The Freakout Over 'Big Balls' and DOGE
Plus: NYC trans medicine protest, airplane collision (again), and more...

Mainstream media apoplectic that Trump is doing things he promised: "President [Donald] Trump's administration deepened its pressure campaign on government employees to resign before a Thursday deadline, rattling and angering a civil service steeling itself for a prolonged battle with Elon Musk and his ongoing foray into the federal bureaucracy," reads a New York Times lede on the buyouts. The deadline is today, when federal employees may decide to voluntarily leave and be paid through September 30.
"Trump's gut-it-all plan for D.C.'s 'Deep State,'" reads an Axios headline, noting that "Trump promised during his campaign to root out the 'Deep State'—generally framed as institutional resistance in D.C. that impedes his agenda," and lamenting that "the speed and tactics of Trump's vengeance-fueled cost-cutting efforts have been surprising." A longer, more alarmist Politico feature posits that "the widespread political purges of the early 1950s echo clearly today" and that "seventy years ago, the reasonable pretext of hunting Soviet agents opened the way to a yearslong, paranoid campaign, motivated by outlandish conspiracy theories, that destroyed countless careers but did nothing to improve America's security."
You are reading Reason Roundup, our daily, morning newsletter.
Get your daily news roundup from Liz Wolfe and Reason.
Meanwhile, Wired is attempting to drum up opposition for the team of young and talented engineers Musk has hired to help him cull the federal government computer systems of waste and inefficiency. Note the deference to "experts" here:
NEW: Experts question whether Edward Coristine, a DOGE staffer who has gone by "Big Balls" online, would pass the background check typically required for access to sensitive US government systems. https://t.co/Tc0PEWQ0H1
— WIRED (@WIRED) February 6, 2025
I'll grant that everyone's playing their part perfectly: It's not like these publications were going to welcome the Elon Musk–helmed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), heralding the cuts as some huge accomplishment (though Wired used to seemingly be on the side of engineers). But as Hoover Institution economist John Cochrane told Zach Weissmueller and me yesterday on our show Just Asking Questions, it's not really about the cost-savings right now. Something more symbolic is happening here, where Trump, ever a showman, is bringing everyone's attention to the rampant government waste that we've come to accept as standard.
Trump should do this via the proper mechanisms, and he should respect constitutional limits on his power. So far, he has not done a good job of that. But the gutting of the federal government and cutting it down to size, should not be reflexively opposed; perhaps people should instead feel disrespected when their taxpayer dollars are used to fund diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) workplace initiatives in Serbia (even if it is just a drop in the bucket). But many of these things are third-rail issues for liberals: "Defund NPR," writes Musk in a representative tweet. "It should survive on its own." (Over here at Reason, we've been beating this drum for a while.)
Musk has said publicly in the last few days that he intends to "make rapid safety upgrades" to air traffic control following high-profile aviation disasters. And "Musk's team was also spotted at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, where they obtained access to the agency's computer systems to search for programs and staff tied to diversity policies that the Trump administration has vowed to stamp out," per The New York Times.
"In an email to some federal employees Tuesday," reports Politico, "a commissioner at a department overseen by Musk's allies warned of the impending pain if they don't leave. Josh Gruenbaum, who manages the Federal Acquisition Service at the General Services Administration, said that 'we won't need staff in certain areas of the country' and 'will be cutting redundant business functions and associated staffing.' He said 'we're also considering how we can utilize AI in our portfolios.'" Though employees who are concerned about whether the federal government will uphold their portion of the buyout deal deserve clarity and assurances, all of the efficiency focus seems perfectly defensible—perhaps even what the federal government should have been focused on all along.
Scenes from New York: People are protesting NYU Langone hospital for complying with Donald Trump's executive order and ceasing their administration of puberty blockers to children.
QUICK HITS
- "A majority of the justices tend toward a unitary conception of the executive branch, which treats the president as supreme within his domain, but toward limits on executive power in the interbranch struggle," writes Yuval Levin at National Review. "That's how the same Court, in the same term, can overturn Chevron deference (constraining the power of executive agencies to interpret the meanings of laws) while reinforcing executive privilege (guarding the freedom of the president to exercise his power as chief executive)."
- Trump might not be an isolationist; he instead looks a bit like a sovereigntist, writes Jennifer Mittelstadt.
- "The right wing of Japan Airlines Flight 68 struck the tail of Delta Air Lines Flight 1921 while the planes were taxiing at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport," yesterday per the Federal Aviation Administration. Nobody was injured. This follows last week's major accident in which a commercial plane and a Black Hawk helicopter collided midair, seemingly due to air traffic control failures, killing 67 people in Washington, D.C.
- Trump signed an executive order banning transgender men from competing in women's sports; if schools allow this, they risk Title IX investigations and loss of federal funding. I've never competed in team sports, but I spend a lot of free time in male-dominated sports—I surf, skateboard (poorly), and run—and any female athlete of any variety is aware of how high-impact contact with biological males presents a real risk to safety.
- Weissmueller and I did Pirate Wires:
- Bad news:
Bloomberg Economics calculates that tariff uncertainty will cut US industrial production by 1 percent by May 2026: https://t.co/bSIXnXj3UO pic.twitter.com/ZXQSzeE41i
— Scott Lincicome (@scottlincicome) February 5, 2025
- Look, I'm not especially sympathetic to federal employees (ahem), but this is a massive problem:
A federal worker sent me audio of a call that HR did today with staff about "deferred resignation" agreements offered by DOGE … I think this is pretty well understood by now but helps confirm what many suspect
The audio goes:
Employee: Lets say I accept the agreement tomorrow…
— Jeff Stein (@JStein_WaPo) February 5, 2025
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Mainstream media apoplectic that Trump is doing things he promised...
The liar.
See? We were warned to take him literally.
*furrows brow and looks around confusedly*
Reason: HE'S NOT GOING THROUGH THE PROPER PROCESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The strange thing is, Trump and Musk actually are going through the proper process. If you read the EO creating DOGE, it merely modifies an older, Obama EO creating the United States Digital Service, even keeping the same acronym.
Linked to an explanation down below regarding this.
But here again.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1887038847629877714.html
Good stuff, thanks. But I generally find xcancel easier to read than threadreaderapp, FWIW.
This is hilarious beyond all belief. NPR and the like are losing their fucking minds and it is all done properly and legally. They are lying through their teeth that it is unconstitutional for the whole world to see.
Keep giving them rope...
And pink slips.
its the "Proper Process" that lets the buracracy stop anything form getting done. teh Process was tried by Reagan and then Bush even Al Gore they had lots of paper work showing what needed to be done but none of it was ever completed. that Said bush did reduce military bases which were mainly in California which made the S&L recession worse
"We want a powerful, proactive President to take decisive actions and fulfill the peoples' demands!"
"Wait, not that President!"
“Or those peoples’ demands!”
Go ahead and include 90% of the Reasonista staff, since they are angling for invites to the same cocktail parties
President [Donald] Trump's administration deepened its pressure campaign on government employees to resign before a Thursday deadline, rattling and angering a civil service...
The deep state, it turns out, wasn't deep enough to protect itself.
no cockroach can resist the light.
edit: which may be why they tried real hard to nuke war us last year
I have been saying since the beginning that our support of Ukraine looked like a deliberate incitement.
murdering everybody one at a time who shot Seth Rich entirely more difficult than torching half the planet
Was interesting seeing reason worry about censorship yesterday, but only apparently for major news media and their licensing status.
Often ignored by reason was the criminal threats with censorship that occurred under Biden. The best example is Mackey. But another is Project Veritas.
So while worrying about Trump and censorship, they missed the story of the DoJ dropping charges against people in Priject Veritas over Ashley Bidens diary. Reminder, they reported the diary to the FBI but still had their homes raided, phones seized, and were threatened with felonies.
https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/doj-will-not-bring-charges-against-project-veritas-reporters-who-tried
Reason worries only about "bad" censorship.
