI was too politically biased against him. That issue could also be tied up in the Courts past the November 2018 election.


Win or lose the  court challenges, resulting  delays could benefit the GOP and President Trump. The GOP fear is the 2018 midterms could flip control of the  House that has impeachment powers to Democrats. The GOP now has the majority in the House and while they have control, it is realistic to believe they would not impeach their President. Delays would give Donald Trump an opportunity  to keep up the morale of his base through November and keep Congress in GOP hands. It might work. In the midst of Watergate, Nixon was re-elected to a second term by a large majority. It was not until after that election he was forced by the courts to release the tapes that his role in the Watergate cover up was revealed to the public and impeachment was begun.


There are two unforeseen circumstances that could change this scenario: the Mueller findings could be
so explosive even House Republicans could not ignore them and would proceed with impeachment or
that Mueller would indict the president and shortcut impeachment proceedings.  Whether he has the power to do the latter is an unsettled legal matter and would depend upon a Supreme Court ruling..


____________________________________________________________________




















“What happens when the special counsel’s investigation is complete?


Rosenstein’s order notes that if Mueller deems it “necessary and appropriate,” he is “authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters.” The federal code states that at the conclusion of a special counsel’s investigation, he must provide the acting attorney general with a confidential report explaining decisions about whether or not prosecutions are warranted. The acting attorney general could decide to make that report public. According to the code, the “Attorney General may determine that public release of these reports would be in the public interest, to the extent that release would comply with applicable legal restrictions.”


Sunday, February 11, 2018

Blowing the whistle on the games Trump loyalists are playing

A version published in the Sky Hi News February 12, 13. 14
https://www.skyhinews.com/news/muftic-blowing-the-whistle-on-trump-loyalists/



The games President Trump, his White House, and his friends in Congress are playing are two: one, to replace  those involved in the Russian related investigation  he views are  biased against him  with those who are biased in his favor. The second is to to destroy the credibility of prosecutors and  to stop  them before they finish their investigation.  Both  actions threaten the rule of law by subverting the legal system in order  to protect the power of the rule by a person.
.
A president, the head of the executive branch, does have  the right to appoint those in charge of carrying out his policies,  but when he manipulates law  enforcement  investigating whether he  possibly violated the  the law, it becomes a game dangerous to a democracy.


Fresh on the minds of the founders of this country was what kind of government they did not want. They constructed a form of government  to avoid the rule of a monarchy. But also in their recent   past was the  bitter experience of  a  religious and populist inspired civil war in  mid  17th century England causing and following  the beheading of Charles I. In the late 18th century the US  Constitution provided  a third way, a form of government  that better protected  the rule of law above the rule by any other force and set up a system that divided power among three branches with checks  over each. That third way is being seriously challenged in 2018.
.
Here is how Mr Trump is  attempting to turn law enforcement into an instrument to protect his grip on the White House. Gone are FBI Director James Comey  (fired)) and   Deputy Director Andrew McCabe (pressured to resign), both who failed to swear loyalty or act loyally to  protect President Trump  from investigations into possible misconduct that could lead to impeachment. Mr. Trump’s  view  he openly opined is that the Attorney General’s duty should be to  protect him . When  AG Jeff Sessions recused himself from overseeing investigations into Russian involvement in the 2016 campaign, supervising the investigation  fell to Session’s  deputy,  Rod Rosenstein. Rosenstein failed  the Trump loyalty test when he did not reign in the investigation by Special Counsel Mueller. Rosenstein could fire Mueller but he found no grounds and  he  opposed the release of the Nunes memo. To replace him was to be  Associate AG Rachel Brand and she quit Friday. Who fills that vacancy could be a voice more friendly to the Trumpists, clearing the way for firing Rosenstein and Mueller.


The first move  in the current game was a  campaign  coordinated with Trump friendly media and political supporters to destroy the credibility of prosecutors and their findings.They claimed anti Trump texts between two agents painted the entire FBI as biased  even though the  offending agent had been removed from the investigation the summer before. The second salvo was  the Nunes memo concocted by Rep. Devin Nunes, GOP chair of the House Intelligence committee,  and released with the support of the GOP Speaker of the House. The GOP controlled House had become complicit  instead of being a check on the  chief executive.  The Nunes memo lacked credibility itself. Contrary to the memo’s premise, the FBI did disclose to the FISA judge the political funding of the Steele dossier.  Several polls show the campaigns have had a  bit of a  propaganda success, with  growing belief among GOP voters  the FBI is biased against President Trump,  though as a whole American voters still trust the FBI over Mr. Trump.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/373146-poll-most-say-they-believe-fbi-over-trump

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-poll/most-republicans-believe-fbi-justice-dept-trying-to-delegitimize-trump-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN1FP2UH

https://www.factcheck.org/2018/02/qa-nunes-memo/

Friday, February 2, 2018

Is Donald Trump considering taking the 5th?


