The left is misrepresenting Trump’s decision to fire Inspectors General

The MSM is up in arms about Donald Trump’s firing of at least a dozen Inspectors General (“IGs”), calling it a “late-night purge“ and alleging President Trump is dismantling checks on his power. Democrats in Congress are loudly declaring that President Trump broke the law.

The idea of separation of powers in government concerns the three branches of government: legislative, executive, and judicial. But what about the separation of powers within the executive branch? Not a thing.

The left asserts that President Trump’s decision to fire these public officials was illegal and unethical because of their positions as “independent watch-dogs,” suggesting that they are somehow beyond the reach of the U.S. president’s decision-making authority.

Image by Grok.

This is the point where I have seen folks on the right chasing after a red herring on this issue, claiming that government watchdog organizations such as the Inspectors General (either the heads of the organizations or the organizations themselves) are not actually independent in how they function but, instead, have proven themselves to be biased. That may or may not be true, but it is not really the issue here. The issue is that the left has been dishonest in acting as if Trump’s firing of the IGs was either unlawful or unethical. They essentially say it’s tantamount to his destroying any attempt at oversight over his administration. In reality, this was fully within the scope of President Trump’s authority as POTUS.

The IGs whom Trump fired are covered under the IG Act of 1978. This act created these IG offices, with their heads as presidentially appointed positions. POTUS has the legal prerogative to fire any presidential appointee (including IG Act appointees). The respective affected IG offices will continue to exist and function seamlessly without an appointed IG until President Trump names a replacement. Typically, a Deputy IG (not a presidential appointee) will serve in an acting capacity until then.

The left is making a big stink about the supposed independence of IGs, claiming President Trump has violated this independence and that he’s seeking to destroy any efforts to oversee his administration. However, this completely mischaracterizes IG independence under the IG Act.

Executive Branch IGs are supposed to be independent of the Agency they oversee, not independent of the U.S. federal government in general or the Executive Branch in particular. Here is how this plays out in the DoD, for example:

The DoD Inspector General (DoDIG) is independent from the DoD organizationally. While the head of DoDIG reports to (and has direct access to) the Secretary of Defense, he also reports directly to Congress, and only the president is authorized to remove him. Additionally, the IG office’s funding comes directly from Congress, rather than through the overseen agency’s budget. All of this is spelled out in the IG Act. Thus, the left’s assertions amount to a gross mischaracterization that is just dishonest.

There is only one issue as to which the left has any grounds for legitimate complaint, and that is President Trump’s decision not to give 30-day notice to Congress before terminating the IGs. The 30-day notice rule is stipulated in the IG Act. However, not only may it exceed Congress’s powers to oversee the president’s decisions about staff, but this kind of bureaucratic minutia doesn’t call for the level of outrage the left desires against President Trump. Thus, we see exaggerations and outright lies they raise, all to convince credulous people that Trump committed an illegal act to hide his wrongdoing from Congress.

If you experience technical problems, please write to helpdesk@americanthinker.com