SIAP: Trump’s Late Night Puuurge
- Thread starter McLovin32
- Start date
Disagree on much. I mean they are not the best or youngest but Lord almighty they and most democrats have been howling and pushing back on MAGA for 9 years now and it got us nowhere due to the loss of critical thinking, the third estate, and sophisticated manipulation of citizenry by bits and trolls on the internet.
They were all warned, including the millions and millions and millions of Latinos, Blacks, Muslims, Women, Union Workers, and folks on government support who voted for him.
It. Did. Nothing.
And now he has control of federal government, the supreme court court licking his boots, the Republican Congress utterly cowed and in fear, and the most deplorable of people controlling federal agencies.
All that is left is consequences to awaken the American people and if that won’t do it, it is over.
After reading this thread, all I can say is.....thank God for Trump.
I bet you get down on your knees every night & say that.
Did Chuck Grassley grow a pair? We know nothing will come of this.
Love it. Trump is working fast and looks to be on a mission. Excited for tulsi and ke needy confirmations soon
It will be "explained to him" that he's replaceable, and he will fall in line like a good little MAGAt.
I will pray every night that the President will be dead by morning. Then perhaps sanity will have a chance to return to our country.
We could whataboutism all day back to the pilgrims landing.
We are talking now. How many times skirting the law???
90 plus percent of elected democrats are corporates and candy asses. They need to be replaced with someone actually left and willing to fight, though that is often redundant.
Did I just live through an alternative timeline than the rest of you?
In the one I lived through the Democrats despite tepid resistance (it was more a grassroots revolt against Trump) picked up 41 seats in the House in the 2018 midterms and then won the trifecta in 2020.
Even if the Democrats can't do much concretely now they need to be howling at the moon that this shit isn't normal. If the Democrats are going to win in 26 and 28 and be part of destroying MAGA forever they've got to get off their asses and start yelling and introducing impeachment articles in the house and otherwise doing everything procedurally they can do to shut this down.
They need to cripple Trump 2.0 as much as possible right out of the gate if only per public opinion. And they aren't going to do that by pretending everything is normal and the only point of controversy so far is how Trump's early moves are affecting grocery prices.
PJ is correct here, playing possum is going to cost them too many votes that they’ll never be able to get back. Anybody impacted by funding or employment as they watch it burn is going to say “never again” when it comes to voting D
Not authoritarian, right @binsfeldcyhawk2 ??
If Trump can’t legally do this, then all those IGs should show up to work Monday.
Pete. Crockett. AOC. All are pretty great.
Not at all but part and parcel is the idea that ministers serve at the pleasure of the president. The ig act’s notice provisions, one could at least plausibly assert, try to extend article I authority inappropriately to article ii powers. Personally I do t think that’s the case in that my unserstanding is it’s a mere notice requirement.
It’s silly to be, tbh.
IG’s really do act pretty independently, and don’t make policy. They’re kinda nerds. And they identify waste and savings opportunities. They’re about five circles from the center of perceived deep state hell.
Last edited:
Precisely. I’ve not looked at the enabling statute for a while, but it’s not clear to me (1) what the remedy is for the obvious failure to notify Congress, or (2) whether a requirement to notify Congress creates any employment or authority rights for the ig’s themselves. The more you try to hang on the notice requirement, the more problematic it could become constitutionally.
Edit: Here’s the text:
(b)Removal or Transfer.—
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 anestablishment, 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.
In its own weird way this has a feel almost like the marbury v Madison facts
Lindsey Graham weighs in, and gets it all wrong of course. An IG’s role is to help implement the President’s agenda?
Yeah, he should have done that,” Graham said in an interview on CNN’s “State of the Union” when asked about the law dictating notification of Congress 30 days before such a move.
“But the question is, is it OK for him to put people in place that he thinks can carry out his agenda? Yeah. He won the election. What do you expect him to do? Just leave everybody in place in Washington before he got elected?” Graham said.
“This makes perfect sense to me,” he continued. “Get new people. He feels like the government hasn’t worked very well for the American people. These folks did a pretty lousy job. He wants some new eyes on Washington. That makes sense to me.”
“He wants to put people in place, including inspector generals, that can implement his agenda,” Graham said. “So that’s just the way it goes when you win an election.”
Yeah, he should have done that,” Graham said in an interview on CNN’s “State of the Union” when asked about the law dictating notification of Congress 30 days before such a move.
“But the question is, is it OK for him to put people in place that he thinks can carry out his agenda? Yeah. He won the election. What do you expect him to do? Just leave everybody in place in Washington before he got elected?” Graham said.
“This makes perfect sense to me,” he continued. “Get new people. He feels like the government hasn’t worked very well for the American people. These folks did a pretty lousy job. He wants some new eyes on Washington. That makes sense to me.”
“He wants to put people in place, including inspector generals, that can implement his agenda,” Graham said. “So that’s just the way it goes when you win an election.”
Chuck is super mad, and demanding answers.
So, what happens when Trump ignores him? What happens when Trump gives an insufficient answer signaling to Chuck that he should cram it with walnuts?
https://www.kcrg.com/2025/01/29/iow...rce=taboola&utm_medium=organicclicks&tbref=hp
So, what happens when Trump ignores him? What happens when Trump gives an insufficient answer signaling to Chuck that he should cram it with walnuts?
https://www.kcrg.com/2025/01/29/iow...rce=taboola&utm_medium=organicclicks&tbref=hp
3 weeks and counting. Surely Trump's Cracker Jack lawyers are dotting all of those Ts and crossing all of the Is to make this super legal.
Chuck Grassley will be very, very upset. Susan Collins upset if he ignores this statute.
Do you think Trump’s team is still working out the legal niceties, or just ignoring Grassley? Another week has passed and the WH has not responded to Grassley’s demands for an explanation about the mass firings.
Another week has passed and Trump hasn't bothered to respond to Iowa's 90 year old senator. It isn't like Chuck Grassley is even asking for a real justification. He just asked for Trump to give the most meager of excuses.
It's almost like Trump thinks Grassley is his bitch.
