IG Inspector General OIG

4/19 expand to general term

MERRI OK

MSHA refers specifically to dept of labor, but depts have them

===

TRUMP FIRED 18? RIGHT AFTER ELECTION; MUSK HAS 3B$ IN CONTRACTS

NEURALINK SHOWED UP,

BAK 3 26

---

TRENT MORSE EPA LIAR

BOYFRIEND

LoBBY REVOLV DOOR

see SCAVINO DIRTY TRICKS PPO

DOGE HATCHET MAN FIRED IGs

---

-=-=

NOT GONE?

an 10 26

Trump admin launches 'unusual' investigation into one of their own

On Thursday, it was revealed that the Trump administration has launched an "unusual" investigation into the conduct of one of its own. According to the Wall Street Journal, a new Department of Justice inquiry into former Homeland Security advisor Corey Lewandowski is one of the first second-term investigations into a figure so close to President Donald Trump.

As the Journal explains, "The Justice Department is examining allegations that Corey Lewandowski profited off his top position at the Department of Homeland Security, people familiar with the matter said. The inquiry is based on a referral from the DHS inspector general, which shared its findings about Lewandowski’s tenure at the department in recent days." Lewandowski served as the top adviser to then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, but the pair -- widely rumored to be romantically involved -- were fired from the department in March, following increasingly embarrassing revelations about the infighting at the agency and their spending decisions.

According to the Journal, "While at the department, Lewandowski appeared to try to use his vast influence for personal financial gain, including asking several countries in the Middle East to hire him on the side to assist with visa issues and other matters, The Wall Street Journal has previously reported. He or close associates signed off on nearly all department spending decisions for amounts exceeding $100,000, giving Lewandowski visibility into the array of contractors DHS worked with, and the ability to hold the contracts up." He has previously denied seeking foreign contracts while in government or playing a role in approving DHS contracts.

Over the course of Trump's second term, Justice Department officials have mainly focused on trying -- and often failing -- to build cases against Trump’s political adversaries, frequently dropping cases involving people with ties to the administration. "More broadly," writes the Journal, "the Justice Department has curtailed efforts to pursue cases of fraud and corruption against public officials, amid criticism from Trump and others in the administration who say such prosecutions weaponize the justice system for political ends. A unit that focused on such investigations is down to two prosecutors, after roughly two dozen others left the department or were transferred to other roles."

But the administration may be forced to act in this case, as investigators with the DHS inspector general’s office found evidence in July that Lewandowski may have been involved in improperly awarding government contracts. As a result, the office has for months been weighing a criminal referral to the Justice Department.

According to insiders, the investigators looked into many of the contracts the department signed during Noem’s tenure and were surprised at how involved Lewandowski was in the contracting process. He personally signed specific contracts despite not technically serving as a full-time U.S. government official. "Lewandowski served as Trump’s first campaign manager in 2016 and has maintained a close relationship over the years with the president, who valued his loyalty," explains the Journal. "Lewandowski has told people close to him he expects the president would pardon him in the event of a criminal case."

-=-=

RWW -->

Steve Benen @ The Maddow Blog: Team Trump’s campaign against inspectors general is an underappreciated scandal

Since Watergate, IGs have rooted out corruption, ethical lapses and mismanagement. The White House, however, is rejecting the purpose of these offices.

-=-=

an 8 26

After the Watergate scandal of the 1970s, Congress carried out a series of reforms that included strengthening federal watchdogs and creating new agencies like the Office of Inspector General (OIG), the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, and the U.S. Office of Special Counsel. But according to NOTUS, President Donald Trump is greatly undermining that post-Watergate system during his second presidency.

Reporting for NOTUS, journalists Natalie Alms and Eric Katz explain, "The once-independent system that Congress established after Watergate has radically transformed in Trump's second term. Trump's unprecedented firing of nearly 20 inspectors general has unraveled the firewalls government's ombudsmen have operated under for decades.

The new watchdogs are erasing the lines between agency leadership and their own watchdog offices, Office of Inspector General employees told NOTUS, openly suggesting they should work hand-in-glove with the Trump administration to advance its goals…. Trump has installed former political appointees from the same agencies they're now overseeing, a co-author of Project 2025, and a Republican congressman into watchdog roles across the government."

Alms and Katz add, "Those IGs have boosted the president and his appointees in ways that directly contravene the statutory independence of their offices, 11 current and former staffers told NOTUS."

One of the interviewees for their article was a senior OIG official.

Interviewed on condition of anonymity, the official told NOTUS, "All the adults have left the room. All these new IGs are lining up behind political leadership as if they're lapdogs."

The official noted that remaining officials in watchdog agencies are "scared to death to do anything," adding, "So for the most part, they're just sitting on their hands trying to lay low."

Alms and Katz point to recent events with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) as an example of how much the federal watchdog system is changing under Trump. VA Inspector General Cheryl L. Mason, according to NOTUS sources, held up a move to new office space so that she could have a private bathroom in her office — which, Alms and Katz note, is the "kind of potentially pricey request that government watchdogs typically investigate."

An employee of the VA IG's office, interviewed on condition of anonymity, told NOTUS, "It's been incredibly challenging to continue doing the work we're doing." And another employee, also quoted anonymously, said, "She wanted to make sure the message of everything we did was part of every agreement, promise or whatever she had with the secretary. If you believe in independent oversight, that's not what we were doing."

-=-=

AN 3 26

A Social Security advocacy organization on Thursday blasted the Trump administration for covering up damaging information contained in an inspector general report released in December.

According to The Washington Post, a report from the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) inspector general (IG) about call wait times for beneficiaries was altered to make it seem as though wait times to speak to representatives had been reduced to under 10 minutes per call.

“An unpublished draft of the report... showed that the inspector general had planned to report another metric—called the ‘total wait time’—to measure the overall time it takes for callers to be connected with an SSA employee,” the Post explained. “According to that draft report, in 2025 total wait time averaged 46 minutes to over two hours.”

The Post added that this “information was deleted from the draft after the agency reviewed it before publication.”

Nancy Altman, president of Social Security Works, responded to the report by saying that “now we know why [President Donald] Trump fired the inspector general at Social Security,” noting that the SSA IG was one of several fired across multiple agencies at the start of Trump’s second term.

Altman then argued that the attack on inspectors general was part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to dismantle government transparency all together.

“Inspectors general are the American peoples’ eyes and ears in these agencies,” said Altman. “The Trump administration is undermining that oversight at every turn. Under this administration, the IG has no ability to conduct independent oversight. There is no meaningful check on the Trump administration’s Social Security sabotage.”

Democratic communications consultant Jesse Lee linked the damage to the SSA documented in the draft IG report to efforts by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which went on a firing spree of federal workers last year.

“So DOGE did a smash and grab at the Social Security Administration, breaking into the most sensitive data, firing phone and in-person case workers,” Lee wrote. “Trump appointee waved around an IG report claiming wait times were fine—after burying the real report saying they were up to two hours.”

---

swalwell fuckery PP$

top watchdog out at FHFA

The agency's Office of the Inspector General website now reads that its top position “is currently vacant.”

By:

Cassandra Dumay

| 11/03/2025

The Federal Housing Finance Agency no longer has a top internal watchdog, according to its inspector general website.

Reuters reported Monday that acting Inspector General Joe Allen was facing termination. The outlet previously reported that FHFA Director Bill Pulte had circumvented the inspector general’s office by making criminal referrals on alleged mortgage fraud against Trump adversaries Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Federal Reserve Gov. Lisa Cook and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

The agency's Office of the Inspector General website now reads that its top position “is currently vacant.”

FHFA did not return request for comment.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee, said in a statement that Pulte “has some answering to do – what happened to the watchdog overseeing his agency?”

“What does Pulte have to hide as he continues to use his role to investigate President Trump’s perceived political enemies while failing to lower housing costs for the American people?” Warren added.

...

---

AN 10 25

“Waste, fraud, and abuse.”

It’s President Donald Trump’s battle cry as he dismantles federal agencies, fires hundreds of thousands of employees, and demoralizes the workers who remain. It’s also another of his false flag operations.

Rather than ferreting out corruption, waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement in the federal government, Trump has undermined the very professionals who have that job: inspectors general.

The Role of the IGs

In the wake of procurement scandals and President Richard Nixon’s corrupt abuse of executive power for personal ends, Congress passed the Inspector General Act of 1978 to establish formally the duties and responsibilities of the office. Inspectors general pursue their missions with nonpartisan objectives and have a central role in holding government accountable.

IFrame Content

Approximately half of the 70-plus inspectors general are appointed by the president, subject to Senate confirmation. They are the only independent offices within federal agencies designed to protect taxpayer money and root out corruption, fraud, waste, and mismanagement. IGs also investigate whistleblowers’ confidential claims.

Over the almost 50 years of their statutory existence, they have saved taxpayers billions of dollars.

Trump’s Escalating War on Independent IGs

For Trump and his allies, independent inspectors general have been a nuisance and worse. Following acquittal in his first impeachment, he replaced IGs for the intelligence community, State Department, Defense Department, Health and Human Services, and Transportation Department.

In his second term, Trump has moved more broadly and more rapidly. Typically, IGs remained in place when new presidents took office, underscoring their nonpartisan roles. But in violation of the statutory 30-day notice and “for cause” requirements for termination, Trump fired 17 of them during the first week of his second term. He had appointed several of them during his first term.

So the next time Trump and his allies say they’re eliminating “waste, fraud, and abuse” in the federal government, remember that Trump is actually doing the opposite: clearing away key guardrails of accountability.

During post-termination interviews with the New York Times, the fired IGs said that their biggest concern was the “chilling effect” that their abrupt, unlawful, and unjustified terminations would have on others. Professor Timothy Snyder calls it “obeying in advance.” The inspectors general used similar language to describe their fears:

“Self-censorship”

“Why would you want to write a report that will get you fired?”

“Installing someone who has more loyalty to one person than to the mission of the office.”

“If you do the work that you’re intended to do and it’s not popular, then you will be punished.”

“Who will speak truth to power?”

The concerns were justified. Trump doesn’t want anyone speaking truth to his power.

On Tuesday, February 11, the inspector general for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Paul Martin, issued a report criticizing Trump’s proposed dismantling of that agency and outlining the disastrous consequences. The next day, Trump fired him.

