The POTUS removes a IG within his rights and appoints another

Gives reason! The POTUS lacks confidence in this IG who happens to be a  obama appointee .

Despite activities being reported  lately on the past administration's obsession to surveil and illegally leak info , it should give rise to the President and his administration concerns "Linick transferring a packet of documents from Rudy Giuliani by way of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to Judiciary Committee member Jamie Raskin".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Linick

 

 

Mr. Trump has every right to loose confidence in this guy who has ties to the impeachment hoax

https://www.rollcall.com/2019/10/02/mysterious-dossier-delivered-to-congress-by-state-department-watchdog/

 

Bring on the investigation, subpoenas  , executive privilege  and court rulings  -rule of law  

 

 

 

Edited May 18, 20206 yr by riclag

27 minutes ago, ChouDoufu said:

i am very much looking forward to the testimony on c-span!  i can't wait to hear about pompeo sending staffers to pick up his dry cleaning and walk his dog.  it's gonna be a hoot! 

 

there must be a reason for this.  surely pelosi knows how trump will be able to play the deep state angle, after what was (allegedly) done to flynn and others. yet another obama holdover investigating nothingburgers.  could this be one of those get something in the news before this other thing gets out things?

 

 

The accusations against the secretary of state are pretty trivial. 

If true he should just say yes.. I did that and I understand government workers are not my personal valets. But I suspect IF true guys like the secretary of state can not or will not admit mistakes so IF he got the IG fired - that is an issue.

Edited May 18, 20206 yr by jm91

51 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

 

Yes, I think he's a mole. But that's beside the point. Your dodging the actual point says all anyone needs to know.

I think the point is a potential abuse of power by the secretary of state. Your comments are trying to get the topic off point. 

15 minutes ago, jm91 said:

The accusations against the secretary of state are pretty trivial. 

If true he should just say yes.. I did that and I understand government workers are not my personal valets. But I suspect IF true guys like the secretary of state can not or will not admit mistakes so IF he got the IG fired - that is an issue.

it might just be me, and of course i'm not the president, but if i have an inspector general pulling in $150k a year, and a staff of gs-15's each making $125k or so, i'd be bigly irked if i found out they were wasting their resources on a trivial pursuit of some guy for having a staffer pick up his dry cleaning.  that right there is worthy of firing.

 

that's something the state department HR lady can handle, or maybe mitch can prompt trump into telling mike it don't look good.  really?  is this what we have inspectors general for?  if that's how important his position is, if that's how irrelevant he truly is, then the trump administration must be clean as a whistle.

 

cause from where i'm sitting, definitely NOT a fan of trump, this looks to me like a partisan hatchet job to keep the investigations, any investigations, going through the election.

28 minutes ago, jm91 said:

The accusations against the secretary of state are pretty trivial. 

If true he should just say yes.. I did that and I understand government workers are not my personal valets. But I suspect IF true guys like the secretary of state can not or will not admit mistakes so IF he got the IG fired - that is an issue.

was pompeo involved?

 

i've seen a few reports, all repeating an accusation from one original report, claiming pompeo recommended the firing.....according to an unnamed white house official.

 

has it been repeated enough times to become fact yet?

37 minutes ago, ChouDoufu said:

was pompeo involved?

 

i've seen a few reports, all repeating an accusation from one original report, claiming pompeo recommended the firing.....according to an unnamed white house official.

 

has it been repeated enough times to become fact yet?

Maybe its true..may its not true. It should be investigated. 

That is the role of congress to oversee the executive branch. 

 

Apparently there may be another reason for his firing, as he was allegedly probing arms sales to a Muslim country.

 

https://www.axios.com/state-watchdog-investigating-trump-saudi-arm-sale-967b3d7e-9ea5-44a0-b36e-0941e9ce56a5.html

3 minutes ago, jm91 said:

Maybe its true..may its not true. It should be investigated. 

That is the role of congress to oversee the executive branch. 

 

you got it!  congrats!  that's the way it works.  any convenient unsourced allegation can lead to a politically useful investigation.  with any luck they can milk it until the election.

 

i'm really hoping the electorate is given a viable alternative to four more years of trump regime.  i really, really do.  but after three years of resistance investigations leading to nothing, more of the same farce will just give more credence to trump's deep state rantings and fire up his base.

