[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Edit][Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
4chan
/news/ - Current News


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: 1679cbCOMIC-DEI.jpg (1.13 MB, 1200x1783)
1.13 MB
1.13 MB JPG
Did you know? The system of Senate-confirmed inspectors general at large agencies was established in the late 1970s, after the Watergate scandal, to conduct independent investigations and audits of federal spending and operations and report the findings to Congress and the public.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-federal-inspectors-general-fired/

The Trump administration purged at least a dozen federal inspectors general overnight Friday, multiple sources confirmed to CBS News. It is an unprecedented move that will likely result in legal challenges.

Speaking to reporters abroad Air Force One on his way to Florida, President Trump on Saturday described the firings as "standard" and a "very common thing to do."

However, the inspector general of the U.S. Small Business Administration said the firings are legally dubious and will be challenged.

Hannibal "Mike" Ware was among those fired. He argued in a letter to a White House personnel official, which was obtained by CBS News on Saturday, that he "does not believe the actions taken are legally sufficient."

According to Ware, he and other inspectors general were sent an email from Sergio Gor, the director of presidential personnel, on Friday informing them that "due to changing priorities, your position as Inspector General...is terminated, effective immediately."

Ware, in his letter, recommended Gor reach out to White House legal counsel to discuss the "intended course of action" as "we do not believe the actions taken are legally sufficient to dismiss Presidentially Appointed, Senate Confirmed Inspectors General."

Federal law requires the White House to give Congress a full month of warning and case-specific details before firing a federal inspector general.
>>
A source told CBS News that the fired inspectors general include many who were appointed during the first Trump administration. Back in 2020, Trump fired five inspector generals.
Ware, who is also the chair of the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency, an independent oversight body, said in a separate statement that inspector generals are not "immune from removal." However, he echoed that unjustified removals are a "significant threat" to the jobs they're meant to do.

"Congress specifically established the authorities and structure of the IGs to safeguard their vital oversight role, by mandating independence under the IG Act," he said. "Removals inconsistent with the law are a significant threat to the actual and perceived independence of IGs."

Ware also noted that Congress recently amended the Inspector General Act to require the president to notify Congress 30 days prior to the removal of an inspector general, as well as requiring a "substantive rationale, including detailed and case-specific reasons."

The White House has not commented on the firings.

Among those fired was Christi Grimm, the inspector general for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, CBS News confirmed.

Inspectors general are tasked with finding waste, fraud, abuse and misconduct in the federal agencies. They would be tasked with monitoring President Trump's agencies and appointees.

Mark Greenblatt, who was nominated by Mr. Trump to be inspector general of the Department of the Interior during Mr. Trump's first term, told CBS News in a phone interview Saturday that he was "stunned" when he received the notification.

When asked why he thinks Mr. Trump fired him and others, he responded: "The most charitable interpretation is that he doesn't believe in our independence or our fairness. The least charitable interpretation is that he wants lackeys to rubber stamp what he's trying to do."
>>
"It's very bizarre," Greenblatt added. "There's no unifying theme as to why he chose this group of 17. It just doesn't make sense, to be completely honest. It does not make sense. No one can figure out what was driving the list."

Democratic Rep. Gerald Connolly of Virginia, who is a ranking member of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, called the firings of inspectors general "an attack on transparency and accountability, essential ingredients in our democratic form of government."

"Replacing independent inspectors general with political hacks will harm every American who relies on social security, veteran benefits and a fair hearing at IRS on refunds and audits."

Sen. Chuck Grassley, an Iowa Republican, said in a statement on Saturday that while "there may be a good reason the IGs were fired," he'd like further explanation from Mr. Trump.

"Regardless, the 30 day detailed notice of removal that the law demands was not provided to Congress," he added.

In remarks on the Senate floor on Saturday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) described the Trump administration's actions as a "chilling purge" and called it "a preview of the lawless approach Donald Trump and his administration are taking far too often as he's becoming president."

"These firings are Donald Trump's way of telling us he is terrified of accountability and is hostile to facts and to transparency," Schumer said. "Inspectors General can be vital for keeping the government honest."
>>
>>1377438 (OP)
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/07/joe-biden-andrew-saul-trump-unitary-executive.html
>WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH IT'S ONLY OKAY WHEN """WE""" DO IT WAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH
>>
>>1377441
>In the long run, there are downsides to the ascent of the unitary executive. The next Republican president will surely follow this example and remove Biden’s own appointees from office. But does anyone seriously think that the next Republican president would have let Biden’s people remain in office either way?
Well? Do you?

Anyway though, some of those guys aren't even Biden nominees. They're Trump's OWN nominees who he's decided aren't loyal enough now.
>>
>>1377441
None of those people had specific protections under the law. Inspector Generals do. Hope this helps.
>>
>>1377445
Fuck all of those liberal traitors. No one is going to do shit. Trump won
>>
>>1377445
Where do you get the idea that the president doesn't have sole authority over the executive branch?
>>
>>1377463
>No one is going to do shit.
Order already got shut down. Same as his EO that would've overridden the 14th amendment.