And they need to be brought up on charges for violation of civil rights.
"Following orders" did not work for Nazis and won't work for the Gestapo unleashed by Biden.
Apparently we are up to 40k federal workers agreeing to leave.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/least-40000-fed-workers-accept-doge-buyout-deadline-looms-tonight
A good start.
It is a good start. Now send everyone who didn't take it an email that if they don't show up in the office next week they are fired.
Notorious anti trump federal judge about to issue injunction against DOGE auditing government.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/judge-appears-likely-to-block-doge-from-accessing-treasury-department-records/ar-AA1ytIcg?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=07585efb96954fc2c74148cbceffe6da&ei=29
This is the judge who gave an elderly woman in bad health 2 years for standing in an abortion clinic hallway then mocked her religion.
I would question what law could POTENTIALLY be fired due to something getting audited.
Trump should ignore the judge and allow her to enforce her ruling.
>>ignore the judge and allow her to enforce her ruling
call. the. bluff.
Maybe the judge could try "mean tweeting". If Trump could cause a Constitutional crisis with tweets, it should work for her as well, right?
"the notorious anti-Trump judge blocked me ... but she can't stop me"
Just pardon himself. Right?
" A longer, more alarmist Politico feature posits that...
I would expect a Libertarian mag to mention Politico after yesterday's revelation, but not cite its bullshit. Twice.
Good Liz apparently still likes quoting the NYT and WaPo too, not understanding that the obstacle is their agenda, not their paywalls.
Better Liz would find less biased sources, or at least other sources to try to balance it out.
I think KMW makes whoever writes the roundup do so.
Liz at least posts from not state media as well. She almost seems to be sneaking it in at times. Usually through a tweet.
Her tweets are decidedly more libertarian than the Roundup.
So are the comments.
betterliz is at citizenfreepress two weeks ahead of the other lizzes
Remember when Politico leaked the Dobbs decision and conservative Supreme Court justices were almost assassinated?
Turns out that was govt-funded
It's okay because democrats did it first.
And they used public funds.
With good intentions.
Another person our glorious FBI cant find just like the J6 Pipe bomber or any info on any of the people who tried to assinate Trump but dam if you were in DC on J6 they know everything about you
I'll grant that everyone's playing their part perfectly: It's not like these publications were going to welcome the Elon Musk–helmed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), heralding the cuts as some huge accomplishment (though Wired used to seemingly be on the side of engineers)
Reason is doing their part too. Quickly issuing libertarian sounding articles to dismantle various federal agencies and cut spending, then spend even more articles attacking Trump and DOGE for doing so.
Trump should do this via the proper mechanisms, and he should respect constitutional limits on his power.
Reason should do homework a day actually go look into the long history of Congress modifying the article II powers of the executive and how in many cases what is accepted as valid is overturned by the courts. They should stop thinking Congress is king and not a coequal branch.
The Impoundment Act is one of the most notorious acts to limit the power to reform or aduti federal spending. It is likely unconstitutional. Just like some of the other Congressional modifications on the executive like CFPB or other limits. They even threatened impeachment for firing political appointees.
Maybe Reason should take a look at the actual constitutional questions instead of blindly agreeing with the leftist interpretation of federal structure.
You can't praise Millei but then yell process to limit what you claim to want here.
You can start here.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1887038847629877714.html
Jesse recognizes no limits on Trump's power. To him Trump is a monarch. And anyone who says otherwise is a leftist.
That's an unfair summary of Jesse's post. There are very legitimate debates over the scope of the President's power under Article II, with the most obvious being where does executive power begin and legislative power end.
It's pretty clear. Congress writes the law and the executive faithfully executes it, whether they like the law or not. That's because we're supposed to be a nation of laws, not of men. But that's not what Trump or his defenders want. They want a nation ruled by men who are above the law.
See, you understand they have different constitutional duties, yet you can't understand the point Congress is limited in how they can direct the executive to execute the duties.
You actually literally made my point. You're just too dumb to realize it.
Dumb or partisan? How many times did Sarc complain about the excesses of Biden's regime?
Plenty. But no one bookmarks those comments because they contradict the narrative.
You went to great lengths to excuse Biden's excess with the secret documents.
He defended Biden as recognizing the constitution and told us to have faith in institutions.
The Constitution puts very few limits on how it direct the executive branch. The entire executive branch other than the president and vp were created by Congress.
The entire executive branch other than the president and vp were created by Congress.
Yup. Which means that only Congress can tear it down.
Funded by, not micromanaged by.
Congress can not modify article II powers.
God damn shrike.
Congress has delegated its power to the executive in the form of agencies that write regulation. Those regulation-writing agencies only exist because of laws passed by Congress.
If you really had a problem with regulations then you would be demanding that Congress repeal those laws. But you don't. You have a problem when Democrats write regulations, but no problems at all when Republicans do.
You don't want to drain the swamp. You just want a swamp that does Trump's bidding.
The proof of this is that you attack anyone who suggests that those powers be taken away from the executive.
I'm for shrinking the power of all branches of government, obviously this includes the executive. But literally No one besides trump has shown any interest in doing so.
Molly.
Godiva.
Is.
A.
Lefty.
Total.
Ignoramus.
Who.
Is.
Full.
Of.
Shit.
And should fuck off and die.
Hint, asshole: The three branches were established by the Constitution, you ignorant piece of shit.
Here comes the daily straw delivery.
It sucks.
Nice to see you guys bonding over your hatred of me. Too bad you can't bond over limited government or basic economics.
We don’t hate you, Sarc, we pity you. We pity the fact you’re a drunk idiot who parrots talking points from the mainstream media and is too stupid to figure out the basic meaning of terms like “ad hominem”.
Don't forget the part where his family hates him. We pity him for that too.
It's OK, Democrats failed to "faithfully execute" the laws for years first and you seldom seemed to worry about it and often lauded their flouting of the laws.
You whine and cry when I mock you by saying "It's ok, Democrats did it first."
Then you literally say it's ok because Democrats did it first.
And you guys accuse me of having no self awareness. lol
You’re the twit who uses it as a daily strawman.
Oh, so when you said "It's OK Democrats did it first" you *weren't* saying it was OK, you were making some sort of mocking statement? And here I thought it was just you agreeing that Democrats actions tend to bite them, like supporting the nuclear option for appointees, then complaining about it when the other side uses the nuclear option for appointees. Or "Elections have consequences, and I won." Or "I have a pen and a phone." Not to mention, the basic notion that if the other side changes the rules, then it seems strategically sound to learn how to use the new rules to your own advantage. There's even an several very old adages "Live by the sword, die by the sword" not to mention "What's good for the goose is good for the gander", "What goes around, comes around", "sow the wind and reap the whirlwind", and "Karma's a bitch".
Since you can't manage the reading comprehension: I was mocking your catchphrase by pretending to take it literally and to call you out for hypocrisy.
I've already given you the nod when I agreed (https://reason.com/2025/02/03/stupid-trade-war/?comments=true#comment-10898951) that Trump needs to back up these actions by seeking legislative change, you're not wrong about the potential for XO's to be tossed by the next Democrat who reaches the office.
But your constant one-sided harping is just so many crocodile tears.
And here I thought it was just you agreeing that Democrats actions tend to bite them, like supporting the nuclear option for appointees, then complaining about it when the other side uses the nuclear option for appointees.
No, my point was the Republicans bitch and moan when Democrats do something that is bad or wrong, and then when they do the exact same thing they justify it by saying the other team did it first.
I've already given you the nod when I agreed...
Be careful agreeing with me. That's a sure way to get the troll brigade up your ass and leaving a dozen antagonistic turds on every single one of your comments.
No, my point was the Republicans bitch and moan when Democrats do something that is bad or wrong, and then when they do the exact same thing they justify it by saying the other team did it first.