Final Act of Destruction

On September 28, 2025, Trump’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) announced that effective October 1 it was defunding the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency. It was a strategic kill shot because the council is the umbrella agency supporting all of the inspectors general offices.

Beginning on October 1, what had been the website for the council stated only:

Due to a lack of apportionment of funds, this website is currently unavailable.

The same line appeared at numerous Office of Inspector General websites, including the Departments of Agriculture, Education, Justice, Interior and Veterans Affairs, and by those of AmeriCorps, Export-Import Bank of the United States, Federal Trade Commission, International Trade Commission, National Archives and Records Administration, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Personnel Management, Smithsonian Institution, and Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration.

Contacting the watchdog website for the National Labor Relations Board’s OIG page resulted in a “404 error.” The Architect of the Capitol’s IG page said “Not found”; another new page offered only hotline information and blamed the change on a “funding issue impacting Oversight.gov functions.”

The council also runs Oversight.gov, which houses over 34,000 reports from most of the OIGs, and operates 28 OIG websites that host legally required hotlines for whistleblowers to report suspected cases of government corruption, waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement. That site was down too. The council site’s link to the “Inspectors General directory” stated only: “Not Found—the requested URL was not found on this server.”

Not a Funding Issue

But the so-called “lack of funds” asserted on the inoperative council website was not the result of the simultaneous government shutdown. The council’s budget did not require additional congressional authorization.

Rather, the OMB under the leadership of Director Russell Vought decided not to fund it. Vought, a self-described Christian nationalist, was a primary architect of Project 2025—a 900-page blueprint for expanding executive power (“the unitary executive”) and imposing an ultraconservative social vision. During the 2024 campaign, Project 2025 was so toxic that Trump repeatedly disavowed and claimed to know nothing about it; as president, he’s boasting about working with Vought to implement it.

Asked about its defunding decision, the OMB asserted without evidence that it shut down the IGs because they had “become corrupt, partisan, and in some cases, have lied to the public.”

Republicans Are Concerned?!

Even Senate Republicans were outraged. Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), the chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) chairman of the Judiciary Committee, called on the White House to release the funding immediately.

So far, it hasn’t.

And remember that when Republicans in Congress say they are “outraged” at some action Trump has taken, don’t expect them to do anything about it.

---

===

AN 2 25 SAD WILL GOP FIND SPINE ON THEIR PRINCIPLES GAME

One of many controversial executive orders that President Donald Trump issued after returning to the White House was his decision to fire more than a dozen inspectors general (IG). And he has also fired Paul Martin, who served as IG for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

Longtime Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) has a history of defending IGs, but he is also defending the firing of Martin — and drawing some strong criticism for it.

Politico's Josh Gerstein, in a February 12 post on X, reported that Grassley is "temper[ing] his longtime defense of inspectors general, saying USAID IG Paul Martin 'should have been fired' over fraud there. Urged Trump to use admin leave to work around law mandating 30-day notice. G: 'I'm just trying to make the president's job easier.'"

The Washington Post's Aaron Blake, in response to Gerstein's tweet, posted, "As telling a moment as any."

On X, HuffPost's Igor Bobic described his interview with Grassley.

Bobic also posted, "Are you going to alert the president he's not following the law by firing IGs without notice? 'I just did, by talking to you,' Grassley tells me."

Bobic reported, "Grassley tells me the USAID IG Trump fired yesterday 'wasn’t doing his job.' 'I'd like to alert the president to the fact that he can abide by the law and still get rid of the people he wants to get rid of. He can put them on administrative leave for thirty days and send us a letter.'"

Democratic activist Cynthia Busch, who formerly chaired the Broward County Democratic Party in Florida, is among Grassley's critics.

Busch tweeted, "Another disappointing moment for congressional oversight. Sen. Grassley's job is not to make the President's job easier by helping him 'work around the law.'"

X user Barbara Ann Stein called Grassley out as well on X, writing, " Grassley isn't up until 2029, and he's currently 91. He's given up his big issue because he's afraid of being primaried?

===

Trump’s Illegal Firing of Inspectors General - American Oversight

Updated February 25, 2025

Trump’s Illegal Firing of Inspectors General

Less than one week into President Donald Trump’s second term, his administration abruptly fired more than a dozen federal watchdogs. The late-night purge was both illegal and an alarming show of contempt for independent oversight. American Oversight is investigating the lead-up to the decision to discover what — if any — attempt was made to comply with the law.

Late on Friday night during President Trump’s first week in office, following days of highly publicized executive actions taking aim at immigrants, LGBTQ+ Americans, and federal workers, 17 federal inspectors general were summarily fired without explanation or proper notice to Congress.

Inspectors general — nonpartisan officials charged with rooting out waste, fraud, and abuses of office at their respective agencies — are crucial components of proper government oversight and a healthy democracy. By design, they are independent watchdogs that protect taxpayer money from being spent corruptly or inefficiently, without regard or loyalty to any presidential administration’s political whims.

But these watchdogs have long been a target of a president openly disdainful of oversight. In April 2020, at the height of the Covid pandemic and in another late-Friday firing, Trump ousted the intelligence community inspector general who had shared with Congress the whistleblower complaint about Trump’s corrupt dealings with Ukraine. He followed that action with a series of other Friday night firings, including of Christi Grimm of the Department of Health and Human Services, who had issued a report about pandemic supply and testing shortages, and of Steve Linick, who was investigating alleged misconduct by then-Secretary Mike Pompeo. He had also removed the inspector general overseeing $2 trillion in pandemic aid.

Trump’s 2025 purge of more than a dozen inspectors general — along with more firings in the weeks after — continued that trend. Certain fired inspectors general had previously looked into or were actively investigating matters that could affect the business interests of billionaire Trump ally Elon Musk, whom Trump chose to oversee the so-called Department of Government Efficiency. This included Defense Department Inspector General Robert Storch, whose office had in late 2024 opened a review of SpaceX’s compliance with federal reporting protocols intended to protect state secrets. The office of Phyllis Fong, the inspector general of the Department of Agriculture, who was also fired, had in 2022 launched an investigation of Musk’s Neuralink startup. Also among those fired were the Labor Department’s Larry Turner and the Transportation Department’s Eric Soskin, both from agencies that had previously investigated or had fined Musk companies.

In early February, Trump fired Paul Martin, the inspector general assigned to the U.S. Agency for International Development, after his office released a report detailing the potential consequences of the administration’s dismantling of the agency. Martin’s office had also been investigating the agency’s sending of Musk-owned Starlink internet terminals to Ukraine. No reason was given for his termination. That same month, the inspector general at the National Archives — whose office had referred to the Justice Department the case of Trump’s alleged mishandling of presidential documents — left amid a major shakeup brought by the president’s attempt to politicize the nonpartisan agency responsible for maintaining our nation’s history. RUBIO 4 HATS INCL ARCHIVES?

Eight fired inspectors general sued the Trump administration in February, asking a federal judge to declare their firings unlawful and to restore their positions. In March, Trump nominated Thomas March Bell, a Republican attorney who has a history of investigating abortion clinics and was once accused of mishandling taxpayer money, as inspector general for the Department of Health and Human Services.

The political independence of inspectors general — and thus their ability to act in the interest of the public, and not the president or agency heads — is crucial for their ability to safeguard government programs that affect millions of Americans. In 2018, the Environmental Protection Agency’s inspector general office found that the water contamination crisis in Flint, Mich., was worsened by the agency’s failure to respond quickly and decisively. In recent years, inspectors general have examined staffing shortages at air traffic control centers operated by the Federal Aviation Administration, investigated whether the Defense Department was properly accounting for funds used to support Ukraine, oversaw congressional Covid-19 relief spending, and uncovered massive pandemic-era fraud in the Small Business Administration.

As with the firings in 2020, Trump’s January 2025 firings defied an important provision of the 1978 Inspector General Act requiring presidents to provide Congress with 30 days’ notice of any removals. The law was amended in 2022 to require that notice also include a substantive explanation and case-specific reasons for the removal or transfer of an inspector general.

The firings of the 17 inspectors general without explanation or notice is not only a brazen violation of the law, but a clear signal of Trump’s intent to evade the systems in place to hold him and his administration accountable to the American people. American Oversight immediately filed dozens of Freedom of Information requests to several agencies for related communications with the Trump transition team, the White House, or Congress. Requests went to the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, HHS, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, the Interior, State, the Treasury, Veterans Affairs, and Transportation, as well as the Environmental Protection Agency, Small Business Administration and Social Security Administration.

Inspectors general are a vital component of an accountable government and a strong democracy, and American Oversight will update this page with its findings and actions as it fights back against efforts to undermine those critical protections.

===

an 1 25

Last Friday, President Donald Trump fired 17 inspectors general throughout multiple federal agencies. Now, one of the independent federal watchdogs Trump fired is pushing back.

Reuters reported Wednesday that U.S. Department of Agriculture inspector general Phyllis Fong, who is a 22-year veteran of the agency, was recently escorted out of the building by security after she refused to leave her role following Trump's announcement that she had been fired. While Fong didn't directly comment, she sent an email to her colleagues saying that the Independent Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency had "taken the position that these termination notices do not comply with the requirements set out in law and therefore are not effective at this time."

Trump defended the firing of the inspectors general — independent officials within federal agencies who monitor waste, fraud and abuse — by saying it was a "very common thing to do." And the White House argued the president's actions were necessary, saying that "rogue, partisan bureaucrats... have been relieved of their duties in order to make room for qualified individuals who will uphold the rule of law and protect Democracy."

While Trump is able to fire inspectors general and replace them with new appointees, the Inspector General Act of 1974 requires that he first give Congress a 30-day notice that he plans to fire an inspector general, and list a specific cause for their firing. Even Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), who is one of Trump's biggest allies in the Senate, co-signed a letter with Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) insisting that the president "immediately" comply with the law.

"While [inspectors general] aren't immune from committing acts that require their removal, and they can be removed by the president, the law must be followed," Grassley and Durbin wrote on Tuesday. "The communication to Congress must contain more than broad and vague statements, rather it must include sufficient facts and details to assure Congress and the public that the termination is due to real concerns about the inspector General's ability to carry out their mission."

