₦airaland Forum

Lovenorth:
Madam Trump has the right to fire any government official, he also has the right to arrest black pastors inside US Churches and transfer them to Guantanamo prison

Being sarcastic, right?

Wallade:
Did Trump notify the Congress before removing the Inspector Generals?

Trump has to notify the Congress with reasons or justification before he can remove her.

It is quite obvious that Trump is seeking and gearing to have absolute power, that is something no USA president had because of checks and balances.

Trump criticized African leadership recently but he covets the absolute power that fuelled corruption, bad leadership and bad governance in Africa.

I am afraid of what failure, terror and pevert USA will become with Trump as the president.

You're still not getting it...yes Trump should have notified Congress...even that in itself is a formality

The issue here is her claiming 'the president cannot remove her'...He actually can. It's in the Constitution

There's a difference between saying 'i don't believe due process was followed in my removal and saying 'i cannot be removed by the president'

I nor dey explain again

DrAda:
How long do you think it will take before Americans launches a massive protest against Trump?

Massive what?

These are the exact things he said he will do during his campaigns and he is doing them as promised. The American people are solidly behind him.

The only thing that will turn the people against Trump is if he decides to go rogue in the future but for now he has the support of the majority of his citizens

Wallade:
Did you read my post? Maybe you should read again and try to comprehend.

A political appointment is such that the president can appoint anybody, even outside civil service or from anywhere into an agency, ministry or department of government.

Career appointment can be done by the president or head of agency by recommendations of career officers for such position to the president, onward transmission of such candidate to the Congress for approval and subsequent appointment.

Did I just explain the difference to you or you still don't understand. If you don't, read and do more research about the subject yourself. I am done spooning you.

That is basically a lie. Where did you get that idea from. Any position that is for Presidential appointment, the President is at liberty to make it as he deems fit except in a situation where the law clearly spells out conditions.

An example is the AGF. In Nigeria, the AGF is the only Minister that the constitution prescribes the minimum qualification of 15 years legal practice for. The rest is at the President's discretion

So unless you can show that the law mandates that IGs should be appointed from career civil servants which is not so, you are simply lying.

The IG can be appointed from anywhere. No law says it must be a career civil servant and even if a career civil servant is appointed. He can be fired by the President and he will simply return to the civil service office he previously occupied just like that of Jack Smith

Mrs Obasa

Starzo:
You're still not getting it...yes Trump should have notified Congress...even that in itself is a formality

The issue here is her claiming 'the president cannot remove her'...He actually can. It's in the Constitution

There's a difference between saying 'i don't believe due process was followed in my removal and saying 'i cannot be removed by the president'

I nor dey explain again

Don't mind the guy
Hatred for Trump has blocked their reasoning
He's reading something clear and simple and still arguing against it

Starzo:
You're still not getting it...yes Trump should have notified Congress...even that in itself is a formality

The issue here is her claiming 'the president cannot remove her'...He actually can. It's in the Constitution

There's a difference between saying 'i don't believe due process was followed in my removal and saying 'i cannot be removed by the president'

I nor dey explain again

Oga, stop talking rubbish.

It is not a formality to inform the Congress. That position is a very sensitive position because an inspector general can investigate heads of agency and even Mr President himself. That is why the President of USA can't unilaterally fire Inspector Generals. That is why the president must justify with reasons the desire to fire an Inspector General to the Congress of the USA.

Again I will show you why are talking rubbish like you said again with your statement that I made bold.

Wallade:
Oga, stop talking rubbish.

It is not a formality to inform the Congress. That position is a very sensitive position because an inspector general can investigate heads of agency and even Mr President himself. That is why the President of USA can't unilaterally fire Inspector Generals. That is why the president must justify with reasons the desire to fire an Inspector General to the Congress of the USA.

Again I will show you why are talking rubbish like you said again with your statement that I made bold.

Ok...you don win

NothingDoMe:
That's nonsense talk from her.

The president fired a government employee and the employee said the termination is not effective.

Now the government don use force remove her from their office her body don cool down.

Illiteracy she wasn't hire and paid by Trump she was hired by the US and paid with the Americans tax payers money. If the sack is illegal she can be reinstated and paid damages .. She is even lucky bcs US nor be Nigeria

Wallade:
Did Trump notify the Congress before removing the Inspector Generals?

Trump has to notify the Congress with reasons or justification before he can remove her.

It is quite obvious that Trump is seeking and gearing to have absolute power, that is something no USA president had because of checks and balances.

Trump criticized African leadership recently but he covets the absolute power that fuelled corruption, bad leadership and bad governance in Africa.

I am afraid of what failure, terror and pevert USA will become with Trump as the president.

Besides, I want to answer your silly assumption that - She didn't say due process was not followed. She expressly said the president does not have the right to remove her.

I answer it with an extract of the original post of the main op:

"Phyllis Fong, a 22-year veteran of the department, had earlier told colleagues that she intended to stay after the White House terminated her Friday, saying that she didn’t believe the administration had followed proper protocols, the sources said"

This shows that you don't read to comprehend or you just don't read at all, you just talk - thrash talk.

It's obvious you have issues with English comprehension

What does it mean to not follow proper procedures? How does that mean Trump does not have the power to fire her according to you?

Ojuntana:
Don't mind the guy
Hatred for Trump has blocked their reasoning
He's reading something clear and simple and still arguing against it

I just taya for some people

It's clearly impossible to have logical and rational conversations with them

Starzo:
You're still not getting it...yes Trump should have notified Congress...even that in itself is a formality

The issue here is her claiming 'the president cannot remove her'...He actually can. It's in the Constitution

There's a difference between saying 'i don't believe due process was followed in my removal and saying 'i cannot be removed by the president'

I nor dey explain again

Oga, stop talking rubbish.

It is not a formality to inform the Congress. That position is a very sensitive position because an inspector general can investigate heads of agency and even Mr President himself. That is why the President of USA can't unilaterally fire Inspector Generals. That is why the president must justify with reasons the desire to fire an Inspector General to the Congress of the USA.

Again I will show you why you are talking rubbish like you said again with your statement that I made bold.

"Phyllis Fong, a 22-year veteran of the department, had earlier told colleagues that she intended to stay after the White House terminated her Friday, saying that she didn’t believe the administration had followed proper protocols, the sources said"

I copied it from the original post. now I ask:

How did you miss that information on the original post? Do you still have your eyes or you just don't want to see?

See your contribution! How can ex president Biden engaged you for a job while he was the President and now a new President has come and you still want to retain that seat. Na Juju dey push you..... 😂 They glue your bum bum to that office?

It's a confirmation that all humans are the same and the only thing that makes a difference in them is the external situation and how the receive and adapt to it.....Shame on her...

DaddyCoool:
But she can still go to court and be reinstated with damages and backpay if the firing was indeed illegal

spiSeyi:
Illiteracy she wasn't hire and paid by Trump she was hired by the US and paid with the Americans tax payers money. If the sack is illegal she can be reinstated and paid damages .. She is even lucky bcs US nor be Nigeria

Actually she was appointed by the presidency

DrAda:
How long do you think it will take before Americans launches a massive protest against Trump?

Massive protest about what really?? 😐

Ojuntana:
It's obvious you have issues with English comprehension

What does it mean to not follow proper procedures? How does that mean Trump does not have the power to fire her according to you?

Trump did not follow due process to fire her.

If you can't read or research to comprehend, that is your problem not mine.

Wallade:
Oga, stop talking rubbish.

It is not a formality to inform the Congress. That position is a very sensitive position because an inspector general can investigate heads of agency and even Mr President himself. That is why the President of USA can't unilaterally fire Inspector Generals. That is why the president must justify with reasons the desire to fire an Inspector General to the Congress of the USA.

Again I will show you why you are talking rubbish like you said again with your statement that I made bold.

"Phyllis Fong, a 22-year veteran of the department, had earlier told colleagues that she intended to stay after the White House terminated her Friday, saying that she didn’t believe the administration had followed proper protocols, the sources said"

I copied it from the original post. now I ask:

How did you miss that information on the original post? Do you still have your eyes or you just don't want to see?

Sorry I might have missed that part

But your argument has been centered on the point that she cannot be removed by the president. Not that due process must be followed

You've been arguing that she cannot be removed by the president hence my response to you

And yes the Congress being informed is mainly a formality... they don't usually turn down the president's request in this scenario.


If by chance they ever do, the supreme Court will ultimately have the final say

DrAda:
How long do you think it will take before Americans launches a massive protest against Trump?

some stupid Nigerians praise his dirty actions with impunities. Even, if this zenophobian man fartted toxic pollution these, ' colo mentality people' would clame it to be farrangrant. It is a matter of time before U.S would be having serious politicall, ecomic and social crises.

God Bless Your Hustle. Nice Caps [color=#000099]

Mpcoll001:
Wahala everywhere

Ojuntana:
That is basically a lie. Where did you get that idea from. Any position that is for Presidential appointment, the President is at liberty to make it as he deems fit except in a situation where the law clearly spells out conditions.

An example is the AGF. In Nigeria, the AGF is the only Minister that the constitution prescribes the minimum qualification of 15 years legal practice for. The rest is at the President's discretion

So unless you can show that the law mandates that IGs should be appointed from career civil servants which is not so, you are simply lying.

The IG can be appointed from anywhere. No law says it must be a career civil servant and even if a career civil servant is appointed. He can be fired by the President and he will simply return to the civil service office he previously occupied just like that of Jack Smith

We are talking USA Inspector Generals not Nigerian Inspector Generals. Don't agree with me on my position, just do your own research about what I have said and then come back for more conversations.

About the position of the Nigerian Attorney General of Federation that you mentioned. Do you know and understand why there has been a lot of clamor, especially from the Legal practicioners and learned persons that the position of the Minister of Justice should be separated from the position of the Attorney General of the Federation(AGF) ?

Conflict of interest!

The AGF is supposed to be a career appointment and professional independent of political or sentimental influence.

While the Minister of Justice can be political appointment which could make the person in that office sentimental or politically influenced.

Combination of the two as one creates a dangerous compromise of conflict of interest.
That is already evident in the Nigerian Justice administration.

Research more please.

Minjim:
If she's to serve a tenure , Trump can't sack her abruptly.
Well, they have a sound justice system and the court will have the final say

There is no sound justice system anywhere. Americans will be the first to tell you how bad their justice system is.

Starzo:
Sorry I might have missed that part

But your argument has been centered on the point that she cannot be removed by the president. Not that due process must be followed

You've been arguing that she cannot be removed by the president hence my response to you

And yes the Congress being informed is mainly a formality... they don't usually turn down the president's request in this scenario.


If by chance they ever do, the supreme Court will ultimately have the final say

She can't be removed by the president with executive fiat in the manner Trump did.

Trumo can remove her, and she did not say he couldn't, but by following a process which is backed by law.

The process, most importantly, includes that the President of USA (Donald Trump, in this case) should inform the Congress of the USA with reasons his justification to sack or remove an Inspector General before the IG is removed.

That is the law in the USA.

Trump ignored that part of the law and used a unilateral executive order (fiat).

Let me ask you: Do you know why Trump removed her? Trump never told the press or the Congress why he removed her till now.

That position of the Inspector General can investigate any head of agency and even the president of the USA himself, so you should understand why the law seeks to protect the Inspector General from a power drunk, bullish and overreaching president like Trump or in future.

NothingDoMe:
That's nonsense talk from her.

The president fired a government employee and the employee said the termination is not effective.

Now the government don use force remove her from their office her body don cool down.

Asslicker. Imagine North Korea or Russia president or an Africa president did this, would you have uttered such trash? I didn't know that American president is supposed to be above the law

Mathewrichard99:
See your contribution! How can ex president Biden engaged you for a job while he was the President and now a new President has come and you still want to retain that seat. Na Juju dey push you..... 😂 They glue your bum bum to that office?

It's a confirmation that all humans are the same and the only thing that makes a difference in them is the external situation and how the receive and adapt to it.....Shame on her...

Rather big shame on you for refusing to read but always rushing to comment. It says 22 years very clearly. See below

Wallade:
She can't be removed by the president with executive fiat in the manner Trump did.

Trumo can remove her, and she did not say he couldn't, but by following a process which is backed by law.

The process, most importantly, includes that the President of USA (Donald Trump, in this case) should inform the Congress of the USA with reasons his justification to sack or remove an Inspector General before the IG is removed.

That is the law in the USA.