 

 

It's not unlawful for him to do such a thing. Don't you have better things to do Nancy like "try" to repair the broken Dem party.

23 minutes ago, HuskerDo said:

It's not unlawful for him to do such a thing. Don't you have better things to do Nancy like "try" to repair the broken Dem party.

The unlawful part is not the firing, the unlawful  part might be the reason for the firing.. 

2 minutes ago, sirineou said:

The unlawful part is not the firing, the unlawful  part might be the reason for the firing.. 

I could write a book on the number of times a sitting Prez did things that were unlawful. I don't remember much prior to Kennedy but since that time there is not a single Prez that hasn't taken privilege of his office to do what he wanted to at times. 

1 minute ago, HuskerDo said:

I could write a book on the number of times a sitting Prez did things that were unlawful. I don't remember much prior to Kennedy but since that time there is not a single Prez that hasn't taken privilege of his office to do what he wanted to at times. 

I thought your sides argument was that he was going to empty the swamp?

A post using a trolling meme has been removed.

 

Off topic deflection posts, troll posts and replies have been removed. 

2 hours ago, sirineou said:

The unlawful part is not the firing, the unlawful  part might be the reason for the firing.. 

Chinese noodles?

2 hours ago, HuskerDo said:

I could write a book on the number of times a sitting Prez did things that were unlawful. I don't remember much prior to Kennedy but since that time there is not a single Prez that hasn't taken privilege of his office to do what he wanted to at times. 

Cigars and interns comes to mind.

15 hours ago, Aland said:

This last clown was investigating Mike Pompeo for having his assistant make dinner reservations. I kid you not, that’s all he had? What law and or rules were not followed here? If that’s all he had to do with his work time then he really wasn’t necessary and needed to go.

He was investigating arms sales to Saudi.

 

But the investigation he was doing is immaterial, if possibly fired because the administration didn't like his investigation Congress has the duty to investigate.

17 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

Using tax funded security detail and improper use of government resources to take Pompeo's dog from the groomer and collect his Chinese food among other personal errands. He should follow his colleague Tom Price and resign in shame.   

It is not really the nature and extent of the violation, as much as the spirit of the thing. It is just like Pompeo to treat his subordinates like personal assistants. That is who he is. He is a pompous, arrogant, ignorant, ineffective, incompetent, and a very nasty man. Worse, he is an absolutely horrible secretary of state. Perhaps one of the worst in history?

 

Elsewhere around the world, Pompeo has been the President's junior partner in undermining US alliances and multilateralism. He's been a cheerleader for the inhumane and ineffectual sanctions campaign to topple the Maduro government in Venezuela. He's championed of the disastrous all-or-nothing approach to denuclearization diplomacy with North Korea, which so far has yielded zero progress (although there are hopeful signs of a change in the US approach to the negotiations).

 

https://carnegieendowment.org/2019/10/05/pompeo-might-go-down-as-worst-secretary-of-state-in-modern-times-pub-80006

9 hours ago, ChouDoufu said:

not exactly.  trump can fire those he has authority to fire.

according to the 1978 law, he DOES in this case have that authority.

 

(b)  An Inspector General may be removed from office by the President. If an Inspector General is removed from office or is transferred to another position or location within an establishment, the President shall communicate in writing the reasons for any such removal or transfer to both Houses of Congress, not later than 30 days before the removal or transfer. Nothing in this subsection shall prohibit a personnel action otherwise authorized by law, other than transfer or removal.

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5a/compiledact-95-452/section-3

Trump runs the Executive Branch.  He can fire anyone who is not elected. 

3 hours ago, stevenl said:

He was investigating arms sales to Saudi.

 

But the investigation he was doing is immaterial, if possibly fired because the administration didn't like his investigation Congress has the duty to investigate.

No problem. It'll be just like the Russia Russia Russia thing, the impeachment thing etc. Another waste of time by those that keep hoping for the magic bullet if only they have enough investigations.

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

No problem. It'll be just like the Russia Russia Russia thing, the impeachment thing etc. Another waste of time by those that keep hoping for the magic bullet if only they have enough investigations.

He was impeached, and Russian interference in the election has been widely accepted.

 

But that has nothing to do with this. If he was fired for doing his job that must be reversed or otherwise he must be compensated and his investigation must be finished by someone else.

And to find out what happened the firing must be investigated. Congress has the responsibility of oversight, they must do their job.

