3 ms·

I wouldn't put it past our government. Who ever even looks at this stuff? Nobody cares to look when they're spending other people's money. Traditionally the pla

I wouldn't put it past our government. Who ever even looks at this stuff? Nobody cares to look when they're spending other people's money. Traditionally the play has been: don't rock the boat and you keep your job for life.

ZeroGravitas 2y ago
Office of the Inspector General looks at this stuff. Trump fired 17 of them: https://campaignlegal.org/update/significance-firing-inspectors-general-explained https://campaignlegal.org/update/significance-firing-inspect... > This blatantly illegal and incredibly concerning mass firing removes the only independent offices within agencies designed to protect taxpayer money and root out corruption, fraud, waste and mismanagement. I also posted the 2022 report the office generated elsewhere in the thread, a follow up to their 2015 report.
- gscott 2y ago
  > Office of the Inspector General looks at this stuff. I wish that were the case, if it was these date of births would have already been fixed. Sounds like they fired 17 useless employees and can split the work of the 17 amongst 150 other employees.
- wruza 2y ago
  Sounded like "out of 25", but just for context: With approximately 1,600 employees, the HHS-OIG performs audits, investigations, and evaluations to recommend policy for decision-makers and the public.
  - ZeroGravitas 2y ago
    There's OIGs for different departments. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Inspector_General_(United_States) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Inspector_General_(U...
    - wruza 2y ago
      I quoted this exact article. It seems almost a tradition to fire all heads of OIGs after elections, from all sorts of presidents.
      - BryantD 2y ago
        The cited examples are Reagan and Bush, both of whom relented to some degree after Congress pushed back. Obama fired one IG, with stated cause. And of course, in 2022, Congress passed a law requiring 30 days advance notice to Congress. So perhaps traditional but also fairly clearly violating the 2022 law.

ZeroGravitas 2y ago

Office of the Inspector General looks at this stuff. Trump fired 17 of them: https://campaignlegal.org/update/significance-firing-inspectors-general-explained https://campaignlegal.org/update/significance-firing-inspect... > This blatantly illegal and incredibly concerning mass firing removes the only independent offices within agencies designed to protect taxpayer money and root out corruption, fraud, waste and mismanagement. I also posted the 2022 report the office generated elsewhere in the thread, a follow up to their 2015 report.

gscott 2y ago
> Office of the Inspector General looks at this stuff. I wish that were the case, if it was these date of births would have already been fixed. Sounds like they fired 17 useless employees and can split the work of the 17 amongst 150 other employees.
wruza 2y ago
Sounded like "out of 25", but just for context: With approximately 1,600 employees, the HHS-OIG performs audits, investigations, and evaluations to recommend policy for decision-makers and the public.
- ZeroGravitas 2y ago
  There's OIGs for different departments. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Inspector_General_(United_States) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Inspector_General_(U...
  - wruza 2y ago
    I quoted this exact article. It seems almost a tradition to fire all heads of OIGs after elections, from all sorts of presidents.
    - BryantD 2y ago
      The cited examples are Reagan and Bush, both of whom relented to some degree after Congress pushed back. Obama fired one IG, with stated cause. And of course, in 2022, Congress passed a law requiring 30 days advance notice to Congress. So perhaps traditional but also fairly clearly violating the 2022 law.