Unfortunately the reality is that to do otherwise (not to use their (D) new normal ways to get their way) would be to lose ground continually- as they have done for decades. How does one correct the pendulum swing if only one side gets to give it a push? [when you're not supposed to be giving it a push in the first place]
"No, my point was the Republicans bitch and moan when Democrats do something that is bad or wrong, and then when they do the exact same thing they justify it by saying the other team did it first."
To do otherwise is to bring a knife to a gun fight.
Once the rules have been changed, adapt or die.
Perhaps you can get the other side to admit that what they did was wrong and unroll those rule changes such they cannot be rolled forward again later...
leaving a dozen antagonistic turds on every single one of your comments.
It really is weird a guy only here to shit on every other commenter constantly whines that people are antagonistic in return. Left Wing Privilege: no matter how much they shit on everyone else they seem to really believe they deserve respect. Sarc is particularly notable for his whining about others engaging in ad hominems and schoolyard taunts as if that doesn't define him.
This is sarc were dealing with. You can assume he is coming from a dishonest and unfair view on a topic. Usually just restating what he heard on MSNBC or CNN.
Jesse and his ad hominem tautology.
If you only knew what an ad hominem is and how to apply the term properly.
He demonstrates almost daily that he does not understand fallacies. Jesse would have to dismiss a valid argument for it to be an ad hominem attack. If Sarc is just presenting his usual misinformed opinion, it is just a true statement.
Your record of posting has established this as a tautology. Get help, and you can reverse it. There's still time.
No, no, no!
Sarc needs to be reamed with a barb-wire-wrapped broomstick and then fuck off and die.
The world will be a better place.
And here we go with Sarc’s TDS and JDS.
It's revealing that he gets so angry about cutting spending.
Poor sarc.
You tried this same tactic with your sqrsly sock 8 years ago when he fired Comey.
Just as dumb then.
It's OK, because Democrats did it first. You keep telling us that!
Only reason I say that is because you guys believe it.
This is where sarc tells everyone what they are thinking.
Oh good. I really needed Sarc to tell me what I’m thinking,
So, Sarc, what am I really thinking?
Thanks for the link. All of the blather about Trump acting chaotically and violating the constitution is bullshit. The Trump team has spent years putting the plan together and they know exactly what they're doing. There will be multiple legal challenges and idiot district court judges will seek to block him but ultimately he's likely to prevail on most of his agenda.
There has not been an administration in my lifetime that had its shit together like this one does. Mostly because this is the first administration that was serious about putting a dent in the entrenched bureaucracy and cutting off the graft. Even if they were only targeting one side, the exercise would be well worth the effort.
It has been amazing to watch.
Their plan was Project 2025, which Trump lied about while campaigning. Also something well planned can also violate the Constitution.
This isn’t Project 2025, dumbass.
There's an amusing episode of Family Guy from around 2005 where Lois is running for school board. In the debate she just constantly drops "9/11" any time she wants to emotionally win an argument. The unsophisticated dolts in the audience would lap it up. It was a good skewering of the neo-cons who would invoke 9/11 at every opportunity to justify any government action.
The modern-day version of that would be "progressives" constantly saying "Project 2025" as though that is a convincing argument instead of the same type of sophistry as invoking 9/11 was to justify forever wars.
...seventy years ago, the reasonable pretext of hunting Soviet agents opened the way to a yearslong, paranoid campaign, motivated by outlandish conspiracy theories, that destroyed countless careers but did nothing to improve America's security.
America's security defined as what, I wonder.
Hard to believe it was 70 years ago we found out Trump was a Russin agent.
Isn't that when Joe Biden was a secret agent behind the Iron Curtain, working side-by-side with FDR and Abe Lincoln?
And McCarthy was proven correct
We aren’t rooting out “communists” this time, we are looking for money being wasted. Not the same.
True. Not all DC grifters are communists. Some are socialists.
And all are hypocrites. See: Sanders, Bernie for a picture.
Not "rooting out" in the sense of finding hidden people and agenda. They are now quite open about their subversive goals.
"A longer, more alarmist Politico feature posits that "the widespread political purges of the early 1950s echo clearly today" and that "seventy years ago, the reasonable pretext of hunting Soviet agents opened the way to a yearslong, paranoid campaign, motivated by outlandish conspiracy theories, that destroyed countless careers but did nothing to improve America's security."
I CAN'T IMAGINE WHY POLITICO WOULD WRITE THAT.
We do indeed appear to be funneling large sums of tax money to
Politico so that some bureaucrats can read left-wing journalists complain about Republicans
They have eight million reasons a year why DOGE sucks.
It is hilarious that they write this with a straight face when due to purges and not promoting conservatives, federal workers vote dem 80% of the time. They've been doing the purges administratively for decades.
seventy years ago, the reasonable pretext of hunting Soviet agents
LOL, are they really running with this? Because the conventional narrative for literal fucking decades was that McCarthy was full of shit and that there were no communists in the federal government, and even if there were, there weren't that many and it was a total witch hunt, and yeah there were a bunch of commies in the federal government at the time and that was a good thing, but that evil Richard Nixon put our boo Alger Hiss in jail.
"McCarthy was full of shit and that there were no communists in the federal government, and even if there were, there weren't that many and it was a total witch hunt"
Multiple history courses I had in both high school and college drilled this in like crazy. Between that and the years of propaganda from the media and the left (I repeat myself) I entered into adulthood thinking McCarthy was this horrible, evil kook.
In reality, he was absolutely right, and we would have been best served following his lead. You really can see how Duranty won a pulitzer with how skewed our media is and how actually infiltrated with marxists we are
McCarthy was right, but his tactics weren’t particularly good, IIRC.
McCarthy's main issue was that he had two overall fuckups--most of the list he waved around was old shit by that time, and a lot of the officials on the list had long been removed from their posts; and he went after the Army during a time when it had sky-high approval ratings by the public.
However, there were absolutely a bunch of communists in academia and government at the time. Various histories of academia complaining about that period confirm it, they state that these professors and admins were just trying to figure out how to keep their jobs so they could continue their subversion. The government ones were true believers that came on board during FDR's time in office.
I'm about 75% certain that Eisenhower actually arranged, behind the scenes, that infamous meeting where McCarthy got berated on camera by that grandstanding general, which ultimately broke his political influence.
The main issue here is that Eisenhower was focused on trying to get the Republicans past their skepticism about being part of the UN. Bear in mind that there were unironic, serious discussions in various parts of the western establishment regarding the need for world government, which the UN would presumably provide the framework to eventually make a reality. It's not an accident that Eisenhower had the Dulles brothers on his payroll, who were true believers in the concept. The last thing he needed was a gadfly and naysayer with a massive public profile like McCarthy undermining the whole project as a communist plot.
And in the real world going back to the 1920s, there was no real knowledge of what was happening in the USSR, unlike Germany, where street battles between Nazis and Communists were world news. Germany may have started the two wars with France (1870 and 1914) but it was a modern country with lots of culture. Compare that to Russia, which still had serfs until the Bolsheviks threw them out (that other revolution was a nothing burger as far as the peasants were concerned), the country was isolated, had very little culture, and used a funny alphabet which no one could even pretend to read. So Lenin and Stalin got the presumption of being the good guys, and Duranty pushed it for all he was worth, while Hitler operated in the public eye.
So it's hard to lay absolute blame on do-gooders for signing up with the Communist Party, and then came WW II, where the two years of the USSR helping Hitler were forgotten once Hitler stabbed them in the front, and the Pearl Harbor six months later made them our ally.
And then suddenly they weren't our ally any more, all those communists were faced with unpleasant truths, and floundered. I bet 90% of the people who joined the CPUSA before the Cold War never paid attention to their membership after that first signup, so why should they bother expressly cancelling it after 1945?