Both Grassley and Durbin called on Trump to reinstate the fired inspectors general on an "acting" basis in order to comply with the 30-day waiting period, and requested he appoint "qualified and non-partisan individuals" to replace them. Trump has so far not responded to their letter.

Reuters reported that Fong had been investigating billionaire Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk — also a top Trump advisor — over his Neuralink brain implant startup before she was fired. She was also investigating the listeria outbreak at Boar's Head that resulted in tainted meat hitting supermarket delicatessens across the country. She was also overseeing the USDA's response to ongoing bird flu outbreak affecting poultry and eggs.

Click here to read Reuters' report in full.

===

an 1 25

One of President Donald Trump's biggest supporters in the U.S. Senate has now co-signed a letter with his Democratic counterpart demanding the president comply with a federal law he recently ignored.

On Friday night, Trump announced he was firing 18 inspectors general throughout various federal agencies, including the Departments of Defense, Labor, State and Health and Human Services. This was done in violation of the Inspector General Act, which requires that a president give Congress 30 days advance that he plans to fire an inspector general — which is an independent watchdog that calls out waste, fraud and abuse — and give a specific reason for their firing.

And on Tuesday, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Ranking Member Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) both signed a letter to Trump, pointing out that the firings were illegal. Politico legal correspondent Kyle Cheney posted the full text of the letter to Bluesky.

"Congress was not provided the legally required 30-day notice and case-specific reasons for removal, as required by law," Grassley and Durbin wrote. "Accordingly, we request that you provide that information immediately."

"While IGs aren't immune from committing acts that require their removal, and they can be removed by the president, the law must be followed," they continued. "The communication to Congress must contain more than broad and vague statements, rather it must include sufficient facts and details to assure Congress and the public that the termination is due to real concerns about the inspector General's ability to carry out their mission."

In addition to providing rationale for their firing, both senators insisted that Trump reinstate the fired inspectors general on an "acting" basis during the 30-day period and "work quickly to nominate qualified and non-partisan individuals to serve in those open positions." Trump has not yet responded to the letter.

As chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Grassley is perhaps the most critical in implementing Trump's policies pertaining to immigration, which is under his purview. Grassley's committee will also have to vet all of Trump's nominees to the federal courts, including anyone he nominates to succeed retiring Supreme Court justices. And as a 91 year-old senator who isn't up for re-election until 2028, Grassley is virtually untouchable in the Hawkeye State, which he has represented for more than 40 years.

===

// FIRED 10 IG INCL INTERIOR

AN 1 25

Trump issued a long list of executive orders after returning to the White House, some of which involve emergency declarations.

The Washington Post's Karen Tumulty, in her January 27 column, examines Trump's use of emergency declarations during his second term. And she argues that he is declaring "national emergencies" where they don't exist.

"The U.S. oil and gas industry is booming, with production at record levels, while renewable sources of energy are expanding at a healthy clip and gasoline prices are at their lowest level in more than three years," Tumulty observes. "To President Donald Trump, all this good news amounts to a 'national emergency.' Or so he claimed in one of the flurry of executive orders signed on his first day in office."

Tumulty continues, "Dire, too, is the situation at the southern border, where, in another emergency declaration, Trump deemed there to be an 'invasion' taking place, which is causing 'widespread chaos.' Never mind Border Patrol statistics saying that, thanks to stronger enforcement, the number of people crossing illegally has dropped sharply, and is lower than it was at the end of Trump’s first term."

The Washington Post columnist laments that by declaring a "national emergency" where there isn't one, a president "gains the ability, usually with just a signature on an executive order, to bypass laws and regulations."

"But at times, these proclamations are not tools for dealing with an actual crisis," Tumulty warns. "Instead, they are used to sweep away impediments to a chief executive's political agenda…. Trump's border declaration, for instance, opened the way for him to unlock billions in funding that Congress had denied for building a wall there — a rerun of what he did as president in 2019, when he cited a law permitting the executive to use military construction funds in a declared national emergency."

Tumulty adds, "Various laws have emergency provisions that would allow Trump to both deploy the 10,000 troops that he is thinking of dispatching to assist Border Patrol agents and shut down applications for asylum by migrants…. Given Trump's hold over the GOP, it is hard to imagine that a Congress where both chambers are in Republican hands will do much to constrain him. So, expect to hear more manufactured emergencies coming from the Trump White House — each one chipping at the guardrails that limit presidential power."

---

Military.com | By Thomas Novelly and Konstantin Toropin

Published February 24, 2025

Current military lawyers and legal experts told Military.com the administration's firings of the Air Force, Army and Navy's top judge advocates general politicizes and sets an alarming precedent for a crucial job in the military, all as President Donald Trump has mused about using the military in unorthodox and potentially illegal ways.

Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced late Friday evening the firings of the top legal officers for the military services -- those responsible for ensuring the Uniform Code of Military Justice is followed by commanders -- as well as the Joint Chiefs chairman, the Navy's top officer and Air Force vice chief.

As part of the judge advocates general purge, Air Force Lt. Gen. Charles Plummer and Army Lt. Gen. Joseph Berger were fired. Navy Rear Adm. Lia Reynolds remains in the position because she was already performing the duties of the top lawyer for the sea service following the resignation of Vice Adm. Christopher French late last year. French had been in the job as the Navy's top lawyer for just a few months.

Hegseth told reporters Monday that the removals were necessary because he didn't want them to pose any "roadblocks to orders that are given by a commander in chief."

Those senior judge advocates general, or JAGs, of the military branches play the important role of setting each service's legal priorities and interpreting military law for top leaders. Their roles have been historically viewed as apolitical, and they oversee everything from a wide variety of criminal cases involving the rank and file to making sure commanders are aware of international law in combat.

The defense secretary didn't elaborate on what specific orders the military's top lawyers could potentially try to block, but Trump has a history of saying he wants to use troops to enforce federal laws, especially in cities run by Democratic mayors.

"Ultimately, I want the best possible lawyers in each service to provide the best possible recommendations, no matter what, to lawful orders that are given, and we didn't think those particular positions were well suited, and so we're looking for the best," Hegseth said. HIRED HIS BRO

One Air Force JAG officer told Military.com the move harms those who wear the uniform by removing the institutional knowledge those top officers hold -- and could result in them being replaced with inexperienced lawyers.

"I think amongst the community, there's just a lot of concern about who's going to come next," the currently serving Air Force JAG officer told Military.com. "People are very scared."

Hegseth hinted to reporters Monday that, as with Trump's pick of Dan "Razin" Caine to be Joint Chiefs chairman, the military may make non-traditional choices for the JAG posts. Caine, who is retired, has no experience leading a combatant command and has never served as a service chief, and would need to be brought back into military service and promoted to serve in the role.

"We're opening it up to everybody to be able to be the top lawyer of those services," Hegseth said, without elaborating further.

But the Air Force JAG officer told Military.com that not just anyone should hold those top positions.

"You can't just pull a lawyer off the street and put him in that job, because there's decades of policy that you kind of have to understand -- the bigger picture of how we got to where we are – in order to steer the ship," the JAG officer added.

The officer also said there are worries that the military justice system could soon become politicized as a result of the moves and that it may throw many uniformed lawyers into an uncomfortable position when administrations eventually change over to a different political party.

"I think everybody now will have a fear of 'well, if I follow this Trump guidance, is the next administration going to fire me?'" the officer said. "We're trying to be apolitical."

Concerns over misuse of the military or bending of the law may be well-founded. Trump has a history of suggesting that he would use troops against U.S. citizens despite federal legal restrictions.

For example, during a March 2023 rally in Iowa, Trump suggested that he would use federal troops in cities like New York, Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco, which he argued have become crime dens.

"We cannot let it happen any longer. And one of the other things I'll do -- because you're supposed to not be involved in that, you just have to be asked by the governor or the mayor to come in -- the next time, I'm not waiting," Trump said.

The judge advocates general could be at the center of such historic and consequential legal decisions as they are being weighed by the administration and military.

Retired Maj. Gen. Charles Dunlap Jr., the former deputy judge advocate general of the Air Force and a professor at Duke University, told Military.com in an emailed statement that military lawyers "have earned an international reputation for expertise, integrity and straightforwardness."

"The U.S. public gives the military their sons and daughters. We owe it to them to provide those serving with the best possible legal advice from lawyers who not only know the law but live the military life," Dunlap said. "No one wants U.S. troops to even be accused of war crimes, and providing nonpartisan expert legal advice from military [lawyers] is key to achieving that goal."

The firing of the JAGs came alongside removals of top senior military officers late Friday evening, including Gen. Charles "CQ" Brown, who was serving as the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Former Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall, who stepped down in January and knew Brown when he served as the Air Force chief, said in a New York Times op-ed on Monday morning that the widespread dismissals were concerning, but especially those of top legal officers.

"What frightens me even more is the removal of three judge advocates general, the most senior uniformed legal authorities in the Defense Department," Kendall wrote. "Their removal is one more element of this administration's attack on the rule of law, and an especially disturbing part."

Meanwhile, allies of the administration and Hegseth have argued that the move would actually help restore the reputation of at least the Navy's legal command.

Tim Parlatore, a former Navy officer who went on to become a lawyer and represented a number of high-profile military clients, including Hegseth and Trump, argued in a video posted to social media Sunday that the last four heads of the Navy's JAG office have had major issues with their leadership.

"One was found to have committed unlawful command influence by interfering in a court-martial for political purposes to keep an innocent man in jail," Parlatore said, referring to the case of Vice Adm. James Crawford, who was found to have unlawfully weighed in on a rape case by a military court of appeals in 2018.

Parlatore also alleged that French, the Navy's most recent judge advocate general, "rushed a retirement package two and a half months into the job, probably to avoid being prosecuted himself for misconduct."

Parlatore offered no evidence for the claim in his post.

But other experts such as Dunlap added that, due to the nonpartisan nature of the military's judge advocates general, they have often been a role model for other nations and have garnered great respect and even deference to U.S. perspectives on the law when working with allies and partners.

"I am not aware of any time in American history where the military's most senior legal officers were fired en masse," Dunlap told Military.com. "This can't help our relations with our allies."

---

===

an 1 25

The Department of Justice's internal watchdog released a report Tuesday finding some of the agency's officials under Donald Trump's first presidency "may have violated federal law" ahead of the 2020 election "by pushing for pandemic-related investigations that targeted states with Democratic governors," ABC News exclusively reports.

Furthermore, ABC reports that the same officials may have leaked "private information about those investigations to friendly media outlets in a potential attempt to influence the election," according to the watchdog.

The report, which the news outlet has obtained less than two weeks before Trump takes the White House once more, notes that a senior member of the DOJ's public affairs team sent a text message less than a month before the 2020 election "describing a proposed leak to a major New York-area tabloid about reviews of COVID-related deaths at nursing homes in New York and New Jersey as 'our last play on them before [the] election' -- 'but it's a big one,' he added."

That same senior public affairs team member, according to the watchdog's report, first launched the alleged ploy to leak the information to media.

ABC reports, "In late August 2020, when the Justice Department then sent letters to the governors of Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and New York seeking relevant data -- 'despite having been provided data indicating that the nursing homes with the most significant quality of care issues were in other states' -- the Justice Department's public affairs office issued a press release about the move," according to the report.

The inspector general's report, ABC notes, mentioned that "current and former officials more recently described the press release as 'unusual and inappropriate.'"

ABC News' full report is available[here.

===

an 10 24

Two House Democratic Ranking Members are calling for the removal of the Dept. of Homeland Security Inspector General Joseph Cuffari, appointed by Donald Trump in 2019, accusing him of lying to Congress, misleading Congress, blatantly abusing his powers, and wasting millions in taxpayer dollars.

Rep. Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member of the Committee on Oversight and Accountability, and Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson, Ranking Member of the House Committee on Homeland Security, in a statement following the release of a damning independent reportsay “Inspector General Cuffari’s extensive and shocking record of misconduct and obstruction is evidence that he has seriously compromised the public’s trust and is plainly not fit to serve in a position that requires him to guard the public interest and act beyond reproach.”

“Cuffari’s unprecedented misconduct in office has been underscored and exacerbated by his persistent and repeated obstruction of oversight efforts. Not only did he fail to fully and meaningfully comply with our investigation—he actively worked to undermine and thwart it.” They call his actions “an outrageous affront and embarrassment to the inspector general community and have undermined the reputation of the entire DHS Office of Inspector General.”

The Project On Government Oversight (POGO), a nonpartisan independent watchdog, on Wednesday released a report alleging Cuffari “waged a years-long campaign to derail and discredit investigations into allegations of his misconduct, which include claims he retaliated against whistleblowers.”

The independent report from the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE) did not cite Cuffari’s actions in deleted texts scandal, but as NCRM reported in 2022, Cuffari appeared to have waited seven months to notify Congress of the missing text messages from the day before and day of the January 6, 2021 insurrection.

That means that four months after the January 6 insurrection the Dept. of Homeland Security knew Secret Service agents’ text messages, from the day before and day of the attack on the U.S. Capitol, were missing and did not inform Congress or the National Archives, which is required by law to retain those records.

The deleted Secret Service texts were not the only missing data at DHS.

“Text messages for President Donald Trump’s acting homeland security secretary Chad Wolf and acting deputy secretary Ken Cuccinelli are missing for a key period leading up to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol,” The Washington Post reported in July 2022.

Cuffari also reportedly “declined to pursue investigations into Secret Service during Trump administration,” The Washington Post reported in 2021, and “blocked investigations proposed by career staff … to scrutinize the agency’s handling of the George Floyd protests in Lafayette Square and the spread of the coronavirus in its ranks.”

“Hundreds of Secret Service officers were either infected with the coronavirus or had to quarantine after potential exposure … as Trump continued to travel and hold campaign events during the pandemic.”

The White House says the report is “concerning, but Politico reports Republicans are circling the wagons around Cuffari.

“Firing Cuffari could spark outrage from Capitol Hill Republicans, who have praised him for investigating DHS’s trouble vetting people evacuated from Afghanistan and its inability to monitor all unaccompanied migrant children released from federal custody after traveling to the United States,” Politico reports. “As CIGIE’s investigation into Cuffari has unfolded, congressional Republicans have rallied around him, suggesting he is being targeted as punishment for criticizing the administration. In an occasionally contentious July hearing, House Oversight Republicans pressed the head of CIGIE on how his office handles investigations into inspectors general and raised concerns about the Cuffari probe.”

In 2023 Cuffari testified before Congress he had deleted text messages from his government-issued cell phone which he also stated he did not use for personal reasons. He alleged the texts he deleted were not considered government records.

===

OMG

an badash 1 23

Special counsel Robert Durham, appointed by then-Attorney General Bill Barr, uncovered possible financial crimes by Donald Trump but made no attempt to prosecute them, The New York Times reveals in massive, bombshell report published Thursday after a months-long investigation.

“Mr. Barr and Mr. Durham never disclosed that their inquiry expanded in the fall of 2019, based on a tip from Italian officials, to include a criminal investigation into suspicious financial dealings related to Mr. Trump. The specifics of the tip and how they handled the investigation remain unclear, but Mr. Durham brought no charges over it,” The Times’ Charlie Savage, Adam Goldman, and Katie Benner report.

The “potentially explosive tip linking Mr. Trump to certain suspected financial crimes” came during a trip Barr and Durham, his special counsel, took together. They “decided that the tip was too serious and credible to ignore.”

But, “Mr. Durham never filed charges, and it remains unclear what level of an investigation it was, what steps he took, what he learned and whether anyone at the White House ever found out. The extraordinary fact that Mr. Durham opened a criminal investigation that included scrutinizing Mr. Trump has remained secret.”

That’s just one aspect of The Times’ extensive and disturbing report.

It also reveals that there was little justification for Barr to install Durham as a special counsel to investigate what Trump wrongly maintained was an unjustifiable investigation into his ties to Russia.

In fact, The Times “found that the main thrust of the Durham inquiry was marked by some of the very same flaws — including a strained justification for opening it and its role in fueling partisan conspiracy theories that would never be charged in court — that Trump allies claim characterized the Russia investigation.”

In another shocking revelation, The Times reports Durham “used Russian intelligence memos — suspected by other U.S. officials of containing disinformation — to gain access to emails of an aide toGeorge Soros, the financier and philanthropist who is a favorite target of the American right and Russian state media.”

The Times does not explain how Durham obtained the Russian disinformation.

“Mr. Durham used grand jury powers to keep pursuing the emails even after a judge twice rejected his request for access to them. The emails yielded no evidence that Mr. Durham has cited in any case he pursued.”

Attorneys on Durham’s team apparently had significant qualms with his actions, leading at least two to resign.

“There were deeper internal fractures on the Durham team than previously known,” The Times reports. “The publicly unexplained resignation in 2020 of his No. 2 and longtime aide, Nora R. Dannehy, was the culmination of a series of disputes between them over prosecutorial ethics. A year later, two more prosecutors strongly objected to plans to indict a lawyer with ties to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign based on evidence they warned was too flimsy, and one left the team in protest of Mr. Durham’s decision to proceed anyway. (A jury swiftly acquitted the lawyer.)”

BARR THREATENED NSA

The Times also reports that Attorney General Barr bought into Trump’s false claims that there had been “no collusion” between the Trump camp and Russia.

Importantly,The Times states point-blank that the Mueller Report “detailed ‘numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign,’ and it established both how Moscow had worked to help Mr. Trump win and how his campaign had expected to benefit from the foreign interference.”

According to The Times’ account, “soon after giving Mr. Durham his assignment,” in May of 2019, “Mr. Barr summoned the head of the National Security Agency, Paul M. Nakasone, to his office. In front of several aides, Mr. Barr demanded that the N.S.A. cooperate with the Durham inquiry.”

The NSA is a wholly separate entity from the Dept. of Justice. It is an agency under the Dept. of Defense and reports to the powerful Director of National Intelligence (DNI).

Barr apparently did not care, and, “repeating a sexual vulgarity, he warned that if the N.S.A. wronged him by not doing all it could to help Mr. Durham, Mr. Barr would do the same to the agency.”

DURHAM TRIED TO SCUTTLE A REPORT’S FINDING THAT TRUMP-RUSSIA INVESTIGATION WAS WARRANTED

“Mr. Durham’s team spent long hours combing the C.I.A.’s files but found no way to support the allegation” that the investigation into Trump and Russia was the result of some anti-Trump deep state operation.

Barr and Durham actually “traveled abroad together to press British and Italian officials to reveal everything their agencies had gleaned about the Trump campaign and relayed to the United States, but both allied governments denied they had done any such thing. Top British intelligence officials expressed indignation to their U.S. counterparts about the accusation, three former U.S. officials said.”

The Dept. of Justice’s Inspector General’s investigation found there was, in fact, sufficient cause for the DOJ to have opened up the Trump-Russia investigation, contrary to Barr’s personal beliefs.

So he tried to have that finding removed from the final report.

The Times reports that “the broader findings contradicted Mr. Trump’s accusations and the rationale for Mr. Durham’s inquiry,” which should have shut down what ultimately became Durham’s four-year long investigation that netted almost nothing.

The DOJ Inspector General, Michael Horowitz, “found no evidence that F.B.I. actions were politically motivated. And he concluded that the investigation’s basis — an Australian diplomat’s tip that a Trump campaign adviser had seemed to disclose advance knowledge that Russia would release hacked Democratic emails — had been sufficient to lawfully open it.”

So Barr tried to discredit Horowitz’s report.

“Minutes before the inspector general’s report went online, Mr. Barr issued a statement contradicting Mr. Horowitz’s major finding, declaring that the F.B.I. opened the investigation “on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient.” He would later tell Fox News that the investigation began “without any basis,” as if the diplomat’s tip never happened.”

Read the entire Times report here.

921

Newly unredacted records from a whistleblower complaint in the State Department have shed light on more allegations against former U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and members of his former staff.

According to documents obtained by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), Pompeo and others were accused of misconduct.

The publication reports: "The alleged misconduct included false or misleading statements to the agency's legal department, misuse of government resources on personal and political activities potentially prohibited by the Hatch Act, verbal abuse of employees by Mike and Susan Pompeo and directives to staff not to communicate in writing in order to evade transparency laws."

The unredacted documents come two years after the redacted version of the whistleblower complaint was filed with the State Department Office of Inspector General (OIG). The OIG is said to have excluded many of the previous redactions in the version of the documents released to CREW.

