4 ms·
>If she committed a felony Big if, especially since she hasn't been formally charged with anything. In any case, even if she has, Trump and Pulte's authority t
by underlipton 1y ago
>If she committed a felony
Big if, especially since she hasn't been formally charged with anything. In any case, even if she has, Trump and Pulte's authority to fire her is questionable. It would be like a mayor attempting to fire a private security guard that's contracted with the city, pending an investigation.
A couple of points: if it were a LEO, they would generally be put on leave, not fired. But, again, officer of a private entity (which the Fed) is; the mayor/president's ability to influence that entity's activity ends at the contracts/relevant statutes's stipulations - and if there's a dispute, it gets hashed out in civil court. Of course, if a felony has been committed, one could just wait for the conviction, which would likely lead to termination by one of several exigencies.
But, again, big if.
- phendrenad2 1y ago> Trump and Pulte's authority to fire her is questionable So you agree that if she did it, she should be fired, but not by Trump. But the effect is the same. Seems like you're making a mountain out of a molehill. And by the way, if she did it, and whomever is (in your eyes) responsible for firing her chooses not to, would you consider that a direliction of duty, I.E. would that person deserve to be fired? And would it eventually get to the president's responsibility to fire someone if people kept deciding no to, all theh way up the chain? I'm really curious to know what your thoughts are on this, if any.