Thanks Donnie,you treasonous POS.

His firing was justified by his deliberate actions that went against recommendations and norms to the disadvantage of one candidate.

Don't forget we have Comey and the FBI to thank for Trump in the first place.

severely (!) over a year ago when he was ejected from the Mueller team.

He had headed up the FBI's counterintelligence group before he joined the Mueller investigation. So, though firing him cost us a very experienced, high-level person, it did not literally cost us the FBI's current counterintelligence head (as Rachel may have implied by telescoping history for simplicity).

to be fired for cause. And Trump in his malice took advantage of that to oblige himself. I know how Rachel put it last night, but she was slicing gray areas back to the specific black bones she wanted to illustrate to make her point. I've heard her and others instead focus on my point before, and that is this:

If Trump had fired an honorable director and assistant director of the FBI (#1 and #2!) because they wouldn't stop the Trump-Russia investigation, our final constitutional crisis would have been triggered. But both actually needed to be fired (if not prosecuted and imprisoned), and the FBI/DoJ/OIG practices independently and together called for each to be fired.

And that is why Trump's firings of the FBI's #1 and #2 didn't trigger the crisis.

(Unlike the other two, no one's currently claiming that Strzok's actions impacted the election or the investigation, but it was also appropriate for the DoJ to fire him for cause. The severe lapses of judgement he was caught in compromised the image of the FBI, gave aid to its enemies, and ruined his own ability to be an asset to the FBI. If he was fired in part to strengthen the DoJ's position against its enemies on the right, that illustrates the extent of the damage his actions caused the FBI. It doesn't excuse them.)