I saw this news story break around 11:00 last night, and I haven't seen anybody posting about it this morning. Attorney General Barr once again shows whom he works for....
We've been following that one too. The current version involves Barr sending him a letter today saying that Trump has fired him, and Trump saying not me I'm not involved.
So much to keep track of today, between that and Tulsa.
So now the take is that he insisted on being fired through channels in order to ensure that his deputy will normatively succeed him rather than having some rando appointed because he resigned. This story clearly isn't over yet.
Yes, it sounds to me as though he reached a face-saving compromise with Barr: I go quietly, and you leave my assistant in charge until there's a replacement confirmed by the Senate. The New York Times analysis suggested that Barr really didn't have the power to fire him, but Trump did (if he was willing to take responsibility for doing so).
And it seems not at all clear that Trump's preferred nominee will sail through Senate confirmation: Clayton has never been a prosecutor, so becoming the chief prosecutor of perhaps the highest-profile U.S. District seems like a stretch, and normally-Trump-sycophant Lindsay Graham says he won't hold hearings on the nomination unless it's OK with New York State's two Senators -- which it presumably isn't.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
So much to keep track of today, between that and Tulsa.
no subject
no subject
And it seems not at all clear that Trump's preferred nominee will sail through Senate confirmation: Clayton has never been a prosecutor, so becoming the chief prosecutor of perhaps the highest-profile U.S. District seems like a stretch, and normally-Trump-sycophant Lindsay Graham says he won't hold hearings on the nomination unless it's OK with New York State's two Senators -- which it presumably isn't.