About those fired IGs
-
Well, it's something. Grassley and Durbin have penned a strongly worded letter.
The leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee sent a rare bipartisan letter to President Trump demanding an explanation for his firing of 17 inspectors general (IG) in one night.
The rebuke said Trump violated the law by failing to give Congress 30 days’ notice and a rationale for the removal for each of the watchdogs at the 18 agencies where they provided oversight.
“Congress was not provided the legally required 30-day notice and case-specific reasons for removal, as required by law. Accordingly, we request that you provide that information immediately,” Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) wrote in the joint letter.
“While IGs aren’t immune from committing acts requiring their removal, and they can be removed by the president, the law must be followed. The communication to Congress must contain more than just broad and vague statements, rather it must include sufficient facts and details to assure Congress and the public that the termination is due to real concerns about the Inspector General’s ability to carry out their mission.”
The letter also asks Trump to list which acting officials will take over their roles.
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5111427-senators-explanation-trump-ig-firings/
When the world wearies and society ceases to satisfy, there is always the garden - Minnie Aumônier
-
why did the letter meekly ask Trump to list which officials will take over their roles? Sounds like the letter claims that Trumps firing was itself illegal for several reasons (timing and rationale). They should simply state that the firings were illegal and the inspectors are NOT fired. Period. Push back.
Crazy economist who likes to write about higher education.
-
It’s chuckleheads all the way down!
-
@Piano-Dad said in About those fired IGs:
why did the letter meekly ask Trump to list which officials will take over their roles? Sounds like the letter claims that Trumps firing was itself illegal for several reasons (timing and rationale). They should simply state that the firings were illegal and the inspectors are NOT fired
this, exactly. Not doing this makes their letter not "strongly worded" but weak imo.
-
@ShiroKuro said in About those fired IGs:
"strongly worded" but weak imo.
The "strongly worded" was a tongue-in-cheek reference to something @Steve-Miller said the other day.
But it's still something that a Democrat and a Republican managed to both put their names on a letter pushing back at all on this issue.
When the world wearies and society ceases to satisfy, there is always the garden - Minnie Aumônier
-
Have AOC write it next time.
Those two aren’t up to the task
-
@wtg said in About those fired IGs:
The "strongly worded" was a tongue-in-cheek reference to something @Steve-Miller said the other day.
Ahh, ok, I missed that!
But it's still something that a Democrat and a Republican managed to both put their names on a letter pushing back at all on this issue.
Yes, this is a good thing!
-
Security agents escorted the inspector general of the U.S. Department of Agriculture out of her office on Monday after she refused to comply with her firing by the Trump administration, sources familiar with the matter told Reuters.
Phyllis Fong, a 22-year veteran of the department, had earlier told colleagues that she intended to stay after the White House terminated her Friday, saying that she didn’t believe the administration had followed proper protocols, the sources said.
In an email to colleagues on Saturday, reviewed by Reuters, she said the independent Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency “has taken the position that these termination notices do not comply with the requirements set out in law and therefore are not effective at this time.””
