No, when you are investigating the President and his aides, you are not merely serving "at the pleasure of the President" - and it is a big deal when he tries to fire you.
This should be obvious to any Trump defender who bothers to imagine the shoe being on the other foot.
This should be obvious to any Trump defender who bothers to imagine the shoe being on the other foot.
The concept of "serving at the pleasure of the President" is not an all-purpose no-questions excuse for dismissing people for potentially unethical or corrupt reasons.
Let's say someone offered the President $1 million to be named Secretary of Defense, so the President fired the sitting one. This would not be "okay" because the Defense Secretary "serves at the pleasure of the President'.
"Serving at the pleasure of the President" is understood to mean FOR PUBLIC ENDS, and not at odds with those ends.
Going to re-up this thread, for everyone arguing that because the Constitution grants the President a power, it therefore cannot, by definition, be abused.
