SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
washington post
'It's a Widespread Massacre': Trump Reportedly Purges At Least a Dozen Inspectors General
"President Trump is dismantling checks on his power and paving the way for widespread corruption," Senator Elizabeth Warren warned.
Jan 25, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump reportedly fired at least a dozen inspectors general at various federal agencies late Friday, according to multiple news outlets, in a move that may run afoul of federal law.
Outlets are listing different numbers for how many inspectors general—independent government watchdogs who conduct objective audits and seek to prevent abuse and waste—were terminated.
The New York Timesreported at least 12 inspectors general were dismissed, citing "three people with knowledge of the matter"—but noted that as of Saturday morning, there were competing lists circulating about how many inspector generals had been notified of their termination. Other outlets, like Reuters and The Washington Post, put the count higher, citing unnamed sources.
Also according to the Times, "on Saturday morning, a White House official confirmed that 'some' inspectors general had been dismissed, but did not respond to a request for a list of those who had been terminated."
In response to the news, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) wrote on X: "It's a purge of independent watchdogs in the middle of the night. Inspectors general are charged with rooting out government waste, fraud, abuse, and preventing misconduct. President Trump is dismantling checks on his power and paving the way for widespread corruption."
The firings appear to violate federal law, which stipulates that the president must give Congress 30 days advance notice of intent to remove an inspector general, along with the reason for the removal, according to both the Times and the Post.
"It's a widespread massacre," one of the fired inspectors general told the Post. "Whoever Trump puts in now will be viewed as loyalists, and that undermines the entire system."
Hannibal Ware, chairperson of the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency, cast doubt on the legality of the firings in a Friday letter sent to Sergio Gor, director of the Presidential Personnel Office.
"I recommend that you reach out to White House Counsel to discuss your intended course of action. At this point, we do not believe the actions taken are legally sufficient to dismiss presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed inspectors general," Ware wrote in the letter, which was reported on by multiple outlets.
"White House will likely argue this is unconstitutional, but this will be a fight," wrote Kyle Cheney, a reporter at Politico, on X.
According to the Post, inspectors general who were ousted oversaw some of the federal government's largest agencies, including: The Defense Department, the State Department, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Labor, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and others.
The news also engendered criticism from the watchdog group Public Citizen.
Jon Golinger, Public Citizen's democracy advocate, called the administration's actions "a watchdog wipeout cooked up by corporate lobbyists that knock down the walls that keep corruption from running rampant."
"Replacing nonpartisan, independent inspectors general with loyal political cronies opens the door to more government fraud, waste, and abuse," he said in a statement Saturday.
Keep ReadingShow Less
To Defend Democracy From Trump, the Mainstream Press Must Cover Peoples’ Movements
Without the media covering the actions, litigation, initiatives, and reports of civic institutions and labor unions, little or nothing will flow from their efforts.
Jan 25, 2025
A lawless madman, with cunning political skills, is at large in our White House. After less than five days in office, he has set a record for flamboyantly issued executive orders, many violative of federal statutes and the Constitution.
A partial list: He has withdrawn the U.S. from the World Health Organization (e.g., damaging international coordination regarding pandemics), quit the Paris climate accords (e.g., nations working together against climate violence), selected corporate ideologues to run regulatory agencies (the purpose of which is to save lives, prevent injuries, and stop consumer rip-offs), unleashed ICE to crash schools looking for undocumented kids to take away, threatened the media, readied more tax cuts for the super-rich and big companies, and halted the hiring of IRS staff needed to stop massive tax evasions by the plutocracy. He has moved to make massive cuts in spending for programs protecting children and the sick (e.g., slashing Medicaid), lifted controls over oil and gas drilling, reduced support for solar and wind energy, and gutted the civil service. Meanwhile he, a convicted felon, is pardoning hundreds of convicted jailed felons who assaulted Capitol Hill police on January 6, 2021, who will now be vengefully on the streets. The terrifying list goes on. (See the Brookings Institution tracking of regulatory changes in the second Trump administration: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/tracking-regulatory-changes-in-the-second-trump-administration/).
These actions harm all Americans—that is, they produce indiscriminate injustice against both liberal and conservative low-wage workers, consumers, parents, and children. This strengthens the resistance from the people with a more unified opportunity to stop President Donald Trump. Already the first torrent of federal and state lawsuits are being filed to block Trump’s power grab. Certainly, many state attorneys general are readying lawsuits. However, comfortable with his dominance over Congress and the Supreme Court, Trump’s response is one he has previously used—figuratively mocking so sue me, ha, ha, ha.
The reporters and editors at the Times, Post and the rest of the national and local newspaper, radio, and TV media must rise to higher levels of their own significance and give voice to the aroused resistance against the onrushing Trumpian dictatorial regime.
In anticipation of the Trump rampage, The New York Times published a lead editorial on January 18, 2025, titled: “Are We Sleepwalking Into Autocracy?” The newspaper’s answer is “Yes,” unless: “Defenders of democracy have to stay united, focusing on ensuring that checks and balances remain intact and that crucial democratic watchdog institutions (my emphasis) elude capture.”
Nice words. But the Times and other large newspapers and magazines have largely avoided a critical responsibility since the 60s and 70s. That is, without their covering the actions, litigation, initiatives, and reports of civic institutions and labor unions, little or nothing will flow from their efforts.
The Times editors know full well that without reaching millions of people, influential groups, and lawmakers, the power of civic and labor community is very significantly reduced. This lack of media coverage has been happening for the past 40 years.