37 minutes ago, stevenl said:

He was impeached, and Russian interference in the election has been widely accepted.

 

But that has nothing to do with this. If he was fired for doing his job that must be reversed or otherwise he must be compensated and his investigation must be finished by someone else.

And to find out what happened the firing must be investigated. Congress has the responsibility of oversight, they must do their job.

Pity they spend all their efforts on getting rid of Trump rather than investigating ways of improving the lives of ordinary Americans ie NOT the 1% or lawyers or politicians.

41 minutes ago, stevenl said:

He was impeached

Sure was, by partisan hacks in our government.  Clinton was impeached but it was bipartisan hence you can believe it.

 

Americans now have a better understanding of who is hijacking our government.

 

 

11 hours ago, Stadtler said:

Trump can fire anyone who is not elected.  Full stop.

 

 

Tell that to Richard Nixon... He found out the hard way...

26 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Pity they spend all their efforts on getting rid of Trump rather than investigating ways of improving the lives of ordinary Americans ie NOT the 1% or lawyers or politicians.

I don't think anyone thinks this will get rid of Trump. If it really comes to that Trump will throw pompeo under the bus, hence Trump's claim already he doesn't know the IG he fired.

10 hours ago, candide said:

Apparently there may be another reason for his firing, as he was allegedly probing arms sales to a Muslim country.

 

https://www.axios.com/state-watchdog-investigating-trump-saudi-arm-sale-967b3d7e-9ea5-44a0-b36e-0941e9ce56a5.html

cool!  thanks for that link!  maybe there IS some beef in that veggieburger after all.

 

so it maybe comes down to trump and congress fighting over authority for arms sales.  congress passed a resolution to stop selling arms to saudi for use against yemen, trump vetoed that.  he declared an emergency to bypass congress.  so a continuation of the eternal war powers fight.

 

if so, why are most of the news sites talking up the pompeo dog-walking angle?  does that indicate the "phony emergency declaration" claims have little chance of success?  is the pompeo angle just an attempt to add more layers to make it look more imposing?  is nancy just playing politics?  does she know this can't be resolved quickly, and is simply hoping to drag it out, with selective salacious leaks, leading up to the election?

 

or maybe it's still purely vegan.  the IG's job is to investigate stuff, so more than likely, there's ALWAYS an investigation of some sort going on, in which case trump could never fire the guy without being accused of retaliation. 

 

so far,  trump does have authority to fire an IG, he does need to inform congress, he does not need to provide reasons that satisfy the opposition party, he does have the authority to veto resolutions, and he does have the power to declare an emergency.  his lawyers should be able to show everything was done legally.

 

the difficult part will be proving intent on the part of trump, that this firing was intended to stop an investigation, or that trump didn't really think it was an emergency situation.  it may be potentially possible given his twooter rants, but very difficult to prove what was in his mind at the time.

 

in the meantime, what are nancy and friends doing to amend the IG bill that gives the president the power to fire the IG?  what gives trump the authority to declare an emergency?  is that a power granted through an act of congress, and can that be amended?  are these changes not being made because the opposition party wants to have those powers when they control the executive branch?

2 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Tell that to Richard Nixon... He found out the hard way...

Are you OK?

 

Stadtler asks this, because Richard Nixon is dead.  Didn't you know?

Edited May 19, 20206 yr by Stadtler

to add to above post:

 

trump's authority to declare the emergency was a provision ("a rarely used loophole") in the "arms export control act."

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52716766

I am totally confused.

Pompeo say he was fired for undermining the state department.

Navarro say he was fired by not being loyal.

Trump say he don't even know him. 

Can't the WH even get the same messaging out even if all are lies.  

18 hours ago, jm91 said:

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, 

You found a trump supporter? In the seven years I’ve been here I’ve never met one. I think they’re all closeted or shut-ins. They coming out on ThaiVisa. 
Mind you I don’t live in Pattaya. 

19 hours ago, Mama Noodle said:

 

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. 

Don't ever forget Rep Al Green's comment:

 

"‘We have to impeach him, otherwise he’s going to win the election".

"‘We can’t beat him, so lets impeach him!’ (said) Democrat Rep. Al Green,"

https://tinyurl.com/big-al-impeach

 

Pelosi et al are always looking for fodder for their already revealed 2021-vs2 impeachment plan of Trump when he's re-elected.

This is Day 1288.