Democrats launch probe of Trump's firing of State Department watchdog

[rooster59]

Democrats launch probe of Trump's firing of State Department watchdog

By Susan Heavey and Jeff Mason

 

FILE PHOTO: U.S. State Department Inspector General Steve Linick departs after briefing House and Senate Intelligence committees at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, U.S. October 2, 2019. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst/File Photo

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrats in Congress on Saturday launched an investigation into President Donald Trump's move to oust the State Department's internal watchdog, accusing the president of escalating his fight against any oversight of his administration.

 

Trump announced the planned removal of Inspector General Steve Linick in a letter to House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi late Friday night, making Linick the latest government inspector general to be ousted in recent weeks under the Republican president.

 

The top Democrats on the House and Senate Foreign Relations Committees questioned the timing and motivation of what they called an "unprecedented removal."

 

"We unalterably oppose the politically-motivated firing of inspectors general and the President’s gutting of these critical positions," House panel chairman Eliot Engel and Senator Bob Menendez, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations panel, said in a statement announcing the probe.

 

The two Democrats said it was their understanding that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo personally recommended Linick's firing because the inspector general "had opened an investigation into wrongdoing by Secretary Pompeo himself."

 

Asked about the investigation, a White House official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said: "Secretary Pompeo recommended the move and President Trump agreed."

 

A State Department spokesperson confirmed Linick had been fired but did not comment on the Democratic investigation or Pompeo's role in the dismissal. The agency said Stephen Akard, director of the Office of Foreign Missions, would take over the watchdog job.

 

Linick, who was appointed to the role in 2013 under the Obama administration, is the fourth inspector general fired by Trump since early April following the president's February acquittal by the Republican-led Senate in an impeachment trial.

 

Pelosi called the ousting an acceleration of a "dangerous pattern of retaliation."

 

"PART OF A PURGE"

 

In April, Trump removed a top coronavirus watchdog, Glenn Fine, who was to oversee the government's COVID-19 financial relief response. Trump also notified Congress that he was firing the inspector general of the U.S. intelligence community, Michael Atkinson, who was involved in triggering the impeachment investigation.

 

Earlier in May, Trump ousted Christi Grimm, who led the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General, after accusing her of having produced a "fake dossier" on American hospitals suffering shortages on the frontlines of the novel coronavirus outbreak.

 

"Trump is methodically eliminating anyone who would bring wrongdoing to light," Senator Jeff Merkley, a Democrat on the Foreign Relations panel, tweeted.

 

Engel and Menendez called on the Trump administration to turn over any related documents by May 22.

 

Trump and his administration have repeatedly balked at Congress' power to check the executive branch, refusing to turn over records in multiple probes and triggering lawsuits over its oversight power. It was not immediately clear what, if any, other action lawmakers would take outside the probe.

 

Walter Shaub, the former head of the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, who exited after clashing with Trump, said the 30-day notice gave lawmakers a window to act, if they wanted to, including calling Pompeo to testify.

 

"It is part of a purge to remove legitimate watchdogs and replace them with loyalists," he tweeted.

 

Representatives for Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Jim Risch did not respond to a request for comment.

 

Trump's letter provided 30-days' notice as required and said he no longer had confidence in Linick's ability to serve as inspector general, but gave no specific reasons.

 

Republican Senator Chuck Grassley said in a statement that citing "a general lack of confidence simply is not sufficient detail to satisfy Congress."

 

(Reporting by Susan Heavey, Jeff Mason and Joel Schectman in Washington; Additional reporting by Kanishka Singh in Bengaluru; Editing by Leslie Adler and David Gregorio)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-05-17

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

[Tounge Thaied]

It's called getting fired. Time to fire some of the lame democrats now. 

[BobBKK]

He was an Obama pick who decided to investigate one of the government team. I have no idea why Trump did not fire them ALL when he first took office. Of course Dems will be bleating and whining and grinding there pure white teeth trying to come up with a new Russia/Ukraine impeachment scandal.  

[Rimmer]

Troll post and a reply have been removed

[Walker88]

Similar to IG Atkinson of the Intel Community, IG Linick was fired for doing his job. Under 45, there is fealty or fired. Atkinson and Linick refused to accept that the United States is not a Democratic Republic, but a monarchy. They were so naive that they thought the Founders system of checks and balances in government, of which IGs are an integral part, has been disbanded and eradicated by 45. Cronyism and blatant self-interest rule the day, and like North Korea, all must bow to the wishes of the new king.

