Rubio now weighs firing the ambassador he still won't say took the $100,000.

…(cont) Now, on October 12th, the temperature rises again without the number moving. The New York Post reports Guilfoyle is "on very thin ice" with the president; the Washington Examiner and The Hill both report Trump and Rubio are weighing whether to fire her; a senior administration official describes the two men as "extremely pissed off." A decision is reportedly pending. None of that is an accounting of the $100,000. It is a measure of how loud the story has gotten, not of whether the transaction happened — anger is not an audit, and a personnel decision is not a bank statement.

Here is what has not moved since October 8th. Rubio was asked directly, twice, on the record, whether his own ambassador asked a donor for $100,000 in exchange for access to his department. He answered zero of those two questions. Four days and two news cycles later, the question has grown teeth — a majority whip uses the word troubling, a president reportedly uses stronger words in private — but the count is still zero. Nobody who can confirm or deny the transaction has done either.

Firing an ambassador answers a personnel question. It does not answer a money question. A whip's discomfort and a president's anger are real, but neither one is a substitute for a secretary of state's accounting, and on that accounting, the running count is still zero for two.