I'll assume you realize now although you didn't acknowledge it that the President does. Therefore the President would be the top of the hierarchy of the bureaucracy. This suggests to me that he indeed has the power to hire and fire at FEMA. Which you asserted he did not.
I just posted that in a separatepost, because I realized I might have given you too much credit in seeing how what I commented tied in to the President being directly over the Secretary of Homeland Security.
Did you not bother reading my post? Did you not understand it?
Do you not understand how things like conflict of interest arises in the scenario you've painted? Are you completely unaware of the legal ramifications of someone being unfairly dismissed? Or that the President has much more important things to do than run around firing every mid-level employee that does something he doesn't like?
Note that I'm not just talking about Trump here. Unless you think this would somehow magically only relate to him? Imagine if the Democrats could just fire whoever they wanted.
So, to point it out, again, just because the President could eventually work his way down the chain of command to eventually get to the person he wants to fire, that does not mean he has the authority to just fire anyone he wants.
There's a concept called "abuse of power" that you might want to look up.
Please explain what conflict of interest would arise in the President directing his Secretary of Homeland Security to fire a particular employee or group of employees. Assuming he had just cause, of course.
The Secretary of Homeland Security answers directly to the President. My previous post already points out why being able to fire the Secretary of Homeland Security doesn't mean that the President can fire people under their domain himself.
Could you please answer the question sir?
I did answer it.
I'll assume you realize now although you didn't acknowledge it that the President does. Therefore the President would be the top of the hierarchy of the bureaucracy. This suggests to me that he indeed has the power to hire and fire at FEMA. Which you asserted he did not.
I just posted that in a separatepost, because I realized I might have given you too much credit in seeing how what I commented tied in to the President being directly over the Secretary of Homeland Security.
Did you not bother reading my post? Did you not understand it?
Do you not understand how things like conflict of interest arises in the scenario you've painted? Are you completely unaware of the legal ramifications of someone being unfairly dismissed? Or that the President has much more important things to do than run around firing every mid-level employee that does something he doesn't like?
Note that I'm not just talking about Trump here. Unless you think this would somehow magically only relate to him? Imagine if the Democrats could just fire whoever they wanted.
So, to point it out, again, just because the President could eventually work his way down the chain of command to eventually get to the person he wants to fire, that does not mean he has the authority to just fire anyone he wants.
There's a concept called "abuse of power" that you might want to look up.
Please explain what conflict of interest would arise in the President directing his Secretary of Homeland Security to fire a particular employee or group of employees. Assuming he had just cause, of course.
But since you seem to need it spelled out to you:
Yes. I understand what the Socratic Method is.
The Secretary of Homeland Security answers directly to the President. My previous post already points out why being able to fire the Secretary of Homeland Security doesn't mean that the President can fire people under their domain himself.
My point exactly.