The problem with McCarthy was his random plinking instead of concentrating on the true believers, which gave his critics all the ammunition they needed to drown him.
The problem with McCarthy was his random plinking instead of concentrating on the true believers, which gave his critics all the ammunition they needed to drown him.
Good summation.
Arthur Herman wrote a pretty good book on Mccarthy. My thought is, the anti-communist pursuit was totally valid, and there were communists in the US government. The effort to root them out should have had a better spokesman than Mccarthy; he was bombastic and an alcoholic (not to the level of sarc, but still). But since he is the one who did it, so he deserves credit.
Funny Liz actually quotes Politico but doesn't point this out. I guess she doesn't read the comments.
"No body here but us chickens!" Politico writes.
Also, $10,000,000 to Reuters for social engineering
No, really. Social engineering.
Why do you think American universities produced millions of social "science" graduates?
NASA bought $500000 worth of Politico subscriptions last year. Someone needs to be fired for that, obviously. The whole U SAID is rotten and indefensible.
It's not just Politico and Reuters. The Associated Press has been raking in millions of dollars in government money for years.
The AP's bias also makes perfect sense.
No wonder these media companies don't act like they are beholden to the American people, let alone obligated to report the truth or hold the U.S. government accountable.
They're getting millions of government dollars in subscription and media contracts. Makes sense.
In my local papers this morning, it was obvious that the AP was pissed about losing their federal funding. Every fucking article from them was either anti-Trump, anti-Musk, or anti-both.
*Reason looks around nervously*
+1
right ... are the Kochs on the list too?
Hey, how can we have a robust state media without robust state funding?
So it was a typical day?
Notice all these outlets are the ones Jeff demands be the only cites used.
It’s almost as if Jeffy is on the take as well.
He's going to be out of a job if Media Matters doesn't find a replacement sugar daddy ASAP.
He went a bit berserkers last night. It’s almost as if he can sense the jig is up and he’s flailing about with as much retarded shit as he can.
Not just that, but USAID was providing them with the narratives to push. It's why all their Operation Mockingbird crap sounded the same for decades, and then really ramped up after Obama put his creatures in the agency.
Perhaps USAID was the mission command of the whole propaganda operation? Dole out the money and deliver the talking points.
It's like Rubio was saying and that USAID official that got narced out by O'Keefe confirmed--they sincerely believed that they were a government unto themselves, and didn't have to answer to anyone.
They don't even consider themselves to be Americans, because any kind of patriotic feeling is bad. They're "citizens of the world," aka a bunch of rootless cosmopolitans, with no loyalty to the country, just their stupid marxist political theology.
Hell, we are funding the BBC.
Why in the blue hell are we funding the BBC at all, much less 8% of their budget?
Don’t they already get enough in TV licensing fees from their own subjects?
So, as I understand it now, the USAID funds went to BBC Media Action, which is supposedly "separate" from the BBC. I don't know if I accept that it's completely separate from the BBC. I looked up an article about this just now, and I got this seemingly propagandistic claim about BBC Media Action:
The charity, which supports press freedom around the world, recently received a $750,000 donation from Jack Dorsey.
Freedom of the press is about not being beholden to a government. It's rather contradictory to be getting large sums of money from the biggest government in the history of the world in order to promote independent media, and that's if there were absolutely no strings attached to the money. But the US isn't going to give out large sums of money and receive nothing in return, so it's pretty clear there were strings attached.
A majority of the justices tend toward a unitary conception of the executive branch, which treats the president as supreme within his domain...
But, that would mean the Executive is Trump's kingdom!?! That people there serve at the pleasure of their president???
But what if Trump is not "their" President?
USAID Funded NY Times, BBC Too
The BBC isn't happy to be outed.
Can it really be called a Free Press if it's bought by the government and paid for by taxpayers?
Sure, if by "free" they mean unencumbered by tacky free market constraints on funding.
Didn't they get mad a while ago when someone called them government funded media?
Edit: This was in 2023 and hilariously, Elon is involved here as well. https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-65226481
Yup, the BBC actual "news" enterprise is totes separate from the BBC foundation.
"They didn't give money to the Clintons, they gave it to the 'Clinton foundation'"
Same energy
I'm sure if Trump directed USAID to give millions to Elon Musk's "X Media Action charity" (which is totally, 10000% separate from X, lol) that the Dems would say that's fine.
The right wing of Japan Airlines Flight 68 struck the tail of Delta Air Lines Flight 1921 while the planes were taxiing at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport...
How many DEI hires do we have in aviation???????
Asian culture leading to aviation accidents has been studied!
https://commons.erau.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1143&context=student-works
Delta dei hire combined with Asian drivers.... It was inevitable
At least it wasn't the far-right and alt-right wings of Japan Airlines Flight 68.
Hey, it was Right Wing. And it was hitting on Tail.
So it was trump’s plane?
It's too bad it didn't involve American Airlines. If it did, we would likely see the following headline on the NY Times:
"The American Right Wing Caused an Airport Disaster"
I love how it's cool to talk about aviation accidents now, sort of like how the price of eggs suddenly became a topic of discussion in polite company.
Well, Japanese pilots do have a tradition of crashing into things.
that took me a second to get HAHA
Glorious Nippon airplanes, folded over 1000 times.
Why did USAID give $68+ million to the World Economic Forum?
Lots of soros linked groups are appearing on this deep dive too.
A shit-ton, and it's not a coincidence given that Soros was front and center in getting Obama elected, and why Obama suspiciously acted like a Manchurian candidate in so many ways during his time in office. It's because he was acting as front for Soros.
It's also why the Dems have no standing to be crying about Musk. Unlike Obama and Soros, Trump is allowing Musk to act out in the open instead of pretending like there's no association there.
It's not surprising at all. A lot of the commentariat and like-minded people knew that Soros and his ilk were spending millions setting up NGOs so they could "influence" bureaucrats and politicians to pump billions into them, but it's nice to see numbers put to the graft.
This is wild:
90% of Ukraine’s media is funded by CIA cut-out USAID
I assume the other 10% is covered by CIA cut-out NED
Washington has saturation propaganda control of a country of 40 million people
Source: Reporters Without Borders
One would say that Ukraine is a puppet state of the Deep State.
It absolutely is, and one that's set up specifically for them to use as a forward operating base to try and take down Putin, with the presumed intent that Russia would be run in the aftermath by another Yeltsin-like puppet, or broken up entirely so the west could control the various areas for their natural resources.
It may have been cheaper to just airdrop pamphlets. What happened to the classics?
In an email to some federal employees Tuesday," reports Politico,
You misspelled USAID
Chelsea Clinton casually taking home $84 million
If you are wondering where your Taxpayer Money is, it’s in the Clinton Foundation Bank Accounts!!
The #1 beneficiary of USAID in the world is the Clinton Foundation.
Imagine that!!
I wish I could say I was surprised, but, unfortunately, I cannot.
There's a perfectly reasonable explanation for this.
Trump/Musk should be going thru congress anyway.
You're a fascist.
-sarcjeff.
Fuck you, cut spending.
Wait, we didn't mean THAT spending!!
-sarc
Trump signed an executive order banning transgender men from competing in women's sports; if schools allow this, they risk Title IX investigations and loss of federal funding.
THAT'S NOT HOW TITLE IX WAS SUPPOSED TO BE USED.
It was explicitly written to put (primarily) black college boys into impossible kangaroo courts for one night stands with damaged college girls.
My girlfriend is college went to a title IX informational lecture, and they gave out T-shirts. I literally ripped it off her body when I saw her wearing it. She thought it as funny.
Scott Lincicome
@scottlincicome
·
Follow
Bloomberg Economics calculates that tariff uncertainty will cut US industrial production by 1 percent by May 2026: https://bloomberg.com/news/newslette
Good thing we know economic models have never been wrong, there aren't competing models that just assume and measure those assumptions, and aren't used to just push whatever belief you hold. Always choose the one that agrees with you. Confirmation bias for the win.