 

This firing represents the second quashed investigation into Pompeo. The first was when it was uncovered that he and his wife fraudulently used campaign funds for personal use, just as Rep Duncan Hunter had done. Hunter was found guilty and will be going to jail. 45 had former AG Sessions stop the investigation of Pompeo. Pompeo also misused, for purely personal reasons, govt assets while he served as DCI. He had brought in his former business associate, a Filipino American (Brian Bulatao), to serve with him at CIA, and had the man, who was on the govt payroll, spend his time doing personal favors for both Pompeo and his wife. When Pompeo switched to Foggy Bottom, he took the man with him there and again used him---while on the Taxpayer clock---do personal errands for Pompeo and his wife.  This latter behavior was just one of the things IG Linick was tasked with investigating, but since under 45 drinking at the taxpayer trough is encouraged, IG Linick was fired for doing his job.

 

In the agency, Pompeo's departure for State garnered mixed feelings:  jubilation that such an unqualified and self-serving person had left the agency to professionals, mixed with sympathy for what agency folks knew the folks in Foggy Bottom would have to endure.

 

Those commenting here who get their 'news' from Fox or Gateway Pundit or other such know-nothing venues, have no clue of the reality of the situation. As one with a long association with these matters and direct first hand knowledge, I do know. I assure those who champion the firing of IG Linick, that your beliefs are ill-informed and wrong. Your beliefs, of course, are up to you, but you are wrong. Mine is not an opinion, just fact.

Edited May 17, 2020 by Walker88
add

[winslowsjardine]

Trump Ousted State Dept. Watchdog at Pompeo’s Urging; Democrats Open Inquiry
The lawmakers said Steve Linick, the State Department’s inspector general, had opened an investigation into Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s conduct.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/16/us/politics/linick-investigation-pompeo.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

[Walker88]

49 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

He was an Obama pick who decided to investigate one of the government team. I have no idea why Trump did not fire them ALL when he first took office. Of course Dems will be bleating and whining and grinding there pure white teeth trying to come up with a new Russia/Ukraine impeachment scandal.  

IGs generally last through Administrations, even when the Party in power changes. They are professionals and are tasked with rooting out malfeasance, corruption and violation of laws and norms. They tend to have a particular expertise and are not viewed as political, despite being an appointment.

 

Neither you nor any other commenter here can name a single rule violation any of the fired IGs committed, because none did. Similarly, you cannot refute the investigations that got each of them fired, because every single one of the investigations was legitimate and was being carried out by the book. This is similar to Russiagate. When the first indications came in that Russia was going to aid one candidate over another, President Obama warned every single person on the Bigot List (that identifies every single person who has knowledge of a particular issue) that all must be done 'by the book'. When additional intel began to come in that Russia was receiving cooperation from 45's campaign, all were again reminded both of the seriousness of the intelligence and the absolute need to perform the investigation 'by the book'. You will not hear this on Fox, either because they do not know or do not care.

 

You are blissfully unaware of your own lack of knowledge of both this IG firing and the Russia investigation. Perhaps reality does not matter to you, perhaps it does not matter to you that a hostile foreign govt interfered in the 2016 election with the cooperation of the candidate and his campaign, but for those of us who served and who understand that independence from foreign interference is something we cherish, it is important. Current AG Barr said recently, when asked by CBS about pure partisan politics in the so-called Dept of Justice, 'history is written by the winners'.  Perhaps that is true. November is coming, and after the Dems retake both the WH and the Senate, some history will be written. Those who actually broke the law, as opposed to those who merely criticized a person with thinner skin that a 13 year old schoolgirl, will face justice. Those of us who served owe that to everyone who has ever served to defend the ideals upon which the United States was founded.

 

If your post is allowed to stand, then my reply is equally relevant. Mine has the added benefit of being fact based. I know exactly how Russiagate began and how it progressed. You, I am willing to bet, do not, because you never had access.

 

 

Edited May 17, 2020 by Walker88

[Walker88]

While this website is for opinions, including re the firing of IG Linick, it would be interesting if those siding with 45 could point out what facts other people post here, including me, to which you take exception. Please back up your view with relevant facts and explain what job or access allowed you to become so 'well-informed'.  In other words, please explain your rationale for why---other than 'because he can'---45 fired IG Atkinson, fired the IG who would have overseen much of the CV-19 Bailout money distribution, and fired Intel Community IG Atkinson, who---like all other IGs---had followed the book in terms of opening investigations into alleged wrongdoing on the part of 45 or members of his Administration.

