As I posted a few days ago, our very own Stasi. But these assholes enjoy it. They might even be wishing to be more like North Korea when it comes to informing.
Nevermind.
He may not have the legal authority to fire them, but does he have the power to defund them? Congress authorizes funds but the executive branch carries out the disbursement of them.
The word for a President not spending money Congress allocated is impoundment. It is illegal. Multiple courts over the decades have agreed that it is illegal. Trump will undoubtedly do it anyway.
And there is a giant loophole, in, of all places, The Impoundment Control Act of 1974..
The ICA established a specific, clear, and public procedure for what Presidents should do if they want Congress to change its mind and reduce — or eliminate — some funding it enacted. Specifically, the ICA created a special, fast-track procedure for Congress to consider a President’s request (called a “special message”) to rescind specified funds. Under the ICA, a President may defer spending those funds for up to 45 days following such a request. In that regard, the ICA gave the President authority to withhold funds for a limited period that previously did not exist.[9] If Congress does not approve the President’s rescission request within 45 days of receiving it, then the funds must be spent.
So, does anyone expect Congress to not approve? Raise your hands.
So what, you might ask. Who can do anything about it? Seems that the Government Accountability Office can.
The ICA granted GAO a special enforcement role. GAO can trigger the start of the 45-day withholding period if it finds that the President has been withholding funds but has not requested a recission under the ICA. It can also sue in federal court, if needed, to get impounded funds released after the 45 days. In addition, GAO’s enforcement role allows it to clarify the application of the ICA. For instance, it has ruled that the 45-day period cannot begin so late that the funds in question might lapse (expire) before the period ends or be released so close to their expiration date as to be effectively unusable.
Trump being sued by Congress. Doesn’t that warm the cockles of your heart just reading the words? It won’t happen, of course, not in our multiverse. But it will be happening somewhere and that will be sweet.
I am guessing “Congress,” in this context, is both the House and the Senate. The GOP (53 seats) doesn’t have a filibuster-proof majority, unless they are, in fact, willing to use the “nuclear option” to get rid of it.
I’m still holding out hope that Robert Kennedy, Jr. will say so many crazy and ridiculous things that a few Republicans will abstain from voting for him and he’ll fail to get a majority. The rest of them might as well just be in line to pick up their raffle prizes. The hearings are just for performance so that Republican senators (and apparently a few Democrats) can toady up and demonstrate what servile little toadies they can be.
Stranger
My general observation has been that the IGs are basically Congress’s watchers in the Executive Branch, so they can police that the laws are obeyed and to know what they’re spending their money on. Other than being able to call in people for hearings, the IGs are one of the key mechanism for Congressional oversight.
While I’m sure that there are at least a few true believers in Congress, we can say for certain that none of the Democrats are going to back this and very few Republicans.
I’d generally expect the Republicans to simply quote the law, say that Trump can say it all he wants but he didn’t actually fire them since that’s not in his power to do, and tell the IGs to keep going to work and doing their job, ignoring the idiot.
Can you give me the prefix code to access the particular universe that you are living in because it surely is better than this one even if it still has a President Trump. A world in which Senate Republicans (and apparently some Democrats) are not just falling in line to demonstrate how compliant they can be to a self-declared dictator would be a refreshing change of pace from the last week of unvarnished authoritarianism.
Stranger
A person can say one thing and do another.
The recent Inspector General Act was sponsored by Chuck Grassley (R).
Just because someone is smiling, shaking your hand, and calling you a genius, that doesn’t mean that they actually like you and are working to your advantage.
Trump had some 30 compatriots arrested by his own Republican appointees during his first term. So far as both left-wing and right-wing media would have it, it was the left that was somehow making these accomplishments though you could look up each person, see their right wing credentials, and see the day that Trump appointed them or they were appointed by someone that Trump had appointed.
You can’t just pay attention to what people say, nor what the news says, you need to look at what people do.
Worse case for DJT, he has to give 30 days notice with a “substantial rationale.” It doesn’t have to be a good rationale, just substantial. I predict he will win this one, demonstrating that the letter of the law, when applied against him, is toothless.
I’ve seen the CIGIE letter referred to as “a refusal to step down”. I don’t see it. Nowhere does it say “we are staying”. It more like pointing out the illegality of the purge. What does that have to do with deterring or punishing someone who is immune? Will any actually refuse to leave their office and have to be escorted out by Homeland Security? I hope so. That would make for great
photos.
No new posts on this? Lindsey Graham says basically, Yea he broke the law. Next time we’ll tell them (not him) not to do that. Grassley said “Regardless, the 30-day detailed notice of removal that the law demands was not provided to Congress.”
Why has this already disappeared from the media? Even some Rs are saying he broke the law and it appears to be a pretty simple matter. WTF is he getting a pass on this? What am I missing? I really don’t get it. We are doomed.
Got washed away by the fire hose of other stuff.
Jen Psaki opened her show tonight talking about how Steve Bannon’s “flood the zone” strategy is in full effect right now.
Yeah, anything that you want the media to ignore you do on a Friday evening.
His rationale will be some dressed up version of, “Because I wanna!” and Republican senators will approve it straight down the line.
Stranger
Because this falls squarely within the limits of the immunity he’s been granted by the Supreme Court.
No one denies that firing the Inspectors General is within the power of the president. The issue is that he went about it in an illegal manner. Well, that doesn’t matter, because the firing is an Official Act, and he has immunity for any such illegal actions.
So, really, all anyone can do is note the illegality, and ask him pretty please to not do that again.
A more interesting question is if the IGs will be physically restrained from coming in to their offices, and whether their support staff will take orders from them, or not, for the legally mandated 30 day period.
I’ll bet the Supreme Court is sorry it opened up that can of worms.
/s
Barca or Lecter?
Two IGs I saw interviewed say they have been refused entrance to their offices. They haven’t been able to retrieve the pen sets their spouses gave them.