You don't need an economic model to know that businesses like predictability.
Business that don't plan for disruption or have risk plans are failed businesses.
Have you ever done any work on the financial side of a large business? It doesn't appear so.
Economics is rarely predictable. Please tell me the business prediction leading to Fartcoin getting a billion dollar market cap.
If economics was predictable like you desire, the number of bankruptcy estimates wouldn't be where it is. Your economics view is closer to socialism than it is capitalism. Seemingly thinking economics can be centrally controlled and predicted.
An economist will always tell you tomorrow, why what he predicted today didn't come true.
WTF? Is "tariff uncertainty" like the food and housing uncertainty bullshit? Once actual hunger numbers were down low enough to declare victory, the social justice crowd invented "uncertainty" to skew public perception.
My favorite part is the tariff costs are much less than the regulatory growth of the last 4 years... where's the models about regulatory uncertainty?
And if the WORST the model can find is 1% --- we can probably handle it just fine.
People are protesting NYU Langone hospital for complying with Donald Trump's executive order and ceasing their
administration of puberty blockers tocastration of children"If you aren't protesting with a sucking chest wound, a ruptured appendix, or terminal cancer, you're just a poseur." - Steely-eyed Unvaccinated American
Bloomberg Economics calculates that tariff uncertainty will cut US industrial production by 1 percent...
They're using the same computer models that climate scientists use.
Tariffs accelerate climate change!
No idea, but I wonder if jeffsarc’s whine production effects climate change.
Look, I'm not especially sympathetic to federal employees (ahem), but this is a massive problem:
Sounds like federal worker incompetence, not something nefarious.
They are signing a contract. HR is not a legal rep. So dumb fed workers gives bad information to another dumb fed worker. Cue outrage.
To be fair, something like this requires a pretty detailed breakdown of how it's going to be executed if a fed decides to take the deal. Elon's opening up the government to a pretty massive class action lawsuit if the people who resigned don't get their pay like the initial email promised.
I don't expect HR to be the ones to understand what they are agreeing to. They often just have the talking points.
Here's the graph for how taxpayer $$$ get to the Reason Foundation. As QB said ast night they look fairly clean (still haven't searched for Boehm).
The Foundation looks clean, but how about the magazine itself or specific writers such as Boehm and Sullum?
Here's the tool to search for names and entities. I've got to go to work now, but my first meeting is a short one.
https://datarepublican.com/officers/?officer_kw=governor+walz
Well, Cisco just blocked the cite as a phishing site and they blocked ability to report an incorrect block for it, so something pretty fuckey is going on at Cisco.
Can others here see if you can access the site?
I can get to it just fine on an iPhone.
Still blocked as a phishing site for me.
The sheer criminality of it all.
Odd. It works on my home computer as well, but I don't have Cisco either.
Really should look at the graph for Koch Industries. May do so later.
Again, not to explicitly implicate Boehm or Reason or whatever, and per their own sperg dunking retardation, this is, ideally, just the first domino in what is otherwise generally well-known or systemic corruption.
In 1994, Clinton signed the International Broadcasting Act, streamlining the Broadcast Board of Governors into the US Agency for Global Media. It wasn't even a footnote. Plenty of people's jobs got folded into the State Department or various foreign relations committees. No one batted an eye.
Then "all of the sudden": on January 19, 2021, the nonprofit Government Accountability Project, representing fired USAGM employees and whistleblowers, sent a letter to the congressional foreign affairs committees, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, and the Inspector General of the US Department of State. The letter said that Pack had hired the McGuireWoods law firm to investigate USAGM employees and the OTF at a cost of over $2 million in the last quarter of 2020, bypassing US government investigators including USAGM's own Office of Human Resources, and called for further investigation of what it termed a gross misuse of taxpayer dollars.[26] The Washington Post later reported that a second law firm, Caplin & Drysdale, had also been granted a similar no-bid contract in possible violation of federal contracting regulations for a total cost of $4 million.[27]
On January 20, 2021, journalist Kelu Chao was appointed acting CEO of the USAGM, replacing outgoing CEO Michael Pack.[28]
In September 2022, Amanda Bennett, a journalist and Pulitzer Prize-winning author, received bipartisan confirmation by the U.S. Senate to become CEO.[29] Bennett was sworn in as CEO on December 6, 2022.[30]
In January 2025 President Trump named a conservative critic of the mainstream media, L. Brent Bozell III, as his pick to run the U.S. Agency for Global Media[31]
"A million here, a million there, and pretty soon you’re talking real money." - Reagan, quoting Dirksen, when speaking about The Grace Commission
What we’re finding out in real time is the entire modern left is just smoke and mirrors.
There is no left wing voter base, all the elections are rigged and fake, all the liberal media outlets have no audience and are kept alive by USAID funding. All their politicians and political pundits are paid by USAID to say what the government wants.
The whole thing was a house of cards.
Saw that one yesterday. How much of the left wing voter base is six feet underground?
I was behind a car yesterday with a bumper sticker that said:
"When I die, please don't let me vote democrat"
My grandfather voted democrat for the first time in 60 years in 2020. He would have never done that while he was still alive.
Similar to one I heard a couple months ago:
"I just found out my grandmother voted for Kamala. I'm never going to visit her grave again."
50%. The other half were creamated
"ceasing their administration of puberty blockers to children."
ceasing what? Jeff said this wasnt happening
It is happening, and it's a good thing.
“That will never happen, and when it does, boy will you [homophobes, transphobes, racists, sexists, whatever] deserve it.”
The Law of Merited Impossibility
The coinage is Rod Dreher’s and goes back to the early debates on homosexual marriage. As Dreher formulates it, the Law of Merited Impossibility holds: “That will never happen, and when it does, boy will you [homophobes, transphobes, racists, sexists, whatever] deserve it.”
This Law is used, first, to disarm resistance to the latest leftist enthusiasm. Whatever the innovation is, it will have no adverse consequences. None! Puberty blockers and disfiguring surgeries have no downsides whatsoever. How dare you suggest they might!
Its second purpose is to dismiss out of hand “slippery slope” arguments—despite, or because of, the fact that every single such argument over the last twenty years at least has proved true. Worried that allowing people to “self-identify” as whatever sex they want will lead to pervy 50-year-old men exposing themselves to’ tween girls? Insist, loudly and indignantly, that that will NEVER happen and anyone who suggests it might is an alarmist bigot with a heart full of hate.
The third purpose is to enforce the new caste system. Those who get to impose fresh irrational indignities on the rest of us are the upper caste. Those who object, or even have reservations, are lower. The latter are not allowed to harbor, much less express, any doubts. Whatever humiliation the upper caste has planned for us, we deserve and must meekly accept. Hence when said pervy 50-year-old actually does start waving around “her” equipment in the girls’ locker room, if any parent dares object, let ’em have it with both barrels. That thing that ten seconds ago you said would “never” happen? Now it’s righteous punishment for the retrograde.
The Law of Merited Impossibility has done wonders for the Left in helping to ram through a wide variety of radical societal changes and cow into silence all opposition. It’s currently busy destroying girls’ and women’s sports, an outcome that we were assured would “never” happen. Though one wonders what the ladies did do to deserve it.
https://americanmind.org/salvo/thats-not-happening-and-its-good-that-it-is/
"Though one wonders what the ladies did do to deserve it."
The political utility of feminism faded, both with time and with the continued trends of progressive extremism. And maybe with actual success, with women more present in leadership roles (but not always adhering to progressive ideology).
We need to name the inverse corollary after Reason:
“I know all this stuff we’ve been asking repeatedly for for decades is finally happening, but we’re against it now because the guy doing it might do something bad in the future maybe “
That’s exactly what Sarc’s been screaming for three weeks now.
Trump should do this via the proper mechanisms, and he should respect constitutional limits on his power. So far, he has not done a good job of that.