Mass media coverage based on newsworthiness and editorializing empower these groups, gets the attention of more supporters, and makes it more difficult for the forces of often secret autocratic government to roll over the citizenry.
The regular reporting about what activists were doing in the 1960s and 1970s made possible the consumer, environmental, labor, and freedom of information laws. Similar efforts now cannot gather momentum without media visibility. Legislative hearings, prosecutions, and regulatory actions cannot get jumpstarted just by the people insistent on a just and democratic society.
Over the years I’ve highlighted this exclusion coupled with suggesting newsworthy stories to hundreds of reporters, editors, and a few publishers. To little avail.
Look at the scene at the Times and The Washington Post. How often do you see op-eds from civic or labor advocates? How often do you read reviews of their books? How often have the groundbreaking studies by Public Citizen, Common Cause, Center for Science in the Public Interest, Veterans for Peace, Union of Concerned Scientists, et al. received coverage? Look at the profitable Washington Post Live podcasts and see how civic and union leaders have been backhanded. How often do the celebrated Times and Post podcasts interview them? The exclusions are overwhelming, even when compared with the access extreme right-wingers receive, such as Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and Grover Norquist.
Some may say, well, they can always use social media. It is too cluttered, too fractured, and too impulsive. Whether we like it or not, the major newspapers’ original content feeds the radio and television stations and still has an unchallenged impact on getting attention for agendas underway that may have been floating around on the internet for years and going nowhere.
The same situation exists for local journalism, which could feed local TV and radio were it to stop ignoring incipient efforts from community activism, whistleblowers, or simply good stories called into them by alert citizens.
Official source journalism presently reigns. Our democracy can’t afford redundant and tepid reporting in the coming days. For example, there are about 500 full-time reporters covering Congress. The mostly ditto-head reporting misses all kinds of stories. We started the quarterly 40-page newspaper, Capitol Hill Citizen (capitolhillcitizen.com) to expose some of the goings on in Congress that fall under the rubric of ignored unofficial journalism to illustrate this point.
In an era of closing weekly and daily newspapers, one might expect some coverage of this unique effort reporting on Congress, the most important and potentially most powerful institution that can turn around our deteriorating democracy. For nearly three years, none of the major newspapers and news magazines have told their readers about this rising journalistic beacon.
To sum up: The reporters and editors at the Times, Post and the rest of the national and local newspaper, radio, and TV media must rise to higher levels of their own significance and give voice to the aroused resistance against the onrushing Trumpian dictatorial regime imposing fascistic government and more concentrated corporate power.
If they cave, if they cower, as Thomas Jefferson warned, the main bulwark for our Republic crumbles. More citizens then withdraw and give up. That calamity would freeze Congress and the people who are the last ultimate rescuers of our besieged constitutional Republic.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Public Interest Law Firm to Sue DOGE Within Minutes of Trump's Swearing In
Other critics of Trump's Department of Government Efficiency have also argued that it runs afoul of regulations governing federal advisory committees.
Jan 20, 2025
The public interest law firm National Security Counselors says it will file a lawsuit in federal court challenging the "Department of Government Efficiency," a nongovernmental entity spearheaded by President-elect Donald Trump to help advise on cuts to government spending and regulation, within minutes of Trump's swearing in, according to The Washington Post.
The complaint alleges that the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) meets the requirements to be considered a "federal advisory committee"—groups that are known as FACAs—and therefore must follow regulations outlined in a 1972 law governing how FACAs operate. FACAs must, for example, file a charter with Congress, keep regular minutes of meetings, and ensure meetings are open to the public. DOGE doesn't appear to have taken those steps, according to the Post.
The watchdog group Public Citizen has also criticized DOGE for failing to adhere to FACA requirements, which stipulate that "membership of the advisory committee [must] be fairly balanced in terms of the points of view represented and the functions to be performed by the advisory committee." To help remedy this, the co-presidents of Public Citizen—Lisa Gilbert and Robert Weissman—last week requested that the Trump transition team co-chairs appoint them to serve on DOGE.
"As things stand, DOGE's membership falls far short of satisfying FACA's fair-balance requirement," the two wrote. They also point out that the duo tapped to lead DOGE, billionaire and GOP megadonor Elon Musk and tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, both stand to potentially benefit financially from lessened federal regulation. CBS Newsreported Sunday that Ramaswamy is expected to depart DOGE and announce a bid for Ohio governor.
Kel McClanahan, the executive director of National Security Counselors who authored the lawsuit, told the Post that "we're not trying to say DOGE can't exist. Advisory committees like DOGE have been around for decades. We're just saying that DOGE can't exist without following the law."
Another source the Post spoke with, Sam Hammond of the Foundation for American Innovation—who has been a fan of DOGE's efforts—told the paper that until Trump actually treats DOGE as a FACA, it doesn't need to follow FACA reporting rules. "DOGE isn't a federal advisory committee because DOGE doesn't really exist. DOGE is a branding exercise, a shorthand for Trump's government reform efforts," he said.
But early January reporting from the Post indicates that DOGE is more than just a branding exercise. Citing anonymous sources, the outlet reported that aides with DOGE have spoken to staffers at more than a dozen federal agencies to "begin preliminary interviews that will shape the tech executives' enormous ambitions to tame Washington's sprawling bureaucracy." There has also been a hiring sprint. DOGE is aiming to have nearly 100 staff in place by Trump's inauguration, according to the paper.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular