I wonder if we could have a badge that is added to posts that have a primary source?
Would be a bit of something extra for posters to reach for and a great visual aid to know when to pump the breaks on sharing something.
Many Republicans are terrified as well.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Republican_Institute
https://www.ignet.gov/content/inspectors-general-directory
It seems like a new inspection agency/system is being created.
I'd hope so too but the money seems to be about to go out the door so...
We gotta keep in mind that just because a thing is obvious to us, it's still not to a significant chunk of the public. Based on the possible attacks in HI, CA, NC, ongoing school shooting, etc., the cabal still has the capacity to take our pieces.
Sending the money out the door allows us to state that all options are being considered and this time the vaccines can be evaluated with proper metrics, compromised decision-makers can be removed, critical papers will have a higher likelihood of being published, the products can be offered with safety warnings only upon doctor recommendation, etc.
Imagine the vaccines are released, but the study results indicate they're lousy and possibly harmful, and you have to travel to a quack liberal doctor in the middle of the Tenderloin to get it?
Two other factors.
-
Eisen sent the letter and then immediately locked Walpin's account. So he was collecting salary for 30 days presumably, but not performing any job functions.
-
Trump's letter (including in the case exhibit) says that he's "eliminating the position", which strikes me as a different action from firing the individual.
Here's the wording:
"On behalf of President Donald J. Trump, I am writing to inform you that due to changing priorities your position as Inspector General of the United States Department of Agriculture is terminated, effective immediately."
So yeah, Trump is required to notify Congress when he's removing an IG, but is he required to do that when he's removing the IG position from a department?
https://www.ignet.gov/content/inspectors-general-directory
Notice all the positions that are still listed as vacant.
Why weren't temporary appointees immediately placed?
The wording Obama used was this: "I am exercising my power as President to remove from office the Inspector General of the Corporation for National and Community Service, effective 30 days from today."
If you review the two cases (Walpin's and the 8 that are suing Trump) you'll see they seek the same "writ of mandamus"!
The judge in the Walpin case examined the Cheney Factors (it's a real thing) --among other things--to determine whether it could be granted.
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/02-5354/02-5354b-2011-03-24.html
"Jurisdiction over actions "in the nature of mandamus" under §1361, like jurisdiction over the now-abolished petitions for writs of mandamus, is strictly confined. As the original panel in this case rightly pointed out, mandamus is "drastic"; it is available only in "extraordinary situations"; it is hardly ever granted; those invoking the court's mandamus jurisdiction must have a "clear and indisputable" right to relief; and even if the plaintiff overcomes all these hurdles, whether mandamus relief should issue is discretionary. See 334 F.3d at 1101-02. Although the panel was speaking of this court's mandamus jurisdiction under the All Writs Act, the Supreme Court held that the district court's "analysis of whether mandamus relief is appropriate should itself be constrained" by the same principles."
"Where the action a plaintiff seeks to compel is discretionary, he has no clear right to relief and mandamus is not an appropriate remedy."
I see this gang of eight getting shot down for the same reasons Eisen & Obama were able to shoot down Walpin's challenge.
It's been bugging me so much that Trump couldn't be bothered to send that 30 days notice before firing the IGs. So I figure he must have a reason and I dug on the history of Presidents firing IGs and we have a very juicy connection with one Obama fired: Gerald Walpin.
Obama & his Special Counsel Norm Eisen (that name is in the news) realize Walpin is closing in on two or more of their buddies: Kevin Johnson & Nicky Goren.
KJ is getting grant money from Americorps and Nicky is facilitating it. KJ is also being reported for sexual harassment so it needs to be buried.
Walpin receives a tip on it and does his job. Eisen demands his immediate resignation. Walpin refuses. Obama instructs he be placed on immediate administrative leave & sends the 30 day notice for his removal.
Grassley is upset and has a report written up on it by his staff.
The whole situation mirrors the current matter to a laughable degree. Definitely worth reading up on if you like to compare casework and make projections.
NYT overview:
SFGate overview:
https://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/A-confused-disoriented-whistle-blower-3294322.php
Walpin suit docs:
https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2009cv1343-31
Grassley/Issa staff report on Walpin firing:
New suit from 8 of the fired IGs (Storch Fags heads up: apparently includes Storch as a plaintiff!!!):
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.277385/gov.uscourts.dcd.277385.1.0_1.pdf
Nicky Goren -- CNCS leader when this was going down (became a DEI guru):
https://www.ngstrategies.net/about
Looks like Johnson was assaulting & grooming kids at the school.
"While in Sacramento, Agents Wingers and Morales became aware of allegations of inappropriate contact between Johnson and three female St. HOPE students. Mr. Johnson’s attorney, Kevin Hiestand, approached at least one of the students describing himself only as “a friend of Johnson’s,” and “basically asked me to keep quiet. According to her interview with OIG investigators, about one week later, Kevin Johnson offered her $1,000 a month until the end of the program, which she refused to accept. Moreover, the OIG uncovered evidence of two other female St. HOPE students reporting Johnson for inappropriate sexual conduct towards them. These are not the first such allegations. Johnson was also accused of fondling a young woman in the mid 1990’s, but no charges were ever filed."
Here's the associated entity:
https://www.americasfuture.net/our-mission/
You can see the trace of money inflow here:
https://datarepublican.com/expose/?eins=131549794
Looks like $100k came from Bradley Impact Fund
https://www.bradleyimpactfund.org/
Flynn on the board of America's Future:
The shutdowns usually oriented around raising the debt limit.
But what if through a combination of DOGE'ing away wasteful & fraudulent spending and implementing tariffs, Trump is able to run the government w/out any additional debt?
I mean, there's nothing that says the government has to stop running because Congress wants it to, aye? It was always about the money/debt.
Not sure what the meaning of Musks' comment regarding Department of Education is:
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1887971408573018370
Because there is clearly a legislative record of its creation.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/96/s210/text
So what exactly is he saying? That Trump is unliterally eliminating it through some untested executive function? That it is hollowed out and exists in name only? That it's death is near?
From this looks like a private complaint was made and dismissed because it likely overlapped with ongoing real or fake investigations.
https://x.com/I_Am_JohnCullen/status/1888804810029502845/photo/1
It's funding structure is very odd. Gets its $ from enforcement actions and the Federal Reserve.
Like a lot of these agencies, it's its own little legislature, making laws (oh, excuse me: "rules") as it pleases:
https://www.consumerfinance.gov/rules-policy/rules-under-development/
Limits its complaints to garbage products: credit cards, mortgages, college loans, payday loans, etc. You can't submit complaints about market fraud, for example.
To be honest it seems to just do a lot of nothing at this point. Probably just serves as a backstop to stop competition as it emerges, under the pretext of "protecting consumers".
It's described as a default, "non-disaster" spending code:
"Recipient TAFS which have disaster and/or emergency funding transferred via expenditure transfers (including reimbursable activity) from TAFS with disaster and/or emergency appropriations will report financial activity by reporting the default DEFC domain value "Q" for non-disaster/emergency appropriations. "
Could be a good, "odd" sentinel value or just a wink/nod from someone in the know or something more. But if the goal is to spend funding on disaster aid, why is there a default code for non-disaster aid??
Hard to know the significance of this w/out being involved in the design of the tracking system, or seeing some patterns emerge from its use.
Feel like it's #3878 that really lands this though because it references it and lands exactly on Feb 20.