Anonymous wrote:Unless of course he can prove they were not doing there job. I suspect there’s more to this, he is not an unprepared fighter. I’ll withhold judgement.

How would he know they weren’t doing their job. The man has only been in office five days.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like Chuck Grassley will side with Trump

Source?

https://x.com/courtneybuble/status/1883151364039090588

The fact that Grassley thinks there is a POSSIBLE reasonable basis for the mass firing is already a sign to me assuming there is any truth to the quote from this source.

So why can't trump just give the 30 days and say the reason is they were ineffective? That would be harder to litigate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting how I don’t see this headline on any conservative news sites. Hm.

It's a headline on Fox News if that's what you're looking for.

I made it halfway down the very very long homepage, and it’s not there. If it is, it’s below an interview with the designer of Melania’s hat, and the discovery of a frozen alligator.

Still not a single mention of it

https://www.foxnews.com/search-results/search#q=Ig

FOX is complicit. They are covering up for Trump's brazenly corrupt and criminal actions against our own government.

this can’t be said enough. Why they had to pay $787 in damages

Anonymous wrote:And while the IG's are being shut out and awaiting a court decision, Trump's people will ravage the agencies with no watch dogs on the inside to address it.

But the career folks are there. And they can and will forge ahead. And Trump cannot appoint temporary people like he’s done with many agencies. The IG law passed in 2022 limits who can act.

Nevertheless, this will be a very good test to see if Congress will standup to the bully. If I were them, I’d standup on this so that independent voters (in particular) “think” there are still checks and balances. The American electorate is pretty dumb. So this kind of showing would actually go a long way when Congress lets Trump roll over them on many other things.

Anonymous wrote:Looks like Chuck Grassley will side with Trump

Source?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting how I don’t see this headline on any conservative news sites. Hm.

It's a headline on Fox News if that's what you're looking for.

I made it halfway down the very very long homepage, and it’s not there. If it is, it’s below an interview with the designer of Melania’s hat, and the discovery of a frozen alligator.

Still not a single mention of it

https://www.foxnews.com/search-results/search#q=Ig

FOX is complicit. They are covering up for Trump's brazenly corrupt and criminal actions against our own government.

And while the IG's are being shut out and awaiting a court decision, Trump's people will ravage the agencies with no watch dogs on the inside to address it.

Anonymous wrote:Looks like Chuck Grassley will side with Trump

Why are you saying that?
These people passed the legislation in question.

Looks like Chuck Grassley will side with Trump

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting how I don’t see this headline on any conservative news sites. Hm.

It's a headline on Fox News if that's what you're looking for.

I made it halfway down the very very long homepage, and it’s not there. If it is, it’s below an interview with the designer of Melania’s hat, and the discovery of a frozen alligator.

Still not a single mention of it

https://www.foxnews.com/search-results/search#q=Ig

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting how I don’t see this headline on any conservative news sites. Hm.

It's a headline on Fox News if that's what you're looking for.

I made it halfway down the very very long homepage, and it’s not there. If it is, it’s below an interview with the designer of Melania’s hat, and the discovery of a frozen alligator.

Anonymous wrote:Interesting how I don’t see this headline on any conservative news sites. Hm.

It's a headline on Fox News if that's what you're looking for.

Anonymous wrote:These don’t look like actions of someone who will be gone in 4 years…

“You won’t have to vote anymore. . .”
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/07/28/trump-wont-have-to-vote-anymore-sununu-00171529

Anonymous wrote:it's called the Securing Inspectors General Independence Act of 2022 (public law 117-263). It protects IGs from being removed. It also limits who can be an Acting IG among other things.

Yup. Trump’s first term actions were why this was passed.