“No person shall….. be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,..”  The 5th Amendment of the Constitution.
There is speculation on Morning Joe this morning that the game President Trump , Rep. Devin Nunes, and Speaker  Paul Ryan, are playing is to try to damage the FBI so badly, the President could even take the 5th if he is forced to be interviewed by the special prosecutor’s office.
Those who take the 5th only do so at their own peril since that is sometimes believed  by the public as an admission of  guilt. It is a risky move.  However, there are also other risky  moves: firing Special  Prosecutor  Robert  Mueller, for one, and even being interviewed by Mueller is another. By taking the 5th, Donald Trump might even be able to survive impeachment attempts if he can damage the FBI’s credibility enough.
With steps   recently  to  damage and discredit the FBI engineered by the White House, Trump’s  favored media, and loyal members of Congress, taking the 5th makes as much sense as a  strategy of  just  drumming up pretexts to fire Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and Mueller.    I can see how this could  play out.  At the point Donald Trump takes the 5th if he is issued a Grand Jury subpoena,or refuses to be “interviewed” by the Special Counsel Robert Mueller , Mueller could release his report to the public without Trump’s interview/testimony  with enough  credible details that the case will be in the hands of voters in time for the November midterms.  The court of public opinion would become  the jury and vote, throwing the House  into the hands of a Democratic majority..  Trump would then be counting on his core base who will stand by their man as his firewall against a Senate vote to convict.  The House of Representatives can impeach, similar to an indictment, the Senate holds the trial, and  if a vote of two thirds of the Senate convicts, the President is removed from office. While the  GOP is the majority in the House, an impeachment process is likely not to begin, regardless of the Special Counsel’s report..
One  of the strategy  friends of the  Trump administration  have employed  to  damage the FBI’s credibility as been  to gin up  a case of anti Trump text messages between Agent  Peter Strzok and his girlfriend, but Strzok was removed from the investigation last summer. Another strategy is to paint Deputy AG Rod  Rosenstein as "not on his team". The pitch is the Strzok case is evidence every other FBI agent is politically corrupted.  The Nunes memo has been in the process  for some weeks  as another try   to paint  Rosenstein and the FBI as being  so inept , they  relied  solely on the Steele Dossier  in renewing a FISA warrant.  That would the justification for  removing Rosenstein  because of competence  and the FBI would be given another black eye.
If the Trump strategy  has been  try to fire Rod Rosenstein,  the Deputy Attorney General  who has the  power to fire Mueller,  and replacing him with a loyalist,   he may be having second thoughts.   There are enough members of the GOP in the Senate who have let  it be  known that  firing Mueller would lead to impeachment and conviction. Firing Rosenstein would  raise serious alarm bells., The Trump administration and Ryan have piously, deceptively contended that Nunes’ memo has nothing to do with the Russian investigation. Even House Majority Leader Paul Ryan yesterday said he had confidence in Rosenstein and Mueller, while backing up the release of the Nunes memo.

The  current issue before the White House is  how or whether Donald Trump should be “interviewed” by  Special Counsel Robert Mueller, under oath,  or not under oath, or under subpoena before the Grand Jury.  His verbosity, his record of bald face lying,  and lack of understanding of  the difference between punching back and obstruction of justice  has his legal team worrying he will commit perjury.   Mueller’s representatives and the White House are negotiating now when and how he will speak to Mueller. That explains, too,  why   the Trump media hypes  the line that Trump’s legal team  fears  he will walk into a “perjury trap”.  A perjury trap is challengeable because that refers to a  defined disallowed technique interrogators could use to trick him to lie and experienced prosecutors will not go there. Mueller is if anything one of the most experienced prosecutors in the US.

