“As an Inspector General, I was legally obligated to ensure that whistleblowers had an effective and authorized means to disclose urgent matter.”
Michael Atkinson, the intelligence community inspector general.
| J. Scott Applewhite, File/AP Photo
By KYLE CHENEY 04/05/2020
The intelligence community watchdog removed abruptly late Friday by President Donald Trump says he believes Trump ousted him because of his evenhanded handling of a whistleblower complaint that ultimately led to the president's impeachment.
"It is hard not to think that the President’s loss of confidence in me derives from my having faithfully discharged my legal obligations as an independent and impartial Inspector General," Michael Atkinson, the intelligence community inspector general said in a statement Sunday, "and from my commitment to continue to do so."
Atkinson was the federal official who revealed to Congress in September the existence of a whistleblower complaint against Trump, which indicated that the president improperly pressured Ukraine to investigate his political rivals. When Atkinson sought to share that complaint with Congress under a federal whistleblower law, the White House and Justice Department intervened and blocked the transmission of the complaint for days.
Ultimately, amid withering pressure, Trump provided the whistleblower complaint to Congress, as well as a transcript of a July 2019 call with Ukraine's president, two pieces of evidence that became crucial factors in the House's decision to impeach Trump for abuse of power. The Senate later acquitted him on a nearly party-line vote.
"As an Inspector General, I was legally obligated to ensure that whistleblowers had an effective and authorized means to disclose urgent matters involving classified information to the congressional intelligence committees, and that when they did blow the whistle in an authorized manner, their identities would be protected as a guard against reprisals," Atkinson said in his statement. "Inspectors General are able to fulfill their critical watchdog functions because, by law, they are supposed to be independent of both the Executive agencies they oversee and of Congress."
Trump informed the House and Senate Intelligence Committees late Friday that he would be removing Atkinson after a required 30-day wait. But Atkinson was immediately placed on administrative leave, according to congressional sources, effectively circumventing the one-month delay. The move has prompted some Senate Republicans to demand more details about Atkinson's removal.
Trump indicated in his letters that he had lost confidence in Atkinson but didn't explain why. When asked about the matter at a Saturday press conference, though, Trump cited Atkinson's handling of the whistleblower complaint. Though Trump has repeatedly assailed the complaint as false, many of the underlying details were corroborated by a string of State Department and White Hopuse witnesses during impeachment hearings.
“I thought he did a terrible job. Absolutely terrible,” Trump said of Atkinson on Saturday at a press conference, adding, “He took this terrible, inaccurate whistleblower report and he brought it to Congress."
Atkinson's ouster occurred as Trump moved to remake the ranks of inspectors general, naming a handful to vacant posts late Friday. He also nominated a White House attorney, Brian Miller, to the newly created post of special inspector general for pandemic recovery. The position, created as part of the $2 trillion coronavirus relief law signed late last month, is meant to oversee a $500 billion fund in the Treasury Department meant to stabilize the economy. Though Miller, a former federal inspector general, won plaudits from some transparency advocates, the pick drew quick criticism from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, who questioned whether a White House attorney could demonstrate independence from the president.
Trump's removal of Atkinson also drew a quick brushback from the Justice Department's current inspector general, Michael Horowitz, who heads a council of fellow IGs. Horowitz emphasized that Atkinson was widely respected in the IG community and was seen as having handled the Ukraine whistleblower complaint "by the book."
Atkinson, who remained silent through the impeachment process despite attacks from Trump allies in Congress, defended his handling of the whistleblower complaint.
"Those of us who vowed to protect a whistleblower’s right to safely be heard must, to the end, do what we promised to do, no matter how difficult and no matter the personal consequences," he wrote. "I will be forever grateful to the many public officials and others who fight tirelessly and consistently, in words and deeds, in ordinary and extraordinary matters, to protect the rights of all whistleblowers and, in turn, the best interests of the United States."
---30---
One senator called Trump's decision to fire Michael Atkinson “terrible on a lot of levels," while another didn't appear bothered by it.
GUESS WHICH ONE WAS THE REPUBLICAN
Sen. Angus King. | Carolyn Kaster/AP Photo
By ANDREW DESIDERIO and BURGESS EVERETT
04/06/2020 POLITICO
Sen. Angus King. | Carolyn Kaster/AP Photo
By ANDREW DESIDERIO and BURGESS EVERETT
04/06/2020 POLITICO
Senators are responding to President Donald Trump’s firing of the intelligence community’s top watchdog with a muddled message, with some calling for hearings and others saying lawmakers have far more important issues to tackle.
The scattershot response suggests Congress is unlikely to urgently address Trump’s decision to sack Michael Atkinson, the intelligence community’s inspector general — and it underscores how difficult it will be for the Senate and House to conduct oversight of the surprising firing, especially in the middle of the coronavirus pandemic.
But the matter is an urgent priority to some, including Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), who said the Senate should hold a hearing.
King, who sits on the powerful Senate Intelligence Committee, said officials such as Acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell and Atkinson himself — whom Trump fired late Friday night — should be put under oath.
“It should be an open hearing to have members of the administration come forward and provide an explanation,” King, who caucuses with the Democrats, said in a phone interview, calling Trump’s decision to fire Atkinson “terrible on a lot of levels.”