Checks and balances. I learned about them in 2rd grade. Don't know how Trump made it to 78 without doing so.
>>
>>1377486
Inspector Generals aren't under the executive branch.
>>
look at the retards bending over backwards to defend trump without any knowledge of the situation or government in general
>>
For the anti-law and order Trumpcels.

>50 U.S. Code § 3517 - Inspector General for Agency

>The Inspector General may be removed from office only by the President. The President shall communicate in writing to the intelligence committees the substantive rationale, including detailed and case-specific reasons, for any such removal not later than 30 days prior to the effective date of such removal. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to prohibit a personnel action otherwise authorized by law, other than transfer or removal.
>>
>>1377500
>Inspector Generals aren't under the executive branch.
Absolutely wrong, dumbass.
>50 U.S. Code § 3517 - Inspector General for Agency
Joe Biden can write an executive order saying whatever he wants, but it isn't legally binding for the next president. You can't change the law right before you leave office to handicap your legal successor, it doesn't work that way.

Additionally, if Congress wanted the authority to prevent the president from being able to fire executive branch employees it would have to be approved by the supreme court, which it wouldn't be.
>>
>>1377551
Read retard >>1377523
>>
>>1377554
Retard, I did read and addressed it directly: Congress passed that nonsense in 2022 and it isn't legally binding. Congress doesn't have the ability to pass a law granting itself new authority over another branch of government; this is literally basic civics, stupid faggot. The have zero say over executive branch employees, which includes inspector generals. GG NO RE.
>>
>>1377555
https://apnews.com/article/trump-inspectors-general-fired-congress-unlawful-4e8bc57e132c3f9a7f1c2a3754359993
>Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., acknowledged that the firings violated statutes but shrugged it off: “Just tell them you need to follow the law next time,” he said.
That's how serious Congress is taking it, faggots.
>>
>>1377558
it's funny how you're just out in the open criminals at this point, and aren't even trying to deny it. trump will literally go down as the worst president in history
>>
>>1377559
>trump will literally go down as the worst president in history
Heard this before in 2016. Turns out 2019 was the best year we've had in a decade.
>>
>>1377571
I love how MAGAts always talk about 2019 and not the actual final year he was in office.
>>
>>1377572
Everyone is aware that democrats are cognitively dissonant and on one hand supported lockdowns as a necessary measure for covid, and then on the other hand blamed trump that they caused unemployment

Fagwad.
>>
>>1377523
Here's a slightly different angle for you mentally challenged individuals:
If the president firing an inspector general without giving Congress a "good reason" (notice how ridiculously vague that is?) is a crime, what's the punishment according to the written statute?

I'll give you a clue: it doesn't fucking exist.
>>
>>1377573
COVID was Trump's call to fuck up. We could've been the one major nation that didn't get infected. But he didn't take it seriously until we were already fucked.
>>
>>1377574
>Hmmm, what's the punishment if I make an illegal move in chess? In the rules, it doesn't exist, therefore... why can't I move my queen like this?

If the law says you can't do something, it means if you do it, it gets undone you fucking retard.
>>
>>1377578
Definitionally, if a law doesn't have a punishment attached it isn't a crime. At the top of the "law" you linked, it literally says, "guidance."

As in, the president is under no requirement to follow it. Checkmate, dumbass.
>>
>>1377580
>Hmmm, where's the punishment if the president has everyone in congress executed, huh? Checkmate libtard

Enjoy the resulting lawsuit you fucking retard. Those inspector generals aren't going anywhere lol
>>
>>1377581
>Those inspector generals aren't going anywhere lol
It's ok faggot, not everyone understands what a chain of command is or means. Anybody can write a letter and the president has supreme authority to hire or fire anyone under his direct command, which includes every single person in the executive branch. He can fire every single IRS, FBI, CIA and NSA agent with a single Executive Order, because that's what it means to be somebody's boss.
>>
>>1377577
>But he didn't take it seriously until we were already fucked.
But that's wrong you fucking retard. He immediately wanted to ban travel from China... and was labeled a racist. Why don't you go back and look at some quotes Biden said about it you fucking faggot.
>>
>>1377591
he immediately said there was nothing to worry about. but keep lying since it's your job and you have no choice
>>
>>1377440
>Greenblatt
Its so tiresome.
At this point i genuinely wish to god to brutally punish them.
>>
>>1377591
His handling of covid has nothing to do with him wanting to block people coming in from China. By the time he came up with that brilliant idea, covid was already multiplying in usa at an unstoppable rate.
>>
>>1377438 (OP)
>1679cbCOMIC-DEI.jpg
why do they think every straight white male comes from a wealthy family and was legacy-admitted into ivy league colleges, is it to justify racially discriminating against straight white males
>>
>>1377663
why do you care, you're not even white
>>
>>1377663
>sees a message that explicitly states that meritocracy is better than letting unqualified rich idiots run things and has a melty
right wing shills get triggered over the weirdest things
>>
>>1377663
I'M OUTRAGED!!1 THEY OUGHT TO APOLOGIZE!11
>>
Trump won, stop crying already



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Edit][Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.