If you want him to respect the law and the Constitution, then you oppose spending cuts. At least that's what Jesse said.
And yet again, Sarcasmic starts his day with a big mug of straw.
What does fermented straw taste like? Do you serve it chilled? On ice? What about the bits of straw?
TBQH I thought he just smoked it.
When is congress going to do these things?
TRUMP'S DOING EVERYTHING LIBERTARIANS DEMANDED BUT HE'S NOT RELYING ON UNELECTED BUREAUCRATS AND MITCH MCCONNELL! WAAAAAAAH!!!
Hilariously he would be blaming Trump if he did wait. See sarc on covid spending.
If you don't want the swamp coming back then you need Congress to repeal the laws that created it.
As far as I can tell, neither Trump nor his defenders are interested in taking power away from the executive. They're only interested in purging and replacing the ranks with loyalists who will unquestioningly wield their power against Trump's enemies.
I find it interesting that I'm the only person here who wants to see laws that give power to the executive repealed. No one on the right or left wants that, because they're only interested in their team using that power to harm the other team.
I'm the only person here who wants to see laws that give power to the executive repealed.
How do you figure this?
This doesn't even make since since the is demanding Congress modifying the article II powers of the executive and micromanage that branch lol.
But what we actually see here is using process to delay cuts. Sarc is full on statist. Why he cheers for neocons and defends democrats.
Also shows his hypocrisy again on covid where he refused to blame Congress and blamed Trump instead.
This doesn't even make since since the is demanding Congress modifying the article II powers of the executive and micromanage that branch lol.
Wow. That's weapon's grade stupidity.
Shows how you have no understanding at all of how regulatory agencies are created, or of how to get rid of them.
Here's a clue. They are created when Congress passes laws that delegate power to the executive. Which isn't in the Constitution by the way.
So with your attacks you are defending regulatory agencies and the unconstitutional delegation of power to the executive by Congress.
You want an imperial presidency, as long as your guy is in power.
Sarckles you stupid fuck, the United States Digital Service was renamed DOGE and it's doing much of what it did before. There's no new regulatory agency created here, just an old one with a new name and an extra assignment.
I saw you bitching about this before, but I didn't understand what, or how retarded, your accusation was.
That whooshing noise was my point flying over your head.
Funny, as you lacked any actual point.
The wooshing sound was air flowing between your ears. You had no point.
So you oppose it, because later people might stop it.
Are you sane?
I hesitate to answer, I sincerely doubt Sarc is sane.
As expected you attack me for wanting Congress to repeal laws that created the swamp.
You don't want any limits on executive power. You just want Trump in control of it.
As expected you use a body that never has, nor ever had any intention of dismantling the fascist state, as your cover in order to kneejerk orangemanbad.
What a pathetic hypocrite you are.
Republicans have a majority in both houses. If they wanted to reign in executive power they could try. But they won't, and even if they did you would oppose it. Because that would mean taking power away from Trump.
Democrats had the triple play under Obama and they still demanded that Obama use executive power for things like DACA because they couldn't actually pass laws that they wanted.
Obama, circa 2010 [when asked by immigration reform advocates to stop deportations and to provide legal status for the illegal aliens], “I’m President, I’m not king. I can’t do these things just by myself.”
Obama, circa 2013: “I’m not the emperor of the United States. My job is to execute laws that are passed.”
Obama basically said: Nevermind, here's DASA and DACA. I created work permits out of whole cloth and set aside immigration laws just because I felt like Congress's failure to pass the laws I wanted them to pass was too limiting.
Show me something concrete that Trump has done and what laws were violated by his XOs, and maybe I'll agree with you. So far, all I've seen is vague "unconstitutional" and "laws broken", hinging little more than "Orange mad bad, African-American man worse!"
Why are you demanding that I cite where laws or the Constitution was violated on a thread where all I've been saying is that it takes an act of Congress to take powers away from the executive that were given to it by an act of Congress?
Because I inferred from your comment that you felt that laws were being violated. I inferred that because if you didn't feel that laws were being violated, then there was no good reason for your comment to exist in the form it was presented.
Are you *honestly* just saying something to the effect that "Speaking in a hypothetical case and apropos of nothing, I expect Presidents from either party to adhere to all applicable laws and to uphold the Constitution. And anyone who misconstrues what I'm saying is mistaken or intentionally obtuse."?
Because if THAT'S what you're saying and ALL that you're saying, I think no one here would reasonably disagree with you.
Certainly I would not, I'd be in full agreement.
Which is why I'm asking for cites of Trumps purported violations.
The only one I'm really aware of is that it seems he probably did violate the law when he terminated the several IGs without provided Congress 30 days notice and his reasoning. As far as I can tell, Congress doesn't really get to say "Nah your reasons aren't good enough." So he should have transmitted his notice of "Because I think they suck" to Congress, wait the 30 days, then fired them. Which remedy the courts will no doubt remind him of when they uphold the suits against the firings.
Congress cannot 'reign in' Executive Authority when the authority is part of the executive branch. Congress *could* revoke authority they have deferred (e.g., many laws include language like "The President may determine...").
E.g., 8 US Code 1182:
(f)Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.
We've just had Liz provide this tidbit on SCOTUS deference for executive authority when the authority belongs to the executive.
"A majority of the justices tend toward a unitary conception of the executive branch, which treats the president as supreme within his domain, but toward limits on executive power in the interbranch struggle," writes Yuval Levin at National Review. "That's how the same Court, in the same term, can overturn Chevron deference (constraining the power of executive agencies to interpret the meanings of laws) while reinforcing executive privilege (guarding the freedom of the president to exercise his power as chief executive)."
Congress *could* revoke authority they have deferred (e.g., many laws include language like "The President may determine...").
Which is what I'm talking about. Why is that so fucking difficult to understand?
*facepalm*
Because you seem to consistently conflate the two types of authority.
"Republicans have a majority in both houses. If they wanted to reign in executive power they could try. But they won't"
I see you've pulled out your crystal ball again. Sure it was wrong the last 99 times, but this time you'll get it right.
That’s because his crystal ball is a defective Magic 8 Ball he found in the dumpster behind Dollar General.
Why is it important to continue to waste money?
What laws and what parts of the Constitution have been violated?
What laws and what parts of the Constitution have been violated?
I didn't say that they were.
Congress writes legislation, and the executive administers it.
That means that every regulatory agency was created by some law passed by Congress. While the constitutionality of that is debatable, it is what it is.
Yes many alphabet departments have been created by EO, but they were all conglomerations of agencies created by Congress.
Trump and his defenders deliberately overlook that fact. They seem to believe that he can unilaterally just do away with what Congress has created. They don't know or don't care that the president does not have that power, and that it's all temporary unless Congress gets on board.
So they really don't really want to cut government. If they did then they'd demand that Congress do something, and stop attacking anyone who does.
Sarc "marxsplains" the Constitution.
I've already agreed with you, I think, on the "that it's all temporary unless Congress gets on board." See https://reason.com/profile/comments-history/#comment-10898951 (because I'm capable of searching my own comment history that Reason provides access to, I can produce an example of me agreeing with you; I could also provide you links to comments where I called trump an idiot and other things).
But the other part of that "Trump and his defenders deliberately overlook that fact. They seem to believe that he can unilaterally just do away with what Congress has created. They don't know or don't care that the president does not have that power" is the part I'm focusing on now.
What has he unilaterally done away with that Congress has created? And why do you think he does not have the power to do what he has done (but that you're not willing or able to elaborate on)?
At this point, as I understand it, Trump has 'merely' provided executive guidance and a technical name change as to how the existing USDS, as defined by
44 USC Ch. 36 (note especially purposes 6-11):
(b) Purposes.—The purposes of this Act [see Tables for classification] are the following:
"(1) To provide effective leadership of Federal Government efforts to develop and promote electronic Government services and processes by establishing an Administrator of a new Office of Electronic Government within the Office of Management and Budget.
