Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Trump fires 17 independent watchdogs at US government agencies


Still Waters

Recommended Posts

If they are independent, how did he fire them?   Like the article says, his actions were illegal.  He really does think he was elected emperor and congress and the senate do not matter.  But he is the one who matters less and people need to quit paying so much attention to the president and start paying attention to the senate and congress.  Do you know how many senators we have over the age of 80????   Too many!   Same with congress.   Those octengenarians+ are just getting a free ride.

Edited by Desertrat56
  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, maybe I missed this in the article, but, if they were on contract, he could cancel the contract, in effect firing them.  And if he can prove incompetence,  then it would be justifiable 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, glorybebe said:

Well, maybe I missed this in the article, but, if they were on contract, he could cancel the contract, in effect firing them.  And if he can prove incompetence,  then it would be justifiable 

No He Can't, he is not the boss, he is the figurehead and 3rd vote when congress and the senate do not agree.   Congress and the Senate are the boss, the ones that wrote the contract and the ones who can cancel it.

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

If they are independent, how did he fire them?   Like the article says, his actions were illegal.  He really does think he was elected emperor and congress and the senate do not matter.  But he is the one who matters less and people need to quit paying so much attention to the president and start paying attention to the senate and congress.  Do you know how many senators we have over the age of 80????   Too many!   Same with congress.   Those octengenarians+ are just getting a free ride.

Hi Desertrat

He should remember to beware the Ides of March It was the senate that took care of Caesar. Lol

  • Haha 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Desertrat

He should remember to beware the Ides of March It was the senate that took care of Caesar. Lol

Maybe someone should remind him.   

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

Maybe someone should remind him.   

Someone tried, but failed.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a good move.  Eliminate the watchdogs before you and your buds burgle their houses.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

Like the article says, his actions were illegal.

Actually, it didn't say that:

"The dismissals appeared to violate federal law"

If they violated the law the decision will be reversed on appeal.  I'd say it's more a sign that even supposedly independent inspectors general have shown signs of bias.  Either that or they are redundant within the system.  You guys need to pace yourself, you probably don't have the same energy you had for denouncing Orange Man Bad four years ago ;)  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tatetopa said:

Its a good move.  Eliminate the watchdogs before you and your buds burgle their houses.

He never hid the fact that he was going to reduce government.  If he gets rid of only specific areas rather than doing a general cleansing, they'll sue for that, as well.  If he does not have the power as Chief Executive to fire people in that branch then the courts need to explain why that's the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

No He Can't, he is not the boss, he is the figurehead and 3rd vote when congress and the senate do not agree.   Congress and the Senate are the boss, the ones that wrote the contract and the ones who can cancel it.

Biden lowered the bar on what can be done. Like Jack Smith appointed as prosecutor on Trump's case. It was supposed to go through the Senate but never did.

Was It Legal To Appoint Jack Smith in the First Place? | The Heritage Foundation

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Still Waters said:

Donald Trump fired 17 independent watchdogs at multiple US government agencies on Friday, a person with knowledge of the matter said, eliminating a critical oversight component and clearing the way for the president to replace them with loyalists.

The inspectors general at agencies including the departments of state, defense and transportation were notified by emails from the White House personnel director that they had been terminated immediately, the source said on condition of anonymity.

The dismissals appeared to violate federal law, which requires the president to give both houses of Congress reasons for the dismissals 30 days in advance.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/25/trump-fires-17-independent-watchdogs-government-agencies

What makes them independent?  If Trump can replacement them with "loyalist" as you assert, then it may not be a stretch to assume they fired watchdogs were loyalist to other Presidents?

As Chief Executive, Trump has to be able to put people in place that will carry out his agenda (within the bounds of the constitution or courts).

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, and-then said:

He never hid the fact that he was going to reduce government.  If he gets rid of only specific areas rather than doing a general cleansing, they'll sue for that, as well.  If he does not have the power as Chief Executive to fire people in that branch then the courts need to explain why that's the case.

I get it, and good on him.  When you are going to root out waste and fraud, seems like you would want watchdogs in these departments  to investigate fraud and blatant waste.  Somebody above said most of these people were Trump appointees from Admin 1.

OK, fine, suspect they have been corrupted, then appoint new watchdogs.  OK, lets withhold judgement for a couple of weeks and see if new watchdogs are appointed. 

As many other people have discovered, what Trump says  is just dust in the wind.  It is his actions that mean something.  All of the talk is smoke and mirrors to distract citizens from what helps them and what does not.

Meanwhile seems like bird flu is raising the price of eggs by another third.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Edumakated said:

What makes them independent?  If Trump can replacement them with "loyalist" as you assert, then it may not be a stretch to assume they fired watchdogs were loyalist to other Presidents?

Many of these guys were Trump first term appointees. Do you believe all government employees including watchdogs are political hacks  loyal to their  president?  No man or woman has morals and ethics in government?  Then it is time to get rid of them all 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Michelle said:

Biden lowered the bar on what can be done. Like Jack Smith appointed as prosecutor on Trump's case. It was supposed to go through the Senate but never did.

Was It Legal To Appoint Jack Smith in the First Place? | The Heritage Foundation

 

I think future Democrat governments are going to be hoist on those petards far more often than they ever expected.  The funny part is that they actually did what they are now accusing him of.  

 

1 minute ago, Tatetopa said:

Then it is time to get rid of them all 

Maybe it is, but not all of the IGs.  If they truly are independent then they have a more legitimate function than most of the rest of the government.  

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Edumakated said:

What makes them independent?  If Trump can replacement them with "loyalist" as you assert, then it may not be a stretch to assume they fired watchdogs were loyalist to other Presidents?

As Chief Executive, Trump has to be able to put people in place that will carry out his agenda (within the bounds of the constitution or courts).

Exactly.  I saw a brief interview with Victor David Hanson explaining why "loyalty" to an agenda is not only not nefarious, it's even necessary if anything is going to get done during a four year term of any president.  As usual, it's only "nefarious" if Orange Man Bad is involved in it.  Those in DC who worked so hard to keep him out of that chair again understood that far from being stupid, he actually learned the system very quickly and under fire.  They know he will be a much stronger adversary in this term.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

No He Can't, he is not the boss, he is the figurehead and 3rd vote when congress and the senate do not agree.

No, this isn't accurate.  Historically, the Chief Executive has been accepted as being the manager of that entire branch of government.  He is free to fire anyone he wants to fire who works in that branch, many of them, "without cause".  This Trump administration is going to be setting precedents as these decisions will inevitably be litigated and decisions handed down by the Judiciary branch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Abramelin said:

Someone tried, but failed.

Yes, he did, and Americans should than God for it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's a POS.

The agencies in question are all ones he wants to slash regulations/funding for, which ultimately screws over the American people.

And of COURSE he's gonna find loyalists because he doesn't know Democracy.. he knows power. Psycho.

Another great 4 years for the wealthy!

Edited by joseraul
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, and-then said:

Yes, he did, and Americans should than God for it.  

I agree with that. If Trump had been killed, his followers would have done something much worse than attacking the White House.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Abramelin said:

I agree with that. If Trump had been killed, his followers would have done something much worse than attacking the White House.

Shaft and why?

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, and-then said:

He never hid the fact that he was going to reduce government.  If he gets rid of only specific areas rather than doing a general cleansing, they'll sue for that, as well.  If he does not have the power as Chief Executive to fire people in that branch then the courts need to explain why that's the case.

To reduce the government he would have to eliminate the positions, not fire and replace them.  

I do expect him to leave to posts vacant.  Why put a crony into an oversight position when can just leave it vacant while doing illegal things?

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What’s next? “I can’t trust the Secret Service, I’ll create my own SS….”?

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.