"The complaint alleges “[s]everal senior career Foreign Service officials who held positions of responsibility within the Executive Secretariat” turned a blind eye to Pompeo’s “questionable activities” and, in some cases, “facilitat[ed]” them, according to CREW.

Employees in the State Department's Office of the Legal Adviser "expressed concern that some of these activities may have violated [the] Hatch Act or other regulations," but the whistleblower was "unaware that any resolution was reached, potentially because senior officials in the Executive Secretariat repeatedly declined to seek clarification or guidance from [the Office of the Legal Adviser] despite requests from subordinates to do so."

The new documents also detail the aftermath of former Inspector Steve Linick's removal from his post, which was part of a larger Trump-led effort to oust inspectors. The report also indicated that staff members were "stunned" by the directive.

"[T]his is all so surreal three days later. I'm nervous about the future," the OIG employee wrote in a May 18, 2020 email. In a later email, the official added, "I just heard Trump say we needed to get rid of the 'Attorney Generals' as a whole…Oh dear."

CREW has also received other documentation as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit aimed at uncovering information about Pompeo’s attempts to hinder the investigation into the allegations of misconduct against him.

===

https://www.alternet.org/2020/09/journalist-lost-award-for-criticizing-trump-despite-administration-claims-to-the-contrary-officials/

no lnx pix twt

Journalist lost award for criticizing Trump -- despite administration claims to the contrary: officials

Alex Henderson September 25, 2020

In January 2019, Finnish journalist Jessikka Aro was notified by the U.S. State Department that she would be receiving its International Women of Courage Award. But the offer was later rescinded after it came to light that Aro had been vehemently critical of President Donald Trump on social media. The State Department and allies of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo have denied that Aro’s anti-Trump posts had anything to do with that decision, but a new report by the State Department Inspector General’s Office says otherwise.

“The report tracks how the discovery of the journalist’s remarks worried senior U.S. officials and prompted a decision to withdraw the honor to avoid a possible public relations debacle,” journalist John Hudson reports in the Washington Post. “The report’s release is likely to worsen tensions between the (State) Department’s leadership and the inspector general’s office, which has undergone several shake-ups following the firing of Inspector General Steve Linick in the spring at the request of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.”

Aro was certainly well-deserving of an International Women of Courage Award. The Finnish journalist became the target of death threats and cyberattacks after reporting extensively on Russian troll factories and their propaganda and disinformation efforts.

When the State Department withdrew its offer, its press office said that Aro had been “incorrectly notified”that she was being offered an International Women of Courage Award. The State Department told Congress that Aro “ultimately was not selected to receive the award due to the highly competitive selection of candidates.” And it never acknowledged that Aro’s anti-Trump social media posts had anything to do with it.

But Hudson reports that the State’s Department’s “inspector general ultimately found that the decision to give her the award was not a mistake and was included in a memo approved by Pompeo. The report also noted that the decision to withdraw the award stemmed from the discovery of the social media posts, despite public claims otherwise.”

Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey is speaking out about the State Department watchdog’s report and is highly critical of Pompeo.

Judson quotes Menendez as saying, “Secretary Pompeo should have honored a courageous journalist willing to stand up to Kremlin propaganda. Instead, his department sought to stifle dissent to avoid upsetting a president who, day after day, tries to take pages out of (Russian President Vladimir) Putin’s playbook. The State Department owes Ms. Aro an apology.”

===

https://www.alternet.org/2020/08/revealed-new-details-in-unredacted-ig-report-throw-into-doubt-mike-pompeos-emergency-timeline-on-weapons-sales-to-saudi-arabia/

bernhardt jorjani perjury?

an 720

commerce Department inspector general battles Secretary Ross over release of NOAA ‘Sharpiegate’ report

Alex Henderson

Inspectors general play a valuable role in the United States’ system of checks and balances, but in the Trump era, there has been no shortage of tension between IGs and…

===

an 5/28/20

purged watchdog who found ‘severe’ medical supply shortages persists with 14 ongoing investigations

Kerry Eleveld / Daily KosMay 28, 2020

As Donald Trump tries to replace the independent watchdog at the Health and Human Services Department post-haste, she has continued doggedly investigating his endlessly inept handling of the coronavirus. Christi…

https://www.alternet.org/2020/05/outrage-after-trump-quietly-fires-state-department-inspector-general-friday-night-slow-moving-coup/

no lnx

outrage after Trump quietly fires State Department inspector general Friday night: ‘Slow moving coup’

Written by Eoin Higgins / Common Dreams May 17, 2020

Democratic lawmakers and progressives erupted with anger after President Donald Trump on Friday night quietly removed the State Department’s Inspector general from his post, the latest example of the White House’s hostility to oversight and investigation.

“What checks and balances do we have left?” wondered journalist Andrew Kimmel. “The slow-moving coup continues to successfully—and quite easily—rid itself of any and all roadblocks.”

Brian Stelter

@brianstelter

If you went to bed early ??????? you missed another dismissal of another independent government watchdog. This time, it's State Department Inspector General Steve Linick...https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/15/politics/state-department-inspector-general-fired/index.html …

State Department inspector general becomes the latest watchdog fired by Trump

President Donald Trump on Friday fired State Department Inspector General Steve Linick, the latest in a series of dismissals of independent government watchdogs that have come in the wake of the...

cnn.com

2,257

3:16 AM - May 16, 2020

Twitter Ads info and privacy

1,782 people are talking about this

The president notified Steve Linick he would be removed from his post in 30 days—a timeline required by law to allow Congress time to look into the administration’s justification for the move—and would appoint Vice President Mike Pence ally Stephen Akard to the position.

Linick’s dismissal came shortly after reports surfaced that Linick was looking into possible misuse of political appointees for personal gain by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

As the Guardian reported:

According to a Democratic congressional aide, just before his abrupt dismissal Linick had opened an investigation into allegations that Pompeo had been using a political appointee at the state department to run personal errands for him and his wife, Susan.

House Intelligence Chair Rep. Elliot Engel (D-N.Y.) said in a statement that the move indicates trump believes he and his administration are “above the law.”

“I have learned that the Office of the Inspector General had opened an investigation into Secretary Pompeo,” said Engel. “Mr. Linick’s firing amid such a probe strongly suggests that this is an unlawful act of retaliation.”

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) called for the Senate to investigate the dismissal.

“If Inspector General Linick was fired because he was conducting an investigation of conduct by Secretary Pompeo, the Senate cannot let this stand,” Murphy tweeted. “The Senate Foreign Relations Committee must get to bottom of what happened here.”

The firing marks the third inspector general Trump has removed from office in the past two months.

As Common Dreams reported, the president in April removed Intelligence Community inspector general Michael Atkinson from his post after Atkinson was revealed to have been behind delivering the whistleblower complaint on Ukraine to Congress that led to Trump’s impeachment in December 2019. In May, Trump fired Department of Health and Human Services inspector general Christi Grimm in part for a report on the administration’s lack of preparedness for the coronavirus outbreak.

In a statement, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi referred to the firings of Linick and the other inspectors general as “dangerous.”

“The President must cease his pattern of reprisal and retaliation against the public servants who are working to keep Americans safe,” she said, “particularly during this time of global emergency.”

Trump’s flouting of convention and norms, said the New Yorker‘s John Cassidy, is revealing the flaws in the American government’s system of checks and balances.

“What’s the point of an inspector general if the folks being inspected can fire him/her at will?” tweeted Cassidy. “Another weakness in the system that Trump has exploited.”

same day!

https://www.alternet.org/2020/05/white-house-to-oust-dhhs-inspector-general-whose-report-drew-trump-fury/

an 520

https://www.alternet.org/2020/05/trump-administrations-serial-ig-purges-fuel-calls-for-anti-corruption-provisions-in-next-covid-19-package/

===

https://www.alternet.org/2020/04/trump-white-house-ignores-bipartisan-group-of-senators-demanding-explanation-for-firing-of-former-intelligence-ig/

no lnx

Trump White House ignores bipartisan group of senators demanding explanation for firing of former intelligence IG

Written by Alex Henderson April 15, 2020

Monday, April 13 was the deadline that a bipartisan group of eight senators set for an explanation of President Donald Trump’s firing of Michael Atkinson, who served as inspector general for the United States’ intelligence community. That deadline has passed, and journalist Jenna McLaughlin — in an article published in Yahoo News — explains that as of Tuesday, April 14, the Trump White House had yet to provide that explanation.

The eight senators, who included Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, sent Trump a letter on April 8 and asked him to explain, in detail, why he decided to fire Atkinson. And the senators, McLaughlin notes, wanted to make sure it was “not for reasons unrelated to (Atkinson’s) performance” as intelligence inspector IG.

McLaughlin reports that according to a spokesperson for Grassley’s office, a follow-up request was sent to the Trump White House on April 14 — and it also went unanswered.

In addition to Grassley, the letter was signed by two other Republicans (Sen. Susan Collins of Maine and Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah) and five Democrats (Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan, Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon and Sen. Jon Tester of Montana).

Trump’s detractors, from liberals and progressives to Never Trump conservatives, have been highly critical of his decision to fire Atkinson — often pointing out the role that the former intelligence inspector general played in the Ukraine scandal.

In 2019, a whistleblower in the federal government complained about Trump’s now-infamous July 25 phone conservation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky — who Trump tried to pressure into investigating a political rival (former Vice President Joe Biden) and his son, Hunter Biden. Atkinson brought that complaint to the attention of Congress, and House Democrats voted to indict Trump on two articles of impeachment — asserting that Trump withheld military aid to Ukraine in exchange for political dirt on the Bidens. But Trump was later acquitted in an impeachment trial in the GOP-controlled Senate.

Trump fired Atkinson on April 3 — a firing that the president’s critics have been denouncing as an act of revenge.

===

https://www.alternet.org/2020/04/trump-is-working-behind-the-scenes-to-cripple-any-investigations-before-the-november-election-columnist

no lnx

Trump is working behind the scenes to cripple any investigations before the November election: columnist

President of the United States Donald Trump speaking with supporters at a "Keep America Great" rally at Arizona Veterans Memorial Coliseum in Phoenix, Arizona.

Written by Tom Boggioni / Raw Story April 11, 2020

According to columnist David Lurie, writing for the Daily Beast, Donald Trump’s purge of inspector generals in the government is an attempt to make sure that he is not be subjected to any embarrassing reports or investigations before the November election.

As Lurie notes, the president has enlisted former bodyman John McEntee, who was previously booted from the White House by former Chief of Staff John Kelly, to purge critics and those considered not loyal to Trump from their posts, and that inspector generals are at the top of the list.

“In the midst of a deadly pandemic, Donald Trump has expanded his war on oversight by attacking the governments’ inspectors general, compounding the damage already done by his unprecedented stonewalling of congressional oversight investigations,” Lurie wrote, before adding that Trump and McEntee are dead set on “targeting IGs as part of a broader effort to purge officials who aren’t sufficiently personally loyal to Trump.”

“That effort might help Trump delay any formal reviews of his failed leadership during the pandemic, or of his administrations’ disbursement of trillions in coronavirus-related spending, until after the November election,” he continued before highlighting the firing of Michael Atkinson, the intelligence community inspector general for turning over to Congress the whistleblower report on Trump’s attempts to dig up dirt on former Vice President Joe Biden.

Adding that Trump’s “attacks on the government’s IG infrastructure have been so audacious that they have raised questions among at least some GOP legislators,” Lurie reports, “Additionally, Trump has taken a uniquely recalcitrant approach to congressional investigations. In the Ukraine matter, Trump defied long-standing precedent by refusing to voluntarily comply with nearly all congressional requests for information, and instructed current and former government officials to do the same.”

“In sum, it seems increasingly likely that Trump’s effort to stonewall and otherwise undermine institutional oversight of his own conduct, as well as that of the government officials that report to him, may well largely succeed, at least until after the election,”Lurie warned. ” Even without the ability to force the president’s loyal soldiers to comply with congressional subpoenas, a small number of courageous truth tellers were willing to come forward to tell the truth about Trump’s Ukraine misconduct.”

“Similarly, Trump’s efforts to fully obfuscate and deny the catastrophic nature of his response to the pandemic do appear to be failing,” he added. “Journalists, health-care workers, and state and local officials are seeking to ensure that many of the critical facts come to light. Hopefully, their efforts to inform the public will continue to bear fruit, and Trump will not succeed in hiding the truth. It is crucial that, when voters go to the ballot box (or mailbox) in November, the scope of Trump’s catastrophic failure is known, even if all of the relevant information has yet to be exposed.”

You can read more here (subscription required).

https://www.alternet.org/2020/04/break-glass-moment-for-our-democracy-experts-sound-alarm-over-trump-plan-to-purge-7-inspectors-genera

no lnx

‘Break glass moment for our democracy’: Experts sound alarm over Trump plan to purge 7 inspectors general

Marine Corps Gen. Joe Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, speaks to Glenn A. Fine, acting Inspector General of the Department of Defense, before a town hall with members of the DOD IG at the Mark Center Building in Alexandria, Virginia, Sept. 20, 2018. (DOD photo by Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Dominique A. Pineiro)

Written by David Badash / The New Civil Rights Movement April 8, 2020

President Donald Trump is expected to fire at least seven top inspectors general, and legal experts are sounding the alarm.

Late Tuesday night RealClearPolitics White House and national political correspondent Susan Crabtree dropped this bombshell:

Susan Crabtree

@susancrabtree

Breaking: Trump is firing 7 IGs in one fail swoop, sources confirm to @RealClearNews. Most likely will be the IGs that were appointed by Pres. Obama or beforehand. He wants his own people in those positions now. Trump during his briefing said he has "put in 7 names" for IGs.

Crabtree later noted “more changes may come later.”

Indeed, as Crabtree mentioned, Trump in fact did make the announcement Tuesday during the coronavirus briefing, but it went largely unnoticed.

Asked by a reporter about his Tuesday firing of Glenn Fine, the Acting Inspector General for the Defense Department, Trump rambled, saying that as president he has the right to fire Inspectors General. (That could be challenged in court if he goes through with the plan.)

“Well, we have a IGs [sic] in from the Obama era,” Trump told the reporter asking about Fine, an IG who has worked for every President since Bill Clinton. “And as you know, it’s a presidential decision. And I left them, largely. I may change some, but I left them.”

“But when we have, you know, reports of bias and when we have different things coming in — I don’t know Fine; I don’t think I ever met Fine. I heard the name –” Trump continued. “I heard the name.”

There are no credible reports of bias.

“I don’t know where he is,” Trump continued. “Maybe he was from Clinton. Okay? You have to check that out? Okay, maybe he’s from Clinton.”

“But we did change him, but we changed a number,” Trump said, suggesting the firing of a veteran and highly-regarded Inspector General is akin to getting an oil change.

And then Trump snuck in the bombshell.

“We have about seven nominations in,” meaning he will be replacing seven Inspectors General, or Acting IGs. “I believe we put seven very, very highly qualified people for the IG position. And, you know, that’s a decision that I could have made three years ago and I could have made two years ago. But we’re putting in — not so much for him. We’re putting in seven names. I think it was seven. And they’re going in now.”

Trump late Friday evening fired Michael Atkinson, the Intelligence Community Inspector General. Atkinson fulfilled his legal obligation to report a credible whistleblower complaint to Congress, and President Trump on Monday fully admitted that was the reason he fired him.

QuickTake by Bloomberg

@QuickTake

Replying to @QuickTake

"I thought he did a terrible job... Absolutely terrible."

Trump fired back at a reporter who asked about the firing of Intelligence Community inspector general Michael Atkinson

Embedded video

On Tuesday President Trump fired Glenn Fine, the Acting Inspector General for the Defense Department, who had just been named by his peers to oversee the $2 trillion emergency coronavirus support program, which includes a $500 billion slush fund that will be managed by Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin.

Legal experts and lawmakers responded to the news Trump plans to purge seven Inspectors General, expressing anger and grave concern.

U.S. Senator (D-HI)

Brian Schatz

@brianschatz

You can thank Senate Republicans for pre-approving all of the coming corruption by voting not guilty. And spare all of us a strongly worded press release. You had your chance. https://twitter.com/susancrabtree/status/1247657858033844224 …

Susan Crabtree

@susancrabtree

Former CIA Officer:

Andrew P. Bakaj

@AndrewBakaj

This. Is. A. Problem. Alarm bells should be going off. https://twitter.com/susancrabtree/status/1247657858033844224 …

Susan Crabtree

@susancrabtree

Former U.S. Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications:

Ben Rhodes

@brhodes

Trump is dismantling American democracy during a pandemic, and every Republican who voted to protect him owns it. https://twitter.com/susancrabtree/status/1247657858033844224 …

Susan Crabtree

@susancrabtree

5,032

6:04 PM - Apr 7, 2020

Twitter Ads info and privacy

1,925 people are talking about this

Former Senior Director for Counterterrorism at the National Security Council staff:

Joshua A. Geltzer

@jgeltzer

Trump reportedly firing SEVEN inspectors general all at once.

Guess he figured out that inspectors general were created to ensure accountability & oversight.

Those are 2 things Trump can’t stand.

This move is VERY dangerous to American democracy. https://twitter.com/susancrabtree/status/1247657858033844224 …

Susan Crabtree

@susancrabtree

2,435

4:41 PM - Apr 7, 2020

Twitter Ads info and privacy

1,478 people are talking about this

Head of the Brennan Center’s National Task Force on Rule of Law and Democracy:

Rudy Mehrbani

@RudyMehrbani

If true, this is a break glass moment for our democracy. And I'm not an alarmist, nor the biggest fan of all IGs. But they play an essential role in checking abuse & preventing autocracy. If there are more @MittRomney's in Congress, now is the time to speak out. STRING 1/ https://twitter.com/susancrabtree/status/1247657858033844224 …

Susan Crabtree

@susancrabtree

516

8:06 PM - Apr 7, 2020

Twitter Ads info and privacy

287 people are talking about this

Former director of USAID’s Office of US Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA):

Jeremy INVEST IN PUBLIC HEALTH Konyndyk

@JeremyKonyndyk

This is a huge, huge red flag. https://twitter.com/susancrabtree/status/1247657858033844224 …

Susan Crabtree

@susancrabtree

428

6:22 PM - Apr 7, 2020

Twitter Ads info and privacy

192 people are talking about this

Noted political scientist and resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI):

Norman Ornstein

@NormOrnstein

Replying to @susancrabtree @RealClearNews

This is a giant step towards a corrupt autocracy. And not a word from his enabler’s in Congress. No different than the lawmakers in Hungary, in Egypt and other countries where they turned a blind eye to vicious dictators seizing power and squeezing freedoms out of the society.

3,781

5:42 PM - Apr 7, 2020

Twitter Ads info and privacy

1,528 people are talking about this

Former federal corruption prosecutor, now Executive Director of CREW:

Noah Bookbinder

@NoahBookbinder

If anyone thought we were exaggerating about the President’s attack on any independent oversight and accountability, and undermining of democratic checks and balances, this should make it painfully clear. Really scary. https://twitter.com/susancrabtree/status/1247657858033844224 …

Susan Crabtree

@susancrabtree

401

4:37 PM - Apr 7, 2020

Twitter Ads info and privacy

255 people are talking about this

U.S. Senator (D-CT):

Chris Murphy

@ChrisMurphyCT

This is getting ridiculous.

I’m drafting legislation to give all Inspectors General protected 7 year terms. Sound like a good idea? https://twitter.com/susancrabtree/status/1247657858033844224 …

Susan Crabtree

@susancrabtree

27.1K

6:56 PM - Apr 7, 2020

Twitter Ads info and privacy

8,696 people are talking about this

Law Professor at University of Texas School of Law, CNN’s Supreme Court analyst:

Steve Vladeck

@steve_vladeck

Inspectors General exist to hold the Executive Branch accountable by identifying fraud, waste, abuse, & illegality.

The President has the constitutional and statutory authority to fire them, but given their job, we have a right to know *why* he no longer values their oversight. https://twitter.com/susancrabtree/status/1247657858033844224 …

Susan Crabtree

@susancrabtree

234

5:12 PM - Apr 7, 2020

Twitter Ads info and privacy

117 people are talking about this

Noted activist:

Leah McElrath ??????

@leahmcelrath

Trump is purging oversight officials: https://twitter.com/susancrabtree/status/1247657858033844224 …

Susan Crabtree

@susancrabtree

Nunes threatens criminal charges against inspector general over whistleblower complaint

Sky Palma / Raw Story

According to an exclusive report from Fox News, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) is threatening to take action against Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson over his handling of the whistleblower’s complaint,…

===

https://www.alternet.org/2020/01/treasury-department-inspector-general-opens-probe-into-abuse-of-the-trump-tax-cut-law/

no lnx

Treasury Department inspector general opens probe into abuse of the Trump tax cut law

Written by Justin Elliott / ProPublica January 16, 2020

The Treasury Department’s inspector general is looking into the opportunity zone program following stories by ProPublica and The New York Times about how the tax break meant to help the poor had been manipulated by billionaires.

The development, which was first reported by NBC News, comes after three congressional Democrats wrote to Treasury’s inspector general in October asking for the probe and citing the ProPublica and Times stories.

“We are conducting an inquiry, and expect to complete our work and respond to the Congressional requesters in early spring,” Deputy Inspector General Richard Delmar said in a statement.

The opportunity zone program, passed as part of the 2017 Trump tax overhaul, offers tax breaks to investors who put money into specially designated areas. While it was pitched as a way to help struggling neighborhoods, ProPublica and others have documented how the process has appeared to benefit billionaires with investments in areas that should not have qualified. In other cases, governors have granted the tax break to their political donors and, in some cases, themselves or their families.

Sen. Cory Booker, an architect of the program, along with Reps. Emanuel Cleaver and Ron Kind, asked the inspector general to do a “complete review” of areas picked for the opportunity zone tax break to see if they were truly eligible.The October letter also asked the inspector general to collect all correspondence between Treasury, White House officials and outside interests about the process.

The inspector general said that once the inquiry is complete it plans to publicly post its response to the congressional Democrats.

Do you have access to information about opportunity zones that should be public? Email justin@propublica.org. Here’s how to send tips and documents to ProPublica securely.

===

barr disputes IG report on FBI looking a russia collusion (did find minor problems, fake docs?!) 12/19

https://www.alternet.org/2019/11/inside-the-secret-deep-state-army-thats-quietly-uncovering-trumps-corruption/

no lnx

Inside the secret ‘deep state’ army that’s quietly uncovering Trump’s corruption

Written by Tom Buerkle / DC Report, Raw Story November 4, 2019

Our government’s Inspectors General pose one of the biggest threats to Donald Trump’s presidency. The IGs’ unique status as independent watchdogs that report both to their own agencies and to Congress make them a powerful tool to root out presidential abuse, fraud and corruption.

:{:{}:

The Intelligence Community Inspector General triggered the House impeachment investigation by bringing forth the anonymous whistleblower complaint revealing that Trump pressured Ukraine’s new leader to publicly declare Kyiv was digging dirt on Joe Biden.

Multiple IG inquiries now bear down on Trump’s maladministration of our government, each gathering facts about Team Trump’s disregard for the rule of law.

Abuse of asylum seekers on our southern border is in the sights of the Department of Homeland Security’s IG. In a July report, he called on officials to take immediate action to alleviate “dangerous overcrowding and prolonged detention of children and adults” in the Rio Grande Valley.

Team Trump’s conduct makes clear they want to suppress or distract attention from critical inspector general reports

The number of people border patrol agents apprehended there more than doubled to 223,000 from October 2018 and May 2019, compared with the same period a year earlier.

‘Egregious Violations’ and Little Discipline

A separate report the previous month cited “egregious violations” of standards at Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facilities in California and New Jersey. Yet another reported on a lack of oversight of misconduct and discipline.

In an August report, the Pentagon’s inspector general warned that without American troops in Syria the combined forces of Iraq’s army and the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces would be “unable to sustain long-term operations against ISIS militants” at a time when that Islamic group was increasing its attacks in the region.

That didn’t stop commander-in-chief Trump from abruptly tweeting a major change in Mideast policy on Oct, 7 that endangered both our national security and our elite troops in northern Syria. Trump tweeted without notifying the generals and blindsided even White House national security officials.

Turkey’s invasion forced our soldiers to flee so quickly that they left half-eaten meals, prompting Russian state television to mock our troops. American warplanes had to bomb our own nearby munitions dumps to keep the weapons from hostile hands.

Fierce criticism from Republicans led Trump to retreat and use American forces to prevent ISIS from gaining control of Syrian oil fields and perhaps seize them, which would be a crime under international law.

Curious Cloud Contract

The Defense Department Acting IG is investigating the Pentagon’s awarding of a $10 billion cloud computing contract to Microsoft. Amazon had long been considered the favorite to win the business because it provides cloud services to the CIA. Trump has long attacked Amazon’s founder, Jeff Bezos, accusing his Washington Post of spreading fake news.

Even Trump’s trade wars are getting close scrutiny. The Commerce Department’s IG office late last month warned Secretary Wilbur Ross that lax procedures mean that favored companies and industries could improperly influence department officials to win exemptions from the Trump’s steel and aluminum tariffs. And only days earlier IG Peggy Gustafson told Ross she lacked the staff to properly vet the huge increase in foreign investments into our country that the Trump administration is demanding to blunt China.

Team Trump’s conduct makes clear they want to suppress or distract attention from critical IG reports or even just making documents available to Congressional investigators. Last April Trump ordered his entire administration to largely ignore Congressional oversight, a core function of Congress under our Constitution’s system of checks and balances.

Inspectors General United

After Trump’s Justice Department tried to silence the Ukraine whistleblower in October, 67 of the 73 IGs rallied to the whistleblower’s defense.

The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel had tried to silence the intelligence whistleblower, whose complaint triggered the impeachment inquiry. That drew a sharp rebuke from the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency.

The IG’s letter warned that such suppression efforts “could seriously undermine the critical role whistleblowers play in coming forward to report waste, fraud, and abuse across the federal government.”

Brave Bureaucrats

Significantly, the first of 67 signatures on the Oct. 22 letter came from the Justice Department’s own IG, Michael Horowitz.

That united public defense was an act of “bureaucratic bravery,” John Hudak, deputy director of the Center for Effective Public Management at the Brookings Institution, told DCReport.

There’s no small irony in the activism of the IGs. Congress created these watchdogs in all cabinet departments and federal entities under a 1978 law, part of a wave of clean government legislation passed after the Watergate scandal forced Richard Nixon to resign rather than face impeachment.

The inspectors general are unlikely to thwart administration policy, at least in the short run.

To Trump they provide a convenient foil, embodying what he claims is a “deep state” of unelected bureaucrats, a claim that fuels conspiracy theorists and fringe elements who claim our federal government is a criminal organization.

And they can’t force change, but their reports can motivate Congress and the White House to act. The Office of Personnel Management IG’s calls for tighter data security went unheeded until 2015, when during the Obama administration OPM revealed that suspected Chinese hackers had stolen sensitive information including Social Security numbers of nearly 20 million people who applied for government background clearances.

IG Budget Cuts

IGs have a unique independent status, reporting both to their executive agencies as well as to Congress. They also deliver real value, generating $14 in cost savings and fraud recoveries for every dollar they spent in fiscal 2018. That gives them clout and allies on both sides of the political divide.

Team Trump has cut IG budgets, as did Obama. They declined more than 7 percent over six years, to $2.5 billion in fiscal 2018, even as overall federal spending rose by more than 16 percent, to $4.1 trillion. That may explain why IG induced savings and recoveries fell to $36.2 billion, down 22% from $46.3 billion.

Today nine cabinet departments lack a Senate-confirmed IG, including the CIA, the Pentagon, Education, and Health and Human Services. A president who knows that IGs dig up facts which he has tried to keep hidden is, predictably, in no hurry to plug that gap.

===

IRS

https://www.alternet.org/2019/05/senior-irs-leaders-launch-review-of-agencys-partnership-with-turbotax-and-hr-block-amid-claims-they-deliberately-steer-users-away-from-using-free-filing-software/

https://www.democracynow.org/2019/4/24/headlines/watchdog_launches_ethics_probe_into_top_interior_department_officials

Interior Department’s watchdog has launched a major ethics investigation into six top officials, including former Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke and the agency’s current head, David Bernhardt.The probe by Interior’s inspector general follows an ethics complaint filed in February alleging the officials routinely disregarded rules requiring they recuse themselves from official meetings with former employers or lobbying clients. Secretary Bernhardt is a former oil lobbyist who’s been accused of making at least 15 policy decisions that directly benefited former clients since he joined the agency in 2017. His predecessor, Ryan Zinke, resigned in December as he faced at least 17 federal investigations into his suspected ethics violations and corruption, including a criminal probe into whether he lied to Interior Department investigators.

===

yikes

Top EPA Watchdog Since 2010 Announces Departure

The head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) internal watchdog organization announced plans to leave for a job outside the federal government Tuesday, The Associated Press reported.

Arthur A. Elkins Jr., who has held the position of Inspector General since he was appointed by former president Barack Obama in 2010, will spend his last day at the agency Oct. 12, The Hill reported.

"It has been my great honor and privilege to serve the American people in this role for more than eight years," Elkins said in a statement reported by The Hill.

His departure comes in a particularly busy time for the Office of Inspector General (OIG), as it continues to investigate the actions of former EPA-head Scott Pruitt, who resigned amid several scandals in July.

In one report released Sept. 4, Elkins found that Pruitt had failed to justify the need for his 24-hour security detail.

"Failure to properly justify the level of protective services provided to the Administrator has allowed costs to increase from $1.6 million to $3.5 million in just 11 months," the report found.

OIG spokesperson Jeffrey Lagda told The Associated Press that Elkins' departure was not a response to any aspect of the Pruitt investigation.

He further affirmed Elkins' decision "will definitely not impact any of the ongoing OIG reviews related to allegations regarding former EPA Administrator Pruitt and his staff," Lagda told The Associated Press in an email.

The OIG is conducting four more audits related to Pruitt, three of which are due to be released this fall, Lagda told Reuters.

Other high-profile cases Elkins investigated included that of ex-EPA adviser John C. Beale, who cheated the federal government out of $900,000 by pretending to be a CIA agent, the EPA's handling of the Flint, Michigan water crisis and the Colorado Gold King Mine spill, which was the EPA's fault, according to The Hill.

Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler, a former coal lobbyist, praised Elkins, saying in a statement that he fulfilled his duties "honorably and professionally," The Associated Press reported.

Elkins will be replaced temporarily by deputy Charles Sheehan, who has served at the OIG since 2012.

Before being appointed to head the OIG, Elkins filled legal roles in various federal agencies including the EPA, National Science Foundation, Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency and Department of Defense, Reuters reported.

The OIG is an independently funded office in charge of overseeing the actions of the EPA, according to The Associated Press.

Its head is appointed by the president pending Senate confirmation, Reuters said.

Elkins' departure means President Donald Trump will be able to appoint his successor, The Hill said.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inspector_general

United States

General IG emblem

In the United States, an inspector general leads an organization charged with examining the actions of a government agency, military organization, or military contractor as a general auditor of their operations to ensure they are operating in compliance with generally established policies of the government, to audit the effectiveness of security procedures, or to discover the possibility of misconduct, waste, fraud, theft, or certain types of criminal activity by individuals or groups related to the agency's operation, usually involving some misuse of the organization's funds or credit. In the United States, there are numerous offices of inspector general at the federal, state, and local levels.

Federal offices of inspectors general

There are 73 federal offices of inspectors general,^[3] a significant increase since the statutory creation of the initial 12 offices by the Inspector General Act of 1978.^[4] The offices employ special agents (criminal investigators, often armed) and auditors. In addition, federal offices of inspectors general employ forensic auditors, or "audigators," evaluators, inspectors, administrative investigators, and a variety of other specialists. Their activities include the detection and prevention of fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement of the government programs and operations within their parent organizations. Office investigations may be internal, targeting government employees, or external, targeting grant recipients, contractors, or recipients of the various loans and subsidies offered through the thousands of federal domestic and foreign assistance programs.^[5] The Inspector General Reform Act of 2008^[6] (IGRA) amended the 1978 act^[4] by increasing pay and various powers and creating the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE).^[7]^

Some inspectors general, the heads of the offices, are appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate.^[8] For example, both the inspector general of the U.S. Department of Labor and the inspector general of the U.S. Agency for International Development are presidentially appointed. The remaining inspectors general are designated by their respective agency heads,^[9] such as the U.S. Postal Service inspector general.^[10] Presidentially appointed IGs can only be removed, or terminated, from their positions by the President of the United States, whereas designated inspectors general can be terminated by the agency head.^[11] However, in both cases Congress must be notified of the termination, removal, or reassignment.

While the IG Act of 1978 requires that inspectors general be selected based upon their qualifications and not political affiliation, presidentially appointed inspectors general are considered political appointees and are often selected, if only in part and in addition to their qualifications, because of their political relationships and party affiliation. An example of the role political affiliation plays in the selection of an inspector general, and the resulting pitfalls, can be seen in the 2001 Republican appointment (and resignation under fire) of Janet Rehnquist^[12] (daughter of former Chief Justice of the United States, William Rehnquist) to the post of inspector general for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.^[13]^

Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE) logo.

While all of the federal offices of inspector generals operate separately from one another, they share information and some coordination through the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE).^[14] As of 2010, the CIGIE^[15] comprised 68 offices. In addition to their inspector general members, CIGIE includes non-inspector general representatives from the federal executive branch, such as executives from the Office of Management and Budget, the Office of Personnel Management, the Office of Government Ethics, the Office of Special Counsel, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. CIGIE also provides specialized training to the inspector general community.

Further evidence of coordination between federal offices of inspector generals can be seen by the public through the offices' shared website,^[16] and the use of shared training facilities and resources, such as the Inspector General Criminal Investigator Academy (IGCIA),^[17] and their Inspector General Community Auditor Training Team (IGCATS),^[18] which are hosted by the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC).

Evidence of the offices' return on investment to taxpayers can be seen through their semi-annual reports to Congress, most of which are available on each office's website.^[3]^

Since the post-9/11 enactment of the Homeland Security Act of 2002,^[19] resulting in the amendment of the IG Act of 1978, Section 6e, most presidentially appointed IG special agents have had full law enforcement authority to carry firearms, make arrests, and execute search warrants. Prior to this time, most presidentially appointed IG and some designated IG special agents had the equivalent law enforcement authorities as a result of other statutes or annually required deputation by the U.S. Marshals Service. The 2002 amendment to the IG Act of 1978 made most deputation of presidentially appointed IG special agents unnecessary. Some designated IG special agents, however, still have full law enforcement authority today by virtue of this continued deputation. Some OIGs employ no criminal investigators and rely solely on administrative investigators, auditors, and inspectors.

U.S. offices of inspector general

Presidentially appointed inspectors general

Agency for International Development (AID-OIG)^[20]^
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA-OIG)^[21] [](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Inspector_General_for_the_U.S._Department_of_Agriculture_Seal.png "inline")
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA-OIG)
United States Department of Commerce (DOC-OIG)^[22]^
Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS-OIG)^[23]^
Office of the Inspector General, Department of Defense (DOD-OIG)^[24]^
United States Department of Education (ED-OIG)^[25]^
United States Department of Energy (DOE-OIG)^[26]^
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA-OIG)^[27]^
Export-Import Bank of the United States (EIB-OIG)^[28]^
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC-OIG)^[29]^
General Services Administration (GSA-OIG)^[30]^
United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS-OIG)^[13]^
Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General (DHS-OIG)^[31]^
United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD-OIG)^[32]^
United States Department of the Interior (DOI-OIG)^[33]^
United States Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (DOJ-OIG)^[34]
United States Department of Labor (DOL-OIG)^[35]
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA-OIG)^[36]^
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC-OIG)^[37]^
United States Office of Personnel Management (OPM-OIG)^[38]^
Railroad Retirement Board (RRB-OIG)^[39]^
Small Business Administration (SBA-OIG)^[40] [](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Small_Business_Administration_%28SBA-OIG%29_seal_%28USA%29.jpg "inline")
Social Security Administration (SSA-OIG)^[41] [](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Social_Security_Administration_Office_of_Inspector_General_Seal_%28USA%29.jpg "inline")
United States Department of State — Office of Inspector General (OIG) for the U.S. Department of State and the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) (DOS-OIG)^[42]^
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA-OIG)^[43] [](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tennessee_Valley_Authority_Office_of_Inspector_General_Seal_%28USA%29.png "inline")
Office of Inspector General for the Department of Transportation (DOT-OIG)^[44]^
United States Department of the Treasury (Treasury OIG)^[45]^
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) of the Department of the Treasury^[46]^
United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA-OIG)^[47]

Designated federal entity inspectors general

National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)^[48] [](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Amtrak_Office_of_Inspector_General_-_Logo.png "inline")
Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC-OIG)^[49]^
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC-OIG)^[50]^
Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC-OIG)^[51]^
Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPD-OIG)^[52]^
Denali Commission^[53]^
Election Assistance Commission (EAC-OIG)^[54]^
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC-OIG)^[55]^
Farm Credit Administration (FCA-OIG)^[56]^
Federal Communications Commission (FCC-OIG)^[57] [](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Federal_Communications_Commission_Inspector_General_badge_%28USA%29.jpg "inline")
Federal Election Commission (FEC-OIG)^[58]^
Federal Housing Finance Board (FHFB-OIG)^[59]^
Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA-OIG)^[60]^
Federal Maritime Commission (FMC-OIG)^[61]^
Federal Reserve Board (FRB-OIG)^[62]^
Federal Trade Commission (FTC-OIG)^[63]
United States International Trade Commission (USITC-OIG)^[64]^
Legal Services Corporation (LSC-OIG)^[65]^
National Archives and Records Administration^[66]^
National Credit Union Administration (NCUA-OIG)^[67]^
National Endowment for the Arts (NEA-OIG)^[68]^
National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH-OIG)^[69]^
National Labor Relations Board (NLRB-OIG)^[70]^
National Science Foundation (NSF-OIG)^[71]^
Peace Corps^[72]^
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC-OIG)^[73]^
Postal Regulatory Commission (formerly Postal Rate Commission) (PRC-OIG)^[74]^
United States Postal Service Office of Inspector General (USPS-OIG)^[10]
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC-OIG)^[75]^
Smithsonian Institution^[76]^

Special inspectors general

Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR)^[77] - appointed by the president
Special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction (SIGIR) - appointed by the secretary of defense in consultation with the secretary of state
Special inspector general for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP)^[78] - appointed by the president with Senate confirmation

Legislative agency inspectors general

Architect of the Capitol (AOC-OIG)^[79]^
United States Capitol Police (USCP-OIG)^[80]^
Government Accountability Office (GAO-OIG)^[81]^
Government Printing Office (GPO-OIG)^[82]^
Library of Congress (LOC-OIG)^[83]^

Other federal inspectors general

Director of national intelligence, Office of (ODNI-OIG)

U.S. military

Within the United States Armed Forces, the position of inspector general is normally part of the personal staff serving a general or flag officer in a command position. The inspector general's office functions in two ways. To a certain degree they are ombudsmen for their branch of service. However, their primary function is to ensure the combat readiness of subordinate units in their command.

An armed services inspector general also investigate noncriminal allegations and some specific criminal allegations, to include determining if the matter should be referred for criminal investigation by the service's criminal investigative agency.

The Air Force Inspector General Complaints Program, described in the Airman's Guide by Boone Nicolls, was established to address the concerns of Air Force active duty, reserve, and Guard members, civilian employees, family members, and retirees, as well as the interest of the Air Force. One of the first responsibilities of the Air Force inspector general is to operate a credible complaints program that investigates personnel complaints: Fraud, Waste, and Abuse (FWA) allegations; congressional inquiries; and issues involving the Air Force mission. Personnel complaints and FWA disclosures to the IG help commanders correct problems that affect the productivity, mission accomplishment, and morale of assigned personnel, which are areas of high concern to Air Force leaders at all levels.^[84]^

See:

Inspector General of the Air Force, established by the U.S. Air Force in 1948.
Inspectors General of the U.S. Army, dating back to 1777.
Naval Inspector General, established by the U.S. Navy in 1942.
Office of the Inspector General, U.S. Department of Defense established 1978.