Obama Judge Unfires Agency Head

[elektra]

Democrats find a rule book, only after democrats lose

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Agreed there still are means by which anyone can be terminated, but it can't be arbitrary.
You have to prove the need for termination in a hearing.

Obviously, the Federal bureacrats have way too many protections.

 

[Rigby5]

You think those bureaucrats give us a shit if the People lose their jobs because of government policy decisions? When Obama shut down drilling in the Gulf of America, how many of these bureaucrats "resisted"? Not a single fucking one. Fuck them. I have zero sympathy for them.

Well actually Obama did not "shut down" oil drilling in the Gulf, but he did reduce it by more than half.
However, that likely was due to the mistakes being made with such deep drilling, like the Deep Water Horizon accident that allowed huge contamination and cost billions.
There is no way to safely drill that deep since the pressure are so great, and the drilling rig is not secured.

Nor is lots of drilling necessarily a good idea until the rest of the world's cheap oil is used up first.
Only then should we be looking at drilling what little reserves we have left.
Save our oil for when it is much more expensive.

 

[Rigby5]

Obviously, the Federal bureacrats have way too many protections.

Why?
Do you really believe the Pentagon, and all DC agencies should have a total change of employees every time a new president is elected?
How would that make things "better" since then clearly it would violate the 1st amendment on protecting political beliefs?

 

[BlackSand]

MSN

Trump asks Supreme Court to fire ethics chief as mass purge runs into legal roadblocks​

This time, the Big Orange Bopper, is asking permission.

Why can't people follow rules.

"Donald Trump’s administration is asking the Supreme Court for permission to fire an ethics chief as the president and Elon Musk move quickly to gut the federal workforce, including agency officials and watchdogs.

The top official at the independent U.S. agency that protects government whistleblowers and enforces ethics rules sued the administration this month after he received an email from the president simply stating that his role is “terminated, effective immediately.”

Chief of Office of Special, Hampton Dellinger, is trying to see what he can get away with in firing folks. The time he is trying the right way.

A lawsuit from Hampton Dellinger, who leads the Office of Special Counsel, is one of at least three legal challenges from government officials testing the president’s authority to oust the heads of independent agencies.

Dellinger’s case at the Supreme Court could serve as an early test of the new administration’s authority as the president and Musk signal their willingness to obliterate checks and balances and reject court orders that don’t align with their agenda.

​

.

.​

 

[Concerned American]

A lawsuit from Hampton Dellinger, who leads the Office of Special Counsel, is one of at least three legal challenges from government officials testing the president’s authority to oust the heads of independent agencies.

As the last "special counsel" that wasn't, Jack Smith, illustrates, Dellinger has failed at his job. He is being fired for that failure. End of story.

 

[Auld Phart]

If only Biden had done it by the book

he would have, if someone had bothered to read it to him.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

he would have, if someone had bothered to read it to him.

He'd never have comprehend it. He was two steps toward mush on election and fully mashed in January

 

[jwoodie]

MSN

Trump asks Supreme Court to fire ethics chief as mass purge runs into legal roadblocks​

This time, the Big Orange Bopper, is asking permission.

Why can't people follow rules.

"Donald Trump’s administration is asking the Supreme Court for permission to fire an ethics chief as the president and Elon Musk move quickly to gut the federal workforce, including agency officials and watchdogs.

The top official at the independent U.S. agency that protects government whistleblowers and enforces ethics rules sued the administration this month after he received an email from the president simply stating that his role is “terminated, effective immediately.”

Chief of Office of Special, Hampton Dellinger, is trying to see what he can get away with in firing folks. The time he is trying the right way.

A lawsuit from Hampton Dellinger, who leads the Office of Special Counsel, is one of at least three legal challenges from government officials testing the president’s authority to oust the heads of independent agencies.

Dellinger’s case at the Supreme Court could serve as an early test of the new administration’s authority as the president and Musk signal their willingness to obliterate checks and balances and reject court orders that don’t align with their agenda.

​

What book is that? Rules for Radicals?

 

[Delldude]

MSN

Trump asks Supreme Court to fire ethics chief as mass purge runs into legal roadblocks​

This time, the Big Orange Bopper, is asking permission.

Why can't people follow rules.

"Donald Trump’s administration is asking the Supreme Court for permission to fire an ethics chief as the president and Elon Musk move quickly to gut the federal workforce, including agency officials and watchdogs.

The top official at the independent U.S. agency that protects government whistleblowers and enforces ethics rules sued the administration this month after he received an email from the president simply stating that his role is “terminated, effective immediately.”

Chief of Office of Special, Hampton Dellinger, is trying to see what he can get away with in firing folks. The time he is trying the right way.

