Or we can just post the CNN article.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn...ump/index.html

It's not corruption if they have a legitimate reason to fire the person. If you work some bull**** job and have a ton of writeups against you, they can keep taking advantage of you for as long as they want. They're in a position to pull the trigger whenever you become a real problem.

Take Batlord for instance.. if he got hurt on the job one day and they started having to pay him for time off or whatever, I'm sure they'd find some kind of loophole in their documentation and get rid of him ASAP using his past writeups as an excuse, even though what they are really doing is saving their own ass.. It's bull****, but it's not corruption.

That analogy might make sense if Batlord was an undercover DEA agent and Burger King was putting heroin in the secret sauce.

Okay, then ignore the analogy. Bottom line is if they have a reason to fire the person they can do it. No matter how timely it may seem you'd have one hell of a time proving corruption in the judicial system.

It’s actually illegal to fire someone with the intent to obstruct justice even if there’s another justification for it.

So how does the firing obstruct justice? Is McCabe no longer able to serve as a witness because he was fired? What in the investigation has changed?

**** with me lose your job and your pension

That’s hella illegal

1. He was 26 hours away from retirement.
2. His accrued pension is unaffected.
3. How does this affect the investigation?

It’s an intimidation tactic chickenhead.