Trump has defended the firing, telling reporters on Saturday during a White House coronavirus task force briefing that the longtime public official was a “total disgrace” for the way he handled a whistleblower complaint that led to the president’s impeachment.
But King cautioned that even a public hearing might not yield many answers because “this was a decision made principally by the president, probably without consulting much of anyone else.”
“We don’t need to know why he did it — he said it. The president yesterday said it!” King quipped.
A spokeswoman for Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr (R-N.C.) did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the panel’s plans. The Senate is scheduled to return to regular session on April 20, but several senators have cast doubt on that timeline given the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has yet to comment on Atkinson’s removal.
Meanwhile, Atkinson released a lengthy statement Sunday night about his firing, asserting that Trump removed him simply for doing his job.
“It is hard not to think that the president’s loss of confidence in me derives from my having faithfully discharged my legal obligations as an independent and impartial Inspector General,” Atkinson wrote.
Democrats have condemned the firing as an abuse of power and a brazen act of politically motivated retribution by a president emboldened after the Senate acquitted him in his impeachment trial. Republicans have been tepid in their criticism of the action, but some, including Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, said the firing “demands an explanation,” while others largely deferred to the president’s unorthodox leadership style.
“Obviously those people serve at the pleasure of the president and as is usually the case, it’s not something that we have any control over,” said Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), the GOP whip. “The president made it pretty clear why he did. But he has the prerogative. We don’t always have to agree with his actions. As we’ve learned in the past he’s going to do what he’s to do.”
Thune said it was too early to assess whether the firing was unwarranted: “I want to talk to the people who are close to it and get some context on it. I don’t understand it at this point. But that’s a question for another day when I can figure out what went into it.”
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), who presided over a pro forma session of the Senate on Monday morning, also said more information was needed.
“I think we should get more detail. I agree with that,” she said. “It’s such an odd time it’s hard to say how we’re going to get that info — I mean, you know what kind of priority that information is going to have — but I think that’ll all come out.”
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), a top Trump ally, said he was more consumed with reforming the foreign surveillance courts than Atkinson’s firing. But he also made clear it didn’t trouble him, either: “I don’t necessarily have any issues with it.”
“My view is that this is the president’s decision, it’s a decision that’s his to make. It doesn’t give me enormous heartburn,” Hawley said in an interview on Monday. “It’s not the main issue.”
The scattershot response suggests Congress is unlikely to urgently address Trump’s decision to sack Michael Atkinson, the intelligence community’s inspector general — and it underscores how difficult it will be for the Senate and House to conduct oversight of the surprising firing, especially in the middle of the coronavirus pandemic.
But the matter is an urgent priority to some, including Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), who said the Senate should hold a hearing.
King, who sits on the powerful Senate Intelligence Committee, said officials such as Acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell and Atkinson himself — whom Trump fired late Friday night — should be put under oath.
“It should be an open hearing to have members of the administration come forward and provide an explanation,” King, who caucuses with the Democrats, said in a phone interview, calling Trump’s decision to fire Atkinson “terrible on a lot of levels.”
Trump has defended the firing, telling reporters on Saturday during a White House coronavirus task force briefing that the longtime public official was a “total disgrace” for the way he handled a whistleblower complaint that led to the president’s impeachment.
But King cautioned that even a public hearing might not yield many answers because “this was a decision made principally by the president, probably without consulting much of anyone else.”
“We don’t need to know why he did it — he said it. The president yesterday said it!” King quipped.
A spokeswoman for Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr (R-N.C.) did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the panel’s plans. The Senate is scheduled to return to regular session on April 20, but several senators have cast doubt on that timeline given the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has yet to comment on Atkinson’s removal.
Meanwhile, Atkinson released a lengthy statement Sunday night about his firing, asserting that Trump removed him simply for doing his job.
“It is hard not to think that the president’s loss of confidence in me derives from my having faithfully discharged my legal obligations as an independent and impartial Inspector General,” Atkinson wrote.
Democrats have condemned the firing as an abuse of power and a brazen act of politically motivated retribution by a president emboldened after the Senate acquitted him in his impeachment trial. Republicans have been tepid in their criticism of the action, but some, including Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, said the firing “demands an explanation,” while others largely deferred to the president’s unorthodox leadership style.
“Obviously those people serve at the pleasure of the president and as is usually the case, it’s not something that we have any control over,” said Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), the GOP whip. “The president made it pretty clear why he did. But he has the prerogative. We don’t always have to agree with his actions. As we’ve learned in the past he’s going to do what he’s to do.”
Thune said it was too early to assess whether the firing was unwarranted: “I want to talk to the people who are close to it and get some context on it. I don’t understand it at this point. But that’s a question for another day when I can figure out what went into it.”
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), who presided over a pro forma session of the Senate on Monday morning, also said more information was needed.
“I think we should get more detail. I agree with that,” she said. “It’s such an odd time it’s hard to say how we’re going to get that info — I mean, you know what kind of priority that information is going to have — but I think that’ll all come out.”
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), a top Trump ally, said he was more consumed with reforming the foreign surveillance courts than Atkinson’s firing. But he also made clear it didn’t trouble him, either: “I don’t necessarily have any issues with it.”
“My view is that this is the president’s decision, it’s a decision that’s his to make. It doesn’t give me enormous heartburn,” Hawley said in an interview on Monday. “It’s not the main issue.”
---30---
No comments:
Post a Comment