The irony of this is that the FBI and Director James Comey violated FBI rules to announce Hillary Clinton was under investigation for possible criminal abuse of classified documents in her emails. He did it twice, once just ten days before the 2016 election. Her poll numbers dipped and many believe that led to  her defeat.  What has also come to light that whatever Peter Strzok’s feelings about Hillary Clinton, he drafted the memo used by Comey to make those fatal disclosures that resulted in Trump’s win.  If the FBI was so slanted toward the Democrats and they were full of agents also inclined, they certainly did not act like it in 2016. https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/31/politics/strzok-fbi-comey-clinton-letter/index.html

http://time.com/5127815/donald-trump-rod-rosenstein-team/


Wednesday, January 31, 2018

Trump's war on the deep state sets dangerous precedents

In the President’s State of The  Union address January 30 there was an alarming  sentence: “ I call on the Congress to empower every Cabinet Secretary with the authority to reward good workers—and to remove Federal employees who undermine the public trust or fail the American people.” If the definition  “undermining  of public trust”means lack of credibility due to political bias against him, his  proposal sets some dangerous precedents.  There are  implications  for the impeachment process , endangering lasting public policies,  for undermining the rule of law, and  for preventing government corruption.
Trump has been on a crusade to fire those investigating him who he believes are not  loyal to him. Rumored In danger of being fired are  Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his supervisor  Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. CNN reported Trump asked Rosenstein "if he was on his team".President Trump has already  fired  FBI director James Comey after he failed  to give him  a loyalty pledge and  Trump forced out Assistant FBI Director Andrew McCabe after asking for whom he voted in 2016 and noting he had a wife running for office as a Democrat who received Democratic party campaign money.


President Trump may have a right to have  loyalists in key supervisory positions  of his executive branch, as he did in private business,  but what he does not understand is  that in government that  right does not transfer to appointing or controlling those who are investigating him for potential crimes. It is instead  viewed as an attempt to thwart the investigation for his own benefit. That is the core of “obstruction of justice” charges that brought down Richard Nixon and could be levied against Donald Trump by the special counsel’s  office. Those same charges could also could be cited by a post 2018 Democratic controlled  House  to impeach (indict) him and it could  motivate an outraged Senate to convict him.


This line  in the address  is also likely  a strategy Trump advocates to destroy the “deep state”, a cadre of lower level protected  civil servants, including even rank and file  FBI agents, who are not acting the way he wants them to. The "deep state' conspiracy theory gathered wings when FBI agent Peter Strzok's anti-Trump emails were revealed. Strzok was immediately reassigned last summer from the Russian connection investigation to Human Resources, but later it was also revealed that it was Strzok who had drafted a memo for FBI Director Comey that resulted in Comey announcing he had reopened the criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails, an action that many believe resulted in Trump winning since her polls crashed as a result. Enough for that conspiracy theory and the deep state. Currently,  the criteria for firing government employees protected by  civil service regulations is mostly  whether they are incompetent or fail to perform duties or committed a crime or failed to observe rules. A political bias could fall into the definition umbrella of undermining public trust unless “Public trust” is not carefully defined.
His proposal could make  lower ranking federal employees having political views that differ from him a firing offense.


Andrew Jackson is credited fathering  the spoils system by rewarding those who supported him with jobs and other plums. So corrupt and widespread  was that practice, various  civil service laws were put into effect in the last century  that protected a large group of lower level government  employees from being fired for solely  political reasons  by defining  what constituted proper cause.


The first step taken by any anti-democratic wannabe autocrat is to take total control of  law enforcement agencies by replacing them top to bottom  with his loyalists. The semblance of legality continues, but the practice of the rule of law is destroyed allowing the autocrat to get away with crimes or corruption. Trump  has indicated his belief any number of times when he fumed  that  the Department of Justice headed by the Attorney General Jeff Sesssions should serve him instead of recusing himself from the Russian investigation.


If Democrats  should control the White House after  2020 elections  and  if the criteria for firing civil servants is conforming to a fuzzy definition of public trust based on political loyalties, then Democrats could use the new precedent to undermine  and overturn what the Trump administration had accomplished by ousting Trump loyal  public employees.  What goes around comes around.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-s-gripes-against-mccabe-included-wife-s-politics-comey-n842161

http://www.newsweek.com/fbi-agent-treasonous-trump-helped-draft-hillary-clinton-2016-796699

https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/31/politics/donald-trump-rod-rosenstein-december-meeting/index.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/i-expect-loyalty-trump-told-comey-according-to-written-testimony/2017/06/07/46413298-4bab-1