"(2) To promote use of the Internet and other information technologies to provide increased opportunities for citizen participation in Government.
"(3) To promote interagency collaboration in providing electronic Government services, where this collaboration would improve the service to citizens by integrating related functions, and in the use of internal electronic Government processes, where this collaboration would improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the processes.
"(4) To improve the ability of the Government to achieve agency missions and program performance goals.
"(5) To promote the use of the Internet and emerging technologies within and across Government agencies to provide citizen-centric Government information and services.
"(6) To reduce costs and burdens for businesses and other Government entities.
"(7) To promote better informed decisionmaking by policy makers.
"(8) To promote access to high quality Government information and services across multiple channels.
"(9) To make the Federal Government more transparent and accountable.
"(10) To transform agency operations by utilizing, where appropriate, best practices from public and private sector organizations.
"(11) To provide enhanced access to Government information and services in a manner consistent with laws regarding protection of personal privacy, national security, records retention, access for persons with disabilities, and other relevant laws."
Note also that
"(2) Covered agency.—The term 'covered agency' means the following (including all associated components of the agency):
"(A) Department of Agriculture.
"(B) Department of Commerce.
"(C) Department of Defense.
"(D) Department of Education.
"(E) Department of Energy.
"(F) Department of Health and Human Services.
"(G) Department of Homeland Security.
"(H) Department of Housing and Urban Development.
"(I) Department of the Interior.
"(J) Department of Justice.
"(K) Department of Labor.
"(L) Department of State.
"(M) Department of Transportation.
"(N) Department of Treasury.
"(O) Department of Veterans Affairs.
"(P) Environmental Protection Agency.
"(Q) General Services Administration.
"(R) National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
"(S) National Science Foundation.
"(T) Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
"(U) Office of Personnel Management.
"(V) Small Business Administration.
"(W) Social Security Administration.
"(X) United States Agency for International Development.
The only violation I see here is that the agency is supposed to be managed under OMB, but Trump has moved it to State.
3602. Office of Electronic Government
(a) There is established in the Office of Management and Budget an Office of Electronic Government.
(b) There shall be at the head of the Office an Administrator who shall be appointed by the President.
(c) The Administrator shall assist the Director in carrying out—
(1) all functions under this chapter;
(2) all of the functions assigned to the Director under title II of the E-Government Act of 2002; and
(3) other electronic government initiatives, consistent with other statutes.
The DOGE "committee" seems to be perfectly in line with 5 U.S. Code § 3161.
(a)Definition of Temporary Organization.—For the purposes of this subchapter, the term “temporary organization” means a commission, committee, board, or other organization that—
(1)is established by law or Executive order for a specific period not in excess of three years for the purpose of performing a specific study or other project; and
(2)is terminated upon the completion of the study or project or upon the occurrence of a condition related to the completion of the study or project.
(b)Employment Authority.—
(1)Notwithstanding the provisions of chapter 51 of this title, the head of a temporary organization may appoint persons to positions of employment in a temporary organization in such numbers and with such skills as are necessary for the performance of the functions required of a temporary organization.
(2)The period of an appointment under paragraph (1) may not exceed three years, except that under regulations prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management the period of appointment may be extended for up to an additional two years.
(3)The positions of employment in a temporary organization are in the excepted service of the civil service.
(i)Acceptance of Volunteer Services.—
(1)The head of a temporary organization may accept volunteer services appropriate to the duties of the organization without regard to section 1342 of title 31.
(2)Donors of voluntary services accepted for a temporary organization under this subsection may include the following:
(A)Advisors.
(B)Experts.
(C)Members of the commission, committee, board, or other temporary organization, as the case may be.
(D)A person performing services in any other capacity determined appropriate by the head of the temporary organization.
So it seems pretty clear to me (as a layperson just reading the XO and the laws referenced) that Trump can by law, create via XO a temporary organization, and staff it by employing paid and volunteer workers, and order that temporary organization to work with specific agencies in accordance with 44 USC Ch. 36 and 5 U.S. Code § 3161.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/establishing-and-implementing-the-presidents-department-of-government-efficiency/
Oops, I guess I made that an automatic tl;dr posting.
It was beautiful. Sarc gets confused with big words and probably had to get an aspirin.
My mistake: "The only violation I see here is that the agency is supposed to be managed under OMB, but Trump has moved it to State."
I confused the proposed move of USAID to State with the renaming of USDS.
What laws and what parts of the Constitution have been violated?
I didn't say that they were.
Amazing, really.
Trump is doing, in his admittedly raucous way, what we elected him to do. You don't negotiate with something as venal and embedded as "the swamp;" you mostly kill it without delay so it doesn't have time to protect itself.
Congress writes legislation and the executive implements it.
That means that the swamp is a symptom, and Congress is the cause.
If you want to get rid of the swamp then you need Congress to start repealing the laws that created it. Otherwise you're just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Earlier in the week you mocked people for suggesting that you pressure your congressmen to repeal laws.
He doesn’t even vote.
Yet at the same time he bitches about people not supporting the LP.
Maybe he isn't legally allowed to vote due to actions from his drug and alcohol use.
I doubt it. Maine even allows prisoners to vote.
It's firehosing. The more cuts Trump tries to push through simultaneously, the harder it is for The Resistance to respond.
Other outlays:
$1 million to boost French-speaking LGBTQ groups in West and Central Africa through the State Department.
$14 million in cash vouchers for migrants at the southern border through the State Department.
$20,600 for a drag show in Ecuador through the State Department.
$47,020 for a transgender opera in Colombia through the State Department.
$32,000 for an LGBTQ-centered comic book in Peru through the State Department.
$55,750 for a climate change presentation warning about the impact of climate change in Argentina to be led by female and LGBT journalists through the State Department.
$3,315,446 for “being LGBTQ in the Caribbean” through USAID.
$7,071.58 for a BIPOC speaker series in Canada through the State Department.
$80,000 for an LGBTQ community center in Bratislava, Slovakia through the State Department.
$3.2 million to help Tunisian migrants readjust to life in Tunisia after deportation through the State Department.
$16,500 to foster a “united and equal queer-feminist discourse in Albanian society” through the State Department.
$10,000 to pressure Lithuanian corporations to promote “DEI values” through the State Department.
$8,000 to promote DEI among LGBTQ groups in Cyprus through the State Department.
$1.5 million to promote job opportunities for LGBTQ individuals in Serbia through USAID.
$70,884 to create a U.S.-Irish musical to promote DEI in Ireland through the State Department.
$39,652 to host seminars at the Edinburgh International Book Festival on gender identity and racial equality through the State Department.
$2.5 million to build electric vehicle charging stations in Vietnam’s largest cities through USAID.
$425,622 to help Indonesian coffee companies become more climate and gender friendly through USAID.
So basically USAID was pushing a bunch of queer and green cult shit in all these places.
Again, this is why I've been saying that their real problem with Russia all along wasn't that it's a corrupt kleptocracy. The rhetoric on Russia notably changed when Putin started blocking a lot of the queer propaganda that these agencies were pushing via media outlets and aid groups in the country. Astroturfed shit like Pussy Riot got shut down hard, Putin passed laws forbidding its promotion, and suddenly Russia was a tyrannical hellscape.
All these "journalists" and opposition figures in the country for the last 20-odd years are looking increasingly like CIA assets that USAID and previous administrations were using to try and get Putin out via a color revolution, but like Maduro, Putin's a much more competent gangster than his government opponents in the US.
They are, or were, notably trying that shit in Serbia recently because the leader of the country there is a right-wing populist.
Man. This shit makes those GOP cucks like McConnell Romney McCain & Bushes look terrible. They weren't asleep at the wheel but complicit. My hate for them has been justified!