Trump ignored that part of the law and used a unilateral executive order (fiat). Do you know why Trump removed her, Trump never told the press or the Congress why he removed her till now.

That position of the Inspector General can investigate any head of agency and even the president of the USA himself, so you should understand why the law seeks to protect the Inspector General from a power drunk, bullish and overreaching president like Trump or in future.

Bottom line is she can be removed by the president. Only that he has to tell Congress why.

In this case her fate is sealed wether through Congress or executive order.... Republicans control both houses and even the supreme Court. So all that is formality.

And if she feels Trump has violated the law then she can seek justice the appropriate way.

P.S. Trump is not the first president doing this type of thing. Republican and democratic presidents in the past have removed numerous IG's during their time. It's only getting major publicity now because of who is in power.

Creamypie:
She should be thankful she wasn't deported back to asia

You sounded like fvcking racist. If she was deported back to Asia, would she die? Ignorant buffoon! When American citizens are even relocating to neighbouring countries where live and living conditions are better than that of USA. I bet your sorry ass didn't know that.
USA is for those who are desperate and struggling economically

Lovenorth:
Madam Trump has the right to fire any government official, he also has the right to arrest black pastors inside US Churches and transfer them to Guantanamo prison

Who or what gave Trump such right? You think US is like China or North Korea or a lawless nation like Nigeria where anything goes?

Starzo:
These people sha. Just because you have the mainstream media on your side you feel like you're above the law

President fired you and you say you don't recognize president's authority

Somebody need to put these people in their place...they feel like they're untouchable and unquestionable

You just described Trump's childish behaviour here. President firing civil and career officials at will, which law gave him that power? That's abuse of power. I'm sure that the reason you didn't recognise what he did was that it was done by American president. If it was done by Tinubu, you would instantly know that it was an abuse of power.

Starzo:
Bottom line is she can be removed by the president. Only that he has to tell Congress why.

In this case her fate is sealed wether through Congress or executive order.... Republicans control both houses and even the supreme Court. So all that is formality.

And if she feels Trump has violated the law then she can seek justice the appropriate way.

P.S. Trump is not the first president doing this type of thing. Republican and democratic presidents in the past have removed numerous IG's during their time. It's only getting major publicity now because of who is in power.

I want to believe that she will approach the court to seek redress and Justice.

I trust the USA judiciary to be the last line of defense for the law even if the Congress is compromised.

Trump's removal of Inspector General is getting a major publicity now because of the manner and approach that Trump applied to to do it. I want to believe every other president that removed Inspector General or career civil servants followed due process. There is a reason for that law that requires the president to follow that process.

Now, we have an understanding.

Wallade:
We are talking USA Inspector Generals not Nigerian Inspector Generals. Don't agree with me on my position, just do your own research about what I have said and then come back for more conversations.

About the position of the Nigerian Attorney General of Federation that you mentioned. Do you know and understand why there has been a lot of clamor, especially from the Legal practicioners and learned persons that [b]the position of the Minister of Justice should be separated from the position of the Attorney General of the Federation(AGF) ?

Conflict of interest!

The AGF is supposed to be a career appointment and professional independent of political or sentimental influence.

While the Minister of Justice can be political appointment which could make the person in that office sentimental or politically influenced.

Combination of the two as one creates a dangerous compromise of conflict of interest.
That is already evident in the Nigerian Justice administration.

Research more please.

There are divergent views in the legal profession. As a member, I'm not in support of that separation. It is an unwarranted duplication that will achieve nothing. Rather we should drop the title of Minister of Justice. One of the problems in Nigeria is this copy and paste syndrome. We don't tailor things to suit our peculiarities. We are practising a presidential system, not parliamentary. The President appoints the AGF, and other cabinet members. This is just a case of distrust in the system. Separation is not the solution, neither will it strengthen the system. You have people not appointed or elected in the civil service engaging in massive corruption. The position of a Minster of Justice is found in the UK, where they also have an Attorney General. In the U.S. there is no such duplication. We have better things to focus on, and shouldn't chase shadows.

DaddyCoool:
But she can still go to court and be reinstated with damages and backpay if the firing was indeed illegal

Dey play!!

DrAda:
How long do you think it will take before Americans launches a massive protest against Trump?

Only fraction of their population are not so pleased.
I hope you know their population sha!