Trump defends firing of a dozen federal agency inspectors in the face of Democratic criticism

Donald Trump defended Saturday night's firing of about 10 inspectors general from federal agencies, asserting that it was "a very common thing to do."

"I don’t know them," he said in words picked up by The Washington Post. However, he maintained that "some people" felt that the terminated employees "were unfair" or "not doing their job."

Late Friday, it became known that the administration fired several independent inspectors, who are charged with keeping an eye on agency operations, reporting cases of fraud, waste or abuse. The positions will not be left vacant. This was promised by the Republican president, who also assured that those assigned will be independent: "They’re not my people."

At the moment, the exact number of those fired is unknown, though reports vary between 12 and 17. Most of them are the Republican's own assignments, made during his first term. Two who survived the cut were, according to available information, the inspector of the Department of Homeland Security, Michael Horowitz, and that of the Department of Justice, Joseph V. Cuffari Jr. While the former was appointed by former President Barack Obama, the latter was chosen by Trump himself in 2019.

Although inspectors general are appointed by presidents, some manage to stay in office as presidents of different parties succeed each other. Their work must be nonpartisan.

Democrats enraged

Democrats greeted the news with unanimous outrage. "President Trump is dismantling checks on his power and paving the way for widespread corruption," asserted Senator Elizabeth Warren, who described the firings as a "purge... in the middle of the night."

Congressional Democrats holding the top ranks of a dozen committees in the House signed a letter demanding the president reverse the decision. "Firing inspectors general without due cause is antithetical to good government, undermines the proper stewardship of taxpayer dollars, and degrades the federal government’s ability to function effectively and efficiently," they asserted.

Although they stopped short of saying they would take legal action, they did assert that the measure violated the law. The Inspector General Act, they asserted, requires the president to notify Congress one month prior to the dismissal of any inspector general and to justify dismissals with "substantive rationale, including detailed and case-specific reasons." "The email terminating the inspectors general fails to provide the required notice and a legitimate rationale, as required by law."

Republicans split between enthusiasm and requests for explanations

From the Republican side, reactions were mixed. "I’d like further explanation from President Trump," Senator Chuck Grassley maintained in a statement picked up by KATU. "There may be good reason the IGs were fired. We need to know that if so."

Grassley conceded that the White House had not met the statutory 30-day advance notice requirement. While concurring, his fellow backbencher Lindsey Graham argued that the deadline was a minor detail: "Just tell them you need to follow the law next time."

More confident was former Trump lawyer Sidney Powell: "Existing IGs are virtually worthless," Powell assured that "The whole system needs to be revamped," since the inspectors ended up protecting institutions instead of Americans.

Inspectors do not accept their dismissal

According to various reports, some inspectors general assured that on Monday they will go to their offices as they usually do. Since the guidelines have not been met, they are not considered fired.

Hannibal Ware, chairman of the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE), shared that view. "At this point, we do not believe the actions taken are legally sufficient to dismiss Presidentially Appointed, Senate Confirmed Inspectors General," he said in a letter to White House personnel office director Sergio Gor.

CIGIE is an association that brings together the various independent inspectors, and forms of the executive branch. In this letter, revealed by Politico, Ware resorts to the same arguments as the Democrats: the month's notice and justification were missing.