A lawsuit from Hampton Dellinger, who leads the Office of Special Counsel, is one of at least three legal challenges from government officials testing the president’s authority to oust the heads of independent agencies.

Dellinger’s case at the Supreme Court could serve as an early test of the new administration’s authority as the president and Musk signal their willingness to obliterate checks and balances and reject court orders that don’t align with their agenda.

​

Pretty sure he got a TRO. He's toast.

 

[BackAgain]

The "proof" is the ruling by the judge that says the civil service protection was violated by his firing.

Oh. So sorry. You’re wrong again. That’s just one judicial ruling. It’s not “proof.” What? In your close-minded world view, no judge has ever made a mistaken.

No one in their right mind would EVER "question" the need for civil service protection in any republic.

Wrong. Your assertion is not a fact. And, naturally, it’s also wrong.

I can't believe you actually wrote this?

How could anyone want to allow nepotism, cronyism, etc.

No connection ^ to the discussion.

, that we have been trying to combat against since the Magna Charta?

It’s “Carta.” And no. We haven’t been dealing with “this” since the Magna Carter.
We’re not dealing with “this” now either.

What you suggest, wholesale firings based on political beliefs, would be in total violation of the 1st amendment, and would force an armed rebellion.

No part of that ^ idiotic sentence is true.

I have never heard of anything not just wrong, but criminal.

Another mindless turd ^ dropped on the Board by you.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

What book is that? Rules for Radicals?

Rules for Reactionaries.

 

[fncceo]

There’s an “ethics chief?”

Was she in a coma during the Biden years?

They ALL were.

 

[1srelluc]

OP needs to brush up on Article II....The same as the liberal judges who blocked Trump but are backing down now.

 

[pknopp]

1. If this guy is such a “covered” individual, prove it.

The courts where that is relevant are addressing it.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Agreed there still are means by which anyone can be terminated, but it can't be arbitrary.
You have to prove the need for termination in a hearing.

Obviously, the Federal bureacrats have way too many protections.

Correct.

For the rest of us, our "protection" is coming to work every day and proving our worth.

 

[Lesh]

Does not really matter.
The point is that civil service protection to prevent cronyism and nepotism goes back to the Magna Charta, and is highly evil to try to evade.
I am not saying people cannot be fired, but that they require charges and a hearing where they can defend themselves.

That is one of the reasons I voted for Trump.
Biden had illegally extorted the firing of Shokin in the Ukraine, violating the civil service protections Shokin was supposed to have.

Be real. You voted for Putin. Directly

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

DonGlock26

"Judge to Trump-terminated ethics watchdog: You’re un-fired
Special Counsel Hampton Dellinger won an order allowing him to remain in his job for now.
A federal judge reined in President Donald Trump’s firing spree Monday, ruling that a federal ethics watchdog can return to his job for at least a few days while the judge receives more detailed legal arguments about the case.

Judge Amy Berman Jackson issued the reprieve to Special Counsel Hampton Dellinger, after he sued to contest the Friday night email he received from the White House indicating he’d been dismissed from his position. Dellinger, an appointee of President Joe Biden, is just one of various officials across the government whom Trump has tried to fire in recent days. Some of them are covered by federal statutes that limit the president’s authority to dismiss them.

Although his title is special counsel, Dellinger’s position is different from the more prominent special counsels who prosecute politically sensitive cases for the Justice Department. Rather, Dellinger leads an independent federal agency that handles whistleblower issues and complaints about violations of the Hatch Act, which limits political activity by government employees."

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/10/judge-trump-ethics-watchdog-unfired-00203503

Now the judicial tyrants of the Left will try to block Trump at every turn as he tries to bring down the deep state.
The Demcorats claims about respecting democracy were just lies. Trump won democratically, but they will try to thwart the will of the people.

**This article was brought to you by USAID funded Politico.

Nothing new here. Leftist kook judges doing what the dems tell them to do.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

The likelihood is that Trump will prevail on this one. If you look at the trajectory of the five major cases addressing this issue over the last century (Humphrey's Executor, Morrison, Free Enterprise Fund, Seila Law, and Collins) the arc is clearly toward the view that the president's authority to fire executive branch members can't be constrained under the Constitution.

 

[Delldude]

The likelihood is that Trump will prevail on this one. If you look at the trajectory of the five major cases addressing this issue over the last century (Humphrey's Executor, Morrison, Free Enterprise Fund, Seila Law, and Collins) the arc is clearly toward the view that the president's authority to fire executive branch members can't be constrained under the Constitution.

The hypocrisy is Clinton and Obama did the same thing.