 

As I noted, Pompeo is not new to investigation. AG Sessions quashed the first one into campaign finance malfeasance. IG Linick was fired because he was looking into new allegations of violations by Pompeo at State. In other words, IG Linick was doing the job for which the taxpayer pays him.

 

My knowledge comes via a multi decade association with a certain organization in the govt, which afforded me TS/SCI clearances as well as allowed me to form relationships with many of the people now being vindictively pursued in violation of every norm upon which the US was founded. I am guessing not a single one of you has any such first hand knowledge, but rather merely have opinions. Yes, you are entitled to opinions, but opinions are weightless, while facts have gravitas.

 

The floor is yours.

[Bluespunk]

2 hours ago, rooster59 said:

The two Democrats said it was their understanding that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo personally recommended Linick's firing because the inspector general "had opened an investigation into wrongdoing by Secretary Pompeo himself."

 

trump White House running scared of any form of oversight.

 

Viva la swamp

 

maga

[Tug]

To me it’s just another example of the deep malise of this administration anything that casts doubt disagreement or questions motives the igs job description btw is met with dismissal and attacks it ain’t right and wrecks the checks and balances that keep the ship of state in order in this case it’s to cover pompeo 

[topt]

1 hour ago, Walker88 said:

I do know. I assure those who champion the firing of IG Linick, that your beliefs are ill-informed and wrong. Your beliefs, of course, are up to you, but you are wrong. Mine is not an opinion, just fact.

 

15 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

Yes, you are entitled to opinions, but opinions are weightless, while facts have gravitas.

Firstly I have no axe to grind in this discussion especially as I don't follow US politics that closely but overall I would tend to agree with Tugs comments above.

 

I was happily nodding along with your reasoning until I read the lines I quoted above. Sorry but just too dogmatic without any real background of why yours are "facts".

[Walker88]

17 minutes ago, topt said:

 

Firstly I have no axe to grind in this discussion especially as I don't follow US politics that closely but overall I would tend to agree with Tugs comments above.

 

I was happily nodding along with your reasoning until I read the lines I quoted above. Sorry but just too dogmatic without any real background of why yours are "facts".

Your point is legit, and I accept your reasoning. I'm a voice on the internet, though time and the coming change of govt will bring to light every single thing I note. I can wait.

 

What capability I absolutely do have, however, is that I can ask a question or two and know immediately when other posters are dead wrong. Perhaps that knowledge is available only to me, but that is the nature of access vs having only media sources and opinions, as the other posters have.

 

It baffles me, however, how so many can be blind to the undeniable reality of things that are not opinions or media based, but rather can be seen by the body of evidence from 45's own Tweets and video recordings of what he says. Similarly, it baffles me that his followers simply refuse to accept that these IGs, like IG Linick, were fired not because they did not do their job, but because they WERE doing the job for which the taxpayer pays them. That willful blindness to the reality of the situation is cult behavior. Democrats are fully justified---as part of the Article 1 powers handed to them in the US Constitution, to pursue the matter. It's called 'oversight', and is one of the bedrocks upon which the US system of checks and balances---so as to obviate the chance of a POTUS acting as an autocrat or monarch---was based.

 

Yes, 45 has a right to fire any appointed official, but Dems have a Constitutional right, as well as the responsibility, to investigate the rationale for why IG Linick was fired. Like Linick, the Dems are doing their job.

 

Edited May 17, 2020 by Walker88
add

[Phoenix Rising]

Trump continues his attack on democracy and his base eggs him on. HRC was 100% right.

[BobBKK]

2 hours ago, Walker88 said:

IGs generally last through Administrations, even when the Party in power changes. They are professionals and are tasked with rooting out malfeasance, corruption and violation of laws and norms. They tend to have a particular expertise and are not viewed as political, despite being an appointment.

 

Neither you nor any other commenter here can name a single rule violation any of the fired IGs committed, because none did. Similarly, you cannot refute the investigations that got each of them fired, because every single one of the investigations was legitimate and was being carried out by the book. This is similar to Russiagate. When the first indications came in that Russia was going to aid one candidate over another, President Obama warned every single person on the Bigot List (that identifies every single person who has knowledge of a particular issue) that all must be done 'by the book'. When additional intel began to come in that Russia was receiving cooperation from 45's campaign, all were again reminded both of the seriousness of the intelligence and the absolute need to perform the investigation 'by the book'. You will not hear this on Fox, either because they do not know or do not care.

 

You are blissfully unaware of your own lack of knowledge of both this IG firing and the Russia investigation. Perhaps reality does not matter to you, perhaps it does not matter to you that a hostile foreign govt interfered in the 2016 election with the cooperation of the candidate and his campaign, but for those of us who served and who understand that independence from foreign interference is something we cherish, it is important. Current AG Barr said recently, when asked by CBS about pure partisan politics in the so-called Dept of Justice, 'history is written by the winners'.  Perhaps that is true. November is coming, and after the Dems retake both the WH and the Senate, some history will be written. Those who actually broke the law, as opposed to those who merely criticized a person with thinner skin that a 13 year old schoolgirl, will face justice. Those of us who served owe that to everyone who has ever served to defend the ideals upon which the United States was founded.

 

If your post is allowed to stand, then my reply is equally relevant. Mine has the added benefit of being fact based. I know exactly how Russiagate began and how it progressed. You, I am willing to bet, do not, because you never had access.

 

 

Very nice try at superiority and 'inside knowledge'. If, in fact, you were wholly genuine your posts would not be riddled with political comment but, mostly, your hypocrisy in that the USA interferes herself in countless elections and governments from time immemorial. You also see yourself as a prophet regarding Nov and we know how prophets fared last don't we?

[BobBKK]

1 hour ago, Walker88 said:

While this website is for opinions, including re the firing of IG Linick, it would be interesting if those siding with 45 could point out what facts other people post here, including me, to which you take exception. Please back up your view with relevant facts and explain what job or access allowed you to become so 'well-informed'.  In other words, please explain your rationale for why---other than 'because he can'---45 fired IG Atkinson, fired the IG who would have overseen much of the CV-19 Bailout money distribution, and fired Intel Community IG Atkinson, who---like all other IGs---had followed the book in terms of opening investigations into alleged wrongdoing on the part of 45 or members of his Administration.

 

As I noted, Pompeo is not new to investigation. AG Sessions quashed the first one into campaign finance malfeasance. IG Linick was fired because he was looking into new allegations of violations by Pompeo at State. In other words, IG Linick was doing the job for which the taxpayer pays him.

 

My knowledge comes via a multi decade association with a certain organization in the govt, which afforded me TS/SCI clearances as well as allowed me to form relationships with many of the people now being vindictively pursued in violation of every norm upon which the US was founded. I am guessing not a single one of you has any such first hand knowledge, but rather merely have opinions. Yes, you are entitled to opinions, but opinions are weightless, while facts have gravitas.

 

The floor is yours.

This is Thai Visa Forum your claims hold no more weight than the guy in the bar who used to be a US Navy Seal General. Your constant support of Dems gives you away. I am non-political but see the disaster the Dems have become. If I were American I doubt I'd vote for either party and I hope 2024 will produce much better candidates as I think Trump will win Nov easily (but who knows for sure?).

[spidermike007]

Wait a minute. Putin does not have to deal with watchdogs. Neither does Xi, Kim, MBS, Hun Sen, Prayuth, Erdogan, the Sultan of Brunei, Assad, or Theodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, the absolute despot president of Equatorial Guinea. So, why do I have to deal with these monsters? Expose me? Huh? Not gonna happen. Fire him! Fire him now. Mike Pompeo corrupt? What? No way. Get out of here. 

Edited May 17, 2020 by spidermike007

[BobBKK]

3 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

Wait a minute. Putin does not have to deal with watchdogs. Neither does Xi, Kim, MBS, Hun Sen, Prayuth, Erdogan, the Sultan of Brunei, Assad, or Theodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, the absolute despot president of Equatorial Guinea. So, why do I have to deal with these monsters? Expose me? Huh? Not gonna happen. Fire him! Fire him now. Mike Pompeo corrupt? What? No way. Get out of here. 

Yea Obama never did that right?  I mean fire an Inspector General? ...oh wait

[spidermike007]

14 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

Yea Obama never did that right?  I mean fire an Inspector General? ...oh wait

Most people who make it to the national level in Washington can expected to be somewhat corrupt. There are very, very few exceptions to that rule. John McCain, Bill Bradley, and Bill Richardson, are a few that come to mind. But, lost are the days of men and women of elegance, integrity, nobility and grace, that these great few exemplified. It is a whole new era in D.C. 14 foot alligators rule the swamp. So yes, Obama was corrupt. But, Trump has redefined the term. He has elevated it to a whole new level. Trump makes Nixon and Bush Jr. look like princes and noblemen. 

Edited May 17, 2020 by spidermike007

[JCauto]

4 hours ago, BobBKK said:

He was an Obama pick who decided to investigate one of the government team. I have no idea why Trump did not fire them ALL when he first took office. Of course Dems will be bleating and whining and grinding there pure white teeth trying to come up with a new Russia/Ukraine impeachment scandal.  

So will this be your position henceforth regardless of who is in power in the administration? There's really no need for any internal oversight or people to serve as Inspector-Generals? You'll be okay once a Democrat is in power for there to be no oversight? Or do you believe that the administration should select their own oversight or IGs? What could go wrong with that?

This is one of the many short-sighted viewpoints we see out of the Trump crowd, they will support anything that provides him free reign to do whatever he wants while he is in power, then will bleat endlessly after he's gone about how there's no check on government power. Similar to what we saw in Wisconsin, they actually pass laws to give Republican Governors new and extended powers, then once they lose the Governorship, pass laws to reduce the Governor's power to practically zero. This is not policy, this is not ideology. This is simply using partisan political power to achieve minority goals regardless of future consequence. 

Remember how the Right used to go on and on about the "Imperial Presidency" of Obama and how he was usurping power not granted to him by the Constitution? Seems so long ago now.

[chokrai]

3 hours ago, Walker88 said:

IGs generally last through Administrations, even when the Party in power changes. They are professionals and are tasked with rooting out malfeasance, corruption and violation of laws and norms. They tend to have a particular expertise and are not viewed as political, despite being an appointment.

 

Neither you nor any other commenter here can name a single rule violation any of the fired IGs committed, because none did. Similarly, you cannot refute the investigations that got each of them fired, because every single one of the investigations was legitimate and was being carried out by the book. This is similar to Russiagate. When the first indications came in that Russia was going to aid one candidate over another, President Obama warned every single person on the Bigot List (that identifies every single person who has knowledge of a particular issue) that all must be done 'by the book'. When additional intel began to come in that Russia was receiving cooperation from 45's campaign, all were again reminded both of the seriousness of the intelligence and the absolute need to perform the investigation 'by the book'. You will not hear this on Fox, either because they do not know or do not care.

 

You are blissfully unaware of your own lack of knowledge of both this IG firing and the Russia investigation. Perhaps reality does not matter to you, perhaps it does not matter to you that a hostile foreign govt interfered in the 2016 election with the cooperation of the candidate and his campaign, but for those of us who served and who understand that independence from foreign interference is something we cherish, it is important. Current AG Barr said recently, when asked by CBS about pure partisan politics in the so-called Dept of Justice, 'history is written by the winners'.  Perhaps that is true. November is coming, and after the Dems retake both the WH and the Senate, some history will be written. Those who actually broke the law, as opposed to those who merely criticized a person with thinner skin that a 13 year old schoolgirl, will face justice. Those of us who served owe that to everyone who has ever served to defend the ideals upon which the United States was founded.

 

If your post is allowed to stand, then my reply is equally relevant. Mine has the added benefit of being fact based. I know exactly how Russiagate began and how it progressed. You, I am willing to bet, do not, because you never had access.

 

 

Chock full of fake news there. Democrats will be lucky if they get elected as dogcatcher in November. 

[Baerboxer]

3 hours ago, Walker88 said:

While this website is for opinions, including re the firing of IG Linick, it would be interesting if those siding with 45 could point out what facts other people post here, including me, to which you take exception. Please back up your view with relevant facts and explain what job or access allowed you to become so 'well-informed'.  In other words, please explain your rationale for why---other than 'because he can'---45 fired IG Atkinson, fired the IG who would have overseen much of the CV-19 Bailout money distribution, and fired Intel Community IG Atkinson, who---like all other IGs---had followed the book in terms of opening investigations into alleged wrongdoing on the part of 45 or members of his Administration.

 

As I noted, Pompeo is not new to investigation. AG Sessions quashed the first one into campaign finance malfeasance. IG Linick was fired because he was looking into new allegations of violations by Pompeo at State. In other words, IG Linick was doing the job for which the taxpayer pays him.

 

My knowledge comes via a multi decade association with a certain organization in the govt, which afforded me TS/SCI clearances as well as allowed me to form relationships with many of the people now being vindictively pursued in violation of every norm upon which the US was founded. I am guessing not a single one of you has any such first hand knowledge, but rather merely have opinions. Yes, you are entitled to opinions, but opinions are weightless, while facts have gravitas.

 

The floor is yours.

 

I'm not an American so have no dog in this race.

 

Having read all the posts with interest, and watching the polarization of bipartisan politics in the US i have a couple of questions for you please.

 

1. This now fired IG was an Obama appointment. Clearly, appointments should not be politically biased or appointed for political preference, hence they can continue as administrations change, if I understand your comments correctly. If that is the case, and this IG was doing a good job since his appointment, can you confirm the number of investigations he launched and concluded against members of the Obama administration please?

 

2. Do you think this practice of politically appointed positions in the checks and balances systems and justice branch encourage the growth in bipartisan attitudes?

 

 

[Phoenix Rising]

26 minutes ago, chokrai said:

Chock full of fake news there. Democrats will be lucky if they get elected as dogcatcher in November. 

So you don't you refute those "fake news"? Because your short and pointless reply clearly indicate that you've got nothing.

[Baerboxer]

1 hour ago, spidermike007 said:

Most people who make it to the national level in Washington can expected to be somewhat corrupt. There are very, very few exceptions to that rule. John McCain, Bill Bradley, and Bill Richardson, are a few that come to mind. But, lost are the days of men and women of elegance, integrity, nobility and grace, that these great few exemplified. It is a whole new era in D.C. 14 foot alligators rule the swamp. So yes, Obama was corrupt. But, Trump has redefined the term. He has elevated it to a whole new level. Trump makes Nixon and Bush Jr. look like princes and noblemen. 

 

I think your're right about the levels of corruption - on both sides. Obama was adept at doing it out of public view whereas Trump couldn't give a fig about being discrete.

 

It seems the Republicans have been somewhat slow in retaliating against the venom and constant clutching at any straw to attack mentality being shown by so called "leading" Democrats.

 

Kinnock and Hattersley, Labours so called "dream team" did this in the UK once. They spent all their media time slagging off opponents, criticizing and allowing their own venom to take over. They lost an election that all the media said would be a massive victory for them. Their vindictive hate took over and lost them an election to someone no one thought had a chance. It seems a trait of the left. And suggests a contempt not only for those with different views but for those who elect them too.

[xylophone]

4 hours ago, Tounge Thaied said:

Immorality, the inability to CHOOSE what we know to be right over wrong is ruining America. It is a systemic disease, a malady that many have attempted to rid us from. Jesus, the Buddha, Lao Tzu etc... the sages, the prophets, the wise...

Throughout history the perpetual suffering and injustice occurring on an incomprehensible scale, due to ignorance is now spreading more rapidly. The ignorance of our consequences of choosing wrong over right. The well trained and deeply indoctrinated conformists, perpetuate human suffering. The people who do as they are told who proudly bow to their masters, who follow the crowd, believing what everyone else believes in, no critical thought and thinking whatever authority wants them to think. That is the ignorant, the immoral, the lazy, the ones who are incapable of fully growing up and taking complete responsibility for their actions... the ignore...ance is not because the truth is not available.

 

There have been radicals preaching the truth for thousands of years, ignore... ance prevails because the weak, the meek, shun the truth with all their heart and soul. We close our eyes and runaway when a hint of reality lands in front of us. The conformist, the statist, the deniers condemn us, the truth teller (the conspiracy theorist) as extremists, as freaks, kooks who try to show you the chains you wear because you don't want to be free, you don't even want to be a true moral human. Responsibility and reality scare the hell out of you, so you cling tightly to your own enslavement and lash out at anyone who seeks to free you from it. When someone opens the door to your cage you cower back in the corner and yell close it close it. All you ever do is spout back what your masters have taught you; that being free only leads to chaos and destruction, that being obedient and subservient leads to peace and prosperity. There are none so blind as those who will not see, and you, America, your nation of sheep would rather die than see the truth.

Are you ok?

[Boon Mee]

6 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

Give me strength. Have the democrats not learned anything from all their failed hoaxes? Emoluments, Stormy, Russia Russia Russia, Ukraine etc etc all collapsed into great big nothing burgers and left egg all over the democrats faces and their credibility in tatters. Not to mention the huge waste of time and resources. Solution? Gin up yet another hoax to waste even more time? To deflect from their bunker-bound candidate? This is insane.