The post-Cold War establishment Right was always complicit in this shit. It's why the alt-right started calling them controlled opposition in the 2000s, and it was basically confirmed as such in instances like the Tories blowing off the Arab/Paki rape gangs in the UK.
Third Way politicians like Clinton and Blair may have used centrist economics as a Trojan horse for cultural marxism, but the Bush/Tory right offered no resistance to it whatsoever when they were in charge themselves.
They aren't cucks.
They are active participants.
They LIKE this shit.
Awards and subawards to three selected Chinese entities, 2014-2021
I count 4 and if I had to pick one a priori that would rocket my eyebrows to the top of my skull it would be "[Chinese] Academy of Military Medical Sciences".
Paying China to develop bio weapons?
https://x.com/shellenberger/status/1887282681609588759
The House of Representatives impeached President Donald Trump on December 18, 2019, after a White House whistleblower went public with evidence that Trump abused his powers by withholding military aid to Ukraine in order to dig up dirt on his rival, Joe Biden.
In the complaint, the whistleblower claimed to have heard from White House staff that Trump had, on a phone call, directed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to work with his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, to investigate Joe Biden and Hunter Biden.
The whistleblower who triggered the impeachment was a CIA analyst who was first brought into the White House by the Obama administration.
Reporting by Drop Site News last year revealed that the CIA analyst relied on reporting by a supposedly independent investigative news organization called the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), which appears to have effectively operated as an arm of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), which President Trump has just shut down. The CIA whistleblower complaint cited a long report by OCCRP four times.
The OCCRP report alleged that two Soviet-born Florida businessmen were “key hidden actors behind a plan” by Trump to investigate the Bidens. According to the story, those two businessmen connected Giuliani to two former Ukrainian prosecutors. The OCCRP story was crucial to the House Democrats’ impeachment claim, which is that Trump dispatched Giuliani as part of a coordinated effort to pressure a foreign country to interfere in the 2020 presidential election, which is why the whistleblower cited it four times.
In a 2024 documentary that German television broadcaster NDR made about OCCRP’s dependence on the US government, a USAID official confirmed that USAID approves OCCRP’s “annual work plan” and approves new hires of “key personnel.” NDR initiated and carried out the investigation with French investigative news organization Mediapart, Italian new group Il Fatto Quotidiano, Reporters United in Greece, and Drop Site News in the United States.
However, according to a Mediapart story published the same day as the Drop Site News article, NDR censored the broadcast “after US journalist Drew Sullivan, the co-founder and head of the OCCRP, placed pressure on the NDR management and made false accusations against the broadcaster’s journalists involved in the project.”
On December 16, Drop Site’s Ryan Grim posted a link on X to the 26-minute-long documentary. “NDR, Germany’s public broadcaster, is facing a censorship scandal and has defended itself by saying it never killed a news report about OCCRP and its State Department funding — b/c no report was ever produced to kill,” said Grim. “That was absurd — and dozens, maybe hundreds, of journalists knew it to be false, and now of course, someone has leaked it.”
The journalistic collaboration revealed that OCCRP’s original funding came from the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs of the State Department, and quotes a USAID official who says, “Drew’s just nervous about being linked with law enforcement,” referring to Sullivan. “If people who are going to give you information think you’re just a cop, maybe it’s a problem.”
OCCRP does not operate like a normal investigative journalism organization in that its goals appear to include interfering in foreign political matters, including elections, aimed at regime change. Sullivan told NDR that his organization had “probably been responsible for five or six countries changing over from one government to another government… and getting prime ministers indicted or thrown out.”
As such, it appears that CIA, USAID, and OCCRP were all involved in the impeachment of President Trump in ways similar to the regime change operations that all three organizations engage in abroad. The difference is that it is highly illegal and even treasonous for CIA, USAID, and its contractors and intermediaries, known as “cut-outs,” to interfere in US politics this way.
OCCRP threatened to file a lawsuit against Public in response to questions we sent. “The premise of your article is factually false and defamatory,” wrote Miranda Patrucic, the Editor in Chief of OCCRP, over email. “The claim by Dropsite News and partner media that USAID has control over editorial appointments has been disproven and we suggest you read our response to that.”
But neither OCCRP nor anyone else disproved Drop Site’s allegations and Drop Site stands by them. And the evidence does not support OCCRP’s claim of journalistic independence....
Vindman's wife complaining on Twitter that Biden didn't give their family a pardon was a massive fucking tell.
Wow. Every day more incredible shit comes out.
I wonder if Reason will mention this?
They will call it a nontroversy.
Boehm's on a tariff piece right now to deflect!
Also, gamergate was right all along. USAID was funding Feminist Frequency.
Anita Sarkeesian being a CIA asset was definitely not something I had on my 2025 bingo card, although it's hardly surprising in hindsight.
I feel like Charlie Kelly chasing Pepe Silvia in Always Sunny in Philadelphia with all this info.
Sargon and Rucka rejoice.
So, in a massively round-about way, USAID helped get Trump elected. We got him this time boys!
I saw something noting that SweetBaby inc (gamergate part 2 culprits) were also funded, but havent seen confirmation.
But would be absolutely on brand for the kind of ESG slop money that was going out
(Over here at Reason, we've been beating this drum for a while.)
Drumbeats will strategically and reluctantly cease if and when it actually happens.
Let me get this straight. Fauci’s NIAID and USAID sent over $40M in U.S. taxpayer “support” to a scientist in Wuhan who was working on “bat coronavirus emergence” research, who also became “patient zero” for COVID-19?
And the completion date for that funding was … in 2019???
Well, yeah, but patient 0's work had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that he had sex with a pagolin in a Wuhan wet market, which is 100% proven to be how this whole COVID thing started and anyone who thinks about any other possibilities is obviously a NAZI.
Shut up bigot.
It was a wet market pangolin. Or raccoon dogs.
Occam's razor has no place here
Look, ML, what's really important here is what a nontroversy federal spending, from an "international development agency", on domestic media organizations is.
“But nobody elected him!!!!1111”
Exactly. Who the fuck elected Soros? It was well known that Musk was going to be a part of Trump’s team. Very well publicized, in fact. Soros, on the other hand, stayed in the shadows the whole time.
To be fair, Robert Mueller was not elected either.
Anointed would be more accurate.
I am more convinced every day that the current whinging and wailing by liberals reveals two important truths.
First, when they cry about threats to democracy, they do not mean a set of principles focused on liberty and freedom. Rather, they see a massive Institution, with both abstract and physical components, they they built to support (and enforce) their world views. And like all corporatists, the good of the Institution supercedes any interests and rights of individuals--especially those who challenge the system. They may be naive disciples or deeply imbedded (and even cynical) insiders, but "Democracy" is their personal and group identity.
The second truth is the forging of psychological and emotional selves according to the vision of the Institution. I hear from some liberal friends about living in actual fear, including some sense of physical harm, for themselves and for some others within their expansive compassion. It sure seems like their sense of solidarity is more defined by emotional fragility more than specific ideology or even anger.
Combine these two characteristics and we have a liberal-progressive contingent that might be beyond hope, and certainly beyond the capacity to function as independent, self-sufficient adults who can abide people with other views and values.
^+1.
^^+2
This goes for The Dispatch crowd and the Bush-aligned center-right as well. It's not an accident both those factions belch out the same glittering generalities.
Fucking case in point and right on cue:
The Dispatch
@thedispatch
"Shutting down American organizations like USAID that support democracy, markets, and the rule of law helps the Chinese and their autocratic allies and hurts our democratic allies and partners."
@McFaul on his recent essay for @thedispatch
"Why Is Trump Trying to Lose Our New Cold War With China?" (
@Morning_Joe
2:52 PM · Feb 5, 2025
And again:
The Dispatch
@thedispatch
"I am in favor of a healthy balance between sovereigntism and alliance-supported hegemonism, because it’s good for America. The hardