Trump's firing of State Department watchdog may be 'unlawful,' Pelosi says

[Baerboxer]

8 hours ago, Emdog said:

Typical hogwash from Trump backers. 4 IGs been fired by Trump. What for? Doing their job of ensuring laws and rules are followed.

 

Even the deranged Perlosi admits any POTUS has the right to dismiss any federal employee.

 

So unless you have concrete evidence about how well these individuals were doing their jobs since their appointments to share, we must assume your comment is politically motivated.

[Eric Loh]

2 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Even the deranged Perlosi admits any POTUS has the right to dismiss any federal employee.

 

So unless you have concrete evidence about how well these individuals were doing their jobs since their appointments to share, we must assume your comment is politically motivated.

No need for that. Trump close aide Peter Navarro already given the reason as ‘not loyal enough’. 

[candide]

What a bunch of %$/@#!

By firing the IG, they just succeeded in attracting more public attention on Pompeo

[Proboscis]

10 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

Pelosi . . . one of the deep staters looking to save herself.  A pity she won't be able to eat her beloved ice cream in prison.

Let us get this straight. A Republican is President. A solid majority of Republicans in the Senate makes sure that nothing can be passed without the Republical Party's sayso.

 

It follows that if there is a deep state, then it must be a Republical Party deep state.

[Mama Noodle]

Just now, Proboscis said:

Let us get this straight. A Republican is President. A solid majority of Republicans in the Senate makes sure that nothing can be passed without the Republical Party's sayso.

 

Solid Democrat majority in the House makes sure that the only bills that get passed are 100% partisan bills that Pelosi allows. 

[Mama Noodle]

1 hour ago, Eric Loh said:

No need for that. Trump close aide Peter Navarro already given the reason as ‘not loyal enough’. 

 

Seems reasonable. If you aren't on the team then beat it. Hes an appointee. 

[Eric Loh]

48 minutes ago, Mama Noodle said:

 

Seems reasonable. If you aren't on the team then beat it. Hes an appointee. 

So he is sacked for political expediency not that he is incompetent. 

[andersonat]

1 hour ago, Mama Noodle said:

 

Seems reasonable. If you aren't on the team then beat it. Hes an appointee. 

From Wikipedia: "In the United States, an inspector general leads an organization charged with (1) examining the actions of a government agency, military organization, or military contractor as a general auditor of their operations to ensure they are operating in compliance with generally established policies of the government, (2) to audit the effectiveness of security procedures, or (3) to discover the possibility of misconduct, waste, fraud, theft, or certain types of criminal activity by individuals or groups related to the agency's operation, usually involving some misuse of the organization's funds or credit."

 

I would hope that in order to perform their tasks properly, the Appointees should be actively politically-neutral.

 

  --  I find it quite strange that anyone would prefer, or think that it is reasonable, for them to be partisan.  -  Might that not lead to a perceived loss of, or, as a minimum, a compromise in their integrity after their appointment ?

 

Edited May 18, 2020 by andersonat

[metisdead]

A post using an offensive "cult members" troll comment has been removed.  Continue to use that term in reference to Trump supporters and a warning will be coming.

[Mama Noodle]

22 minutes ago, andersonat said:

I find it quite strange that anyone would prefer, or think that it is reasonable, for them to be partisan.  -  Might that not lead to a perceived loss of, or, as a minimum, a compromise in their integrity after their appointment ?

 

You would think so, and hope so, but the reality is that everyone is partisan.

[rabas]

27 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

So he is sacked for political expediency not that he is incompetent. 

Exactly. His position as a non-elected civil servant requires remaining completely non-political.

 

[Mama Noodle]

31 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

So he is sacked for political expediency not that he is incompetent. 

 

I fail to see how it matters. He could be fired for having mild body odor for all I care. Hes an appointee. 

 

And he seems to be loving his 5 minutes of fame, doesn't he. All over the news, taking every interview possible. Hell probably land a gig on CNN and have a book released in 6 months. 

[IAMHERE]

Maybe ?  Her job in life is to pass the law; if she can't do better than MAYBE then she should let others write the law.

[jm91]

The hypocrisy of trump supporters is amazing. I recently had a conversation with a trump supporter over this issue. Their position was that is trump and his administration are immune from any sort of oversight - basically he can do whatever he wants and he is immune from criticism or any investigation. 

I pointed out that Congress has the duty to  oversee the executive branch - that oversight is part of US law. Their response was that I was lying and that the president and the actions of his representatives were immune from even being looked at for illegality - the president and his people are not subject to the laws of the country.  

I hear that attitude here. Recently the lawyer for trump argued before the supreme court that trump could murder someone and he could not be investigated for the crime until AFTER he left office. trump certainly has some loyal cultists. 

 

The firing should be investigated. If it was to stop an investigation of illegal acts by the secretary of state then the firing was probably illegal. 

I get the impression many trump supporters only like the rule of law when it applies to other people. 

Pure hypocrisy, 

[Eric Loh]

30 minutes ago, Mama Noodle said:

 

I fail to see how it matters. He could be fired for having mild body odor for all I care. Hes an appointee. 

 

And he seems to be loving his 5 minutes of fame, doesn't he. All over the news, taking every interview possible. Hell probably land a gig on CNN and have a book released in 6 months. 

It would need a better excuse than body odor to explain to Congress according the Chuck Grassley. 

 

“ As I’ve said before, Congress requires written reasons justifying an IG’s removal. A general lack of confidence simply is not sufficient detail to satisfy Congress,” Grassley said”.

 

If he was sacked because he is investigation Pompeo, there is criminal obstruction of justice. Crime seem to follow Trump.

 

[candide]

2 hours ago, Isaan sailor said:

In 2008, President Obama fires IG Walpin, for political reasons. Not much uproar about that in ‘08...

Wrong again! As far as I remember, it also went to court.

https://republicans-oversight.house.gov/report/the-firing-of-the-inspector-general-for-the-corporation-for-national-and-community-service/

[Mama Noodle]

2 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

If he was sacked because he is investigation Pompeo, there is criminal obstruction of justice.

 

Yeah, go with that. ????

 

3 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

As I’ve said before, Congress requires written reasons justifying an IG’s removal. A general lack of confidence simply is not sufficient detail to satisfy Congress,” Grassley said”.

 

Easy enough to do. Not like filling out paper formalities is hard, and not like Congress has any say in the matter. 

[candide]

There is a probably more important issue related to this one. Has a legitimate investigation into Pompeo been halted/buried?

[Mama Noodle]

18 minutes ago, jm91 said:

The firing should be investigated. If it was to stop an investigation of illegal acts by the secretary of state then the firing was probably illegal.

 

This is how it works:

Election cycle coming up and prime Dem candidate has literal dementia and one foot in the grave. pelosi and the Dems need to keep the heat on Trump, no matter how stupid, retarded, or downright vicious in their lies. 

IG gets run off, Pelosi pounces and spins it like more 'illegality' and/or 'obstruction' and people like yourself and the other liberals believe pelosi (because tribalism/orange man bad) and become outraged. 

And thats how a fake scandal is born. Rinse and repeat over and over again starting in 2016 to now, and expect it to ramp up even further in the coming months when their walking corpse candidate can't even form sentences without drooling. 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

14 hours ago, webfact said:

In an interview on CNN's "State of the Union," Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Ron Johnson said he felt "not all inspector generals are created equal" and noted they "serve at the pleasure of the president."

 

So basically, Trump and the Republicans either...

 

a. don't want any federal IG's at all because they're seen as getting in the way of their nepotism, self dealing, abuses of government programs, etc., or....

 

b. can tolerate federal IGs -- but only if they're Trump appointed "yes" men and women who won't dare to challenge those in power no matter how outrageous their abuses, because keeping their jobs is more important to them than protecting the U.S. government and the American people.

 

So which is it, Ron?

 

 

[riclag]

10 hours ago, Isaan sailor said:

Poor Nancy, she just doesn’t get it.  Her 1800-page next stimulus bill has money for mail-in voting, and stimulus checks for illegal aliens.  And the fired AG?  A holdover from the Obama regime.

She's taken the socialist down the tubes and thats just what the  us independent(swing) voters want to see! Feeding her base another dose of hate is bringing that branch of government to all time job approval lows!

[Crazy Alex]

10 hours ago, Sujo said:

Absolutely nothing wrong, not even worth looking at. Its perfectly normal for an investigator to be fired at the request of the person he is investigating.

 

Thats trump world.

Seriously, you guys are gonna try the obstruction of justice thingy again?

[Crazy Alex]

 

15 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

So basically, Trump and the Republicans either...

 

a. don't want any federal IG's at all because they're seen as getting in the way of their nepotism, self dealing, abuses of government programs, etc., or....

 

b. can tolerate federal IGs -- but only if they're Trump appointed "yes" men and women who won't dare to challenge those in power no matter how outrageous their abuses, because keeping their jobs is more important to them than protecting the U.S. government and the American people.

 

So which is it, Ron?

 

 

Why do you think those are the only two options?

Edited May 18, 2020 by Crazy Alex

[Crazy Alex]

47 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

It would need a better excuse than body odor to explain to Congress according the Chuck Grassley. 

 

“ As I’ve said before, Congress requires written reasons justifying an IG’s removal. A general lack of confidence simply is not sufficient detail to satisfy Congress,” Grassley said”.

 

If he was sacked because he is investigation Pompeo, there is criminal obstruction of justice. Crime seem to follow Trump.

 

Dude, seriously, you guys are going the obstruction of justice route again?

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

2 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Seriously, you guys are gonna try the obstruction of justice thingy again?

 

If Trump were anyone else, he'd probably be in jail right now for any variety of abuses...

 

But because the Justice Dept. has a policy of not indicting sitting presidents, luckily for him, he seems to have gotten a pass for now... but time will tell.

 

FWIW, in my view, the Justice Dept policy that predated Trump probably is one that deserves reconsideration, at least insofar as criminal conduct relating to an officeholder's official duties.

 

[Mama Noodle]

15 minutes ago, jm91 said:

The issue is still IF the IG was fired to shield the secretary of state then it should be investigated.

 

This is it boys, we finally got him! ????

 

Fired inspector general was examining whether Pompeo had a staffer walk his dog, handle dry cleaning, official says

 

Quote

The State Department inspector general fired by President Trump was looking into allegations that a staffer for Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was performing domestic errands and chores such as handling dry cleaning, walking the family dog and making restaurant reservations, said a congressional official familiar with the matter.

 

Steve Linick, the quasi-independent watchdog whose job it was to expose waste and malfeasance within the agency, investigated a number of issues at the State Department that agitated senior Trump administration officials, but it remains unclear what specifically triggered his ouster Friday night.

 

The congressional official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because the matter remains highly sensitive, said that the State Department staffer was a political appointee and that at least one congressional committee learned of the allegations around the time of Linick’s firing.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/state-department-inspector-general-steve-linick-mike-pompeo/2020/05/17/daf5170a-98a7-11ea-b60c-3be060a4f8e1_story.html

[Sujo]

14 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Dude, seriously, you guys are going the obstruction of justice route again?

Why not, if he keeps doing it why should it not be investigated for all to see who he is.

 

Or do you think the president can do no wrong.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

9 minutes ago, Mama Noodle said:

Fired inspector general was examining whether Pompeo had a staffer walk his dog, handle dry cleaning, official says

 

Pompeo supposedly has a history of doing this, including in his prior government posts.

 

Maybe walking dogs and picking up dry cleaning is what you think U.S. government employees should be doing for their supervisors, but I pretty much think serving as personal servants isn't in their job descriptions.

 

If Pompeo wants or needs a maid or a houseboy, let him hire them himself -- and not on the taxpayers' dime.

 

[rabas]

 

34 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

So basically, Trump and the Republicans either...

 

a. don't want any federal IG's at all because they're seen as getting in the way of their nepotism, self dealing, abuses of government programs, etc., or....

It could be worse. Maybe relates to this.

Exclusive: Democrats investigating whistleblower claims Pompeo's security picked up Chinese food and his dog

 

An you wonder why so many don't take Pelosi and friends seriously.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

2 minutes ago, rabas said:

 

It could be worse. Maybe relates to this.

Exclusive: Democrats investigating whistleblower claims Pompeo's security picked up Chinese food and his dog

 

An you wonder why so many don't take Pelosi and friends seriously.

 

Maybe you should go back to school and learn what federal employees are paid to do based on their job descriptions....