Got that right! 

Just what is the big deal here? 

Cannot the Democrats understand that Trump is simply continuing to drain the Swamp? 

By year 2024 as Trump prepares to leave office, perhaps the US Government may be in much better shape. 

 

MAGA 

[mlmcleod]

27 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

Cannot the Democrats understand that Trump is simply continuing to drain the Swamp? 

Duh, Trump is fertilizing the swamp and tilling it continually!  The smell of methane will soon overcome Washington DC.

Vote in November!

[ALLSEEINGEYE]

6 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

Give me strength. Have the democrats not learned anything from all their failed hoaxes? Emoluments, Stormy, Russia Russia Russia, Ukraine etc etc all collapsed into great big nothing burgers and left egg all over the democrats faces and their credibility in tatters. Not to mention the huge waste of time and resources. Solution? Gin up yet another hoax to waste even more time? To deflect from their bunker-bound candidate? This is insane.

You don't need any strength. you can just keep following your cult leader and keep drinking your kool aid. Trup is the most corrupt president you have ever had in USA. He tells lies on a daily basis yet the only truth you believe is his? Everyone else is lying and Trump is the victim here? He won't testify but no problem he obstructs justice at every turn but no problem. You cult followers fall for every distraction that he throws out there because the state media known as FOX backs up his lies and helps create conspiracy theories based on zero facts but lots of fear and hatred for you to feed off. How many of Trumps admn have come from FOX? How many FOX staff have soke at Trump rallies? If you can't see whats really going on if you can't take a couple seconds to fact check anything (because you really just want to believe what they are telling you) then there really is no hope for USA. If any Dem pulled this stuff you would be up in arms .....but no. 

[Srikcir]

Offices of Inspector General (now 70+) were created by congressional actions. Their role within their assigned Executive Branch agencies buttresses congressional oversight of operation of the Executive Branch. But their removal by the POTUS is by law unchallenged. 

Perhaps at the appropriate point in time Congress can amend laws regarding the IGs to require congressional approval for POTUS removal to assure their independence.

 

[BobBKK]

2 hours ago, JCauto said:

So will this be your position henceforth regardless of who is in power in the administration? There's really no need for any internal oversight or people to serve as Inspector-Generals? You'll be okay once a Democrat is in power for there to be no oversight? Or do you believe that the administration should select their own oversight or IGs? What could go wrong with that?

This is one of the many short-sighted viewpoints we see out of the Trump crowd, they will support anything that provides him free reign to do whatever he wants while he is in power, then will bleat endlessly after he's gone about how there's no check on government power. Similar to what we saw in Wisconsin, they actually pass laws to give Republican Governors new and extended powers, then once they lose the Governorship, pass laws to reduce the Governor's power to practically zero. This is not policy, this is not ideology. This is simply using partisan political power to achieve minority goals regardless of future consequence. 

Remember how the Right used to go on and on about the "Imperial Presidency" of Obama and how he was usurping power not granted to him by the Constitution? Seems so long ago now.

No please do not misunderstand me. Congress and The Senate provide oversight, ultimately, the electorate do too. I am just tremendously sad to see such a bipartisan dog fight every day, day in and day out. Part of that is Trump's ego mutterings via Twitter but a larger part, in my view, is the Dems fanatical "we'll get him one way or another" approach. Get him, IMHO, if you can in Nov not constant investigations.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

3 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Wait a minute. Putin does not have to deal with watchdogs. Neither does Xi, Kim, MBS, Hun Sen, Prayuth, Erdogan, the Sultan of Brunei, Assad, or Theodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, the absolute despot president of Equatorial Guinea. So, why do I have to deal with these monsters? Expose me? Huh? Not gonna happen. Fire him! Fire him now. Mike Pompeo corrupt? What? No way. Get out of here. 

 

That's who Trump aspires to be... one of those guys, with no U.S. Constitution or rule of law or congressional oversight to reign in his worst excesses...

 

But the worst part is, too many Americans seem to think his trashing of the Constitution and democratic institutions is a good thing for the country, which it clearly is not.

 

And it's not going to change until enough Americans wake up and get their heads screwed on straight, or, they're instead going to wake up someday living in the U.S. version of Russia.

 

Edited May 17, 2020 by TallGuyJohninBKK