Trump Rejects Noem's Claim About Being Aware Of a Controversial Multi-Million Contract At DHS Amid Reports He Could Fire Her

President Donald Trump rejected a claim from Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem about him being aware of a controversial multi-million contract subcontracted to one of her allies. "I never knew anything about it," Trump told Reuters.

The remark seems to put Noem on thin ice, especially considering reports that he is considering firing her.

The National Review detailed that Trump is "privately furious" at Noem for suggesting in a Senate Judiciary Committee testimony this week that he gave advanced approval to the add campaign, which cost $220 million and was subcontracted to one of her allies. Noem repeatedly affirmed Trump had given the green light despite repeated questioning from senators, including Republicans.

The situation has led Trump to consider replacing Noem, and he has floated Oklahoma's junior Senator Markwayne Mullin as a possibility, the outlet added.

Elsewhere, Punchbowl News reported on Thursday that Trump was asking congressional Republicans whether he should fire Noem.

The official has faced several controversies throughout her tenure, including one about strained relationships with the U.S. Coast Guard over different decisions. One of them involved a verbal directive aimed at redirecting resources away from a search-and-rescue mission for a missing service member.

The relationship between the DHS secretary and senior Coast Guard leadership has deteriorated further in recent months as Noem oversaw a tenfold increase in the use of Coast Guard aircraft for immigrant deportations, straining already limited resources, the sources said.

Noem could also face an impeachment vote, as over a hundred Democrats in the House signed on to such a petition earlier this year. The articles in question accuse Noem of three counts: Obstruction of Congress, Violation of public trust and Self-dealing.

The first one involves cases when lawmakers were prevented from entering DHS facilities and withheld congressionally appropriated disaster relief funding. The second is in regards ICE's denial of due process and violation of First and Fourth amendments to detainees. And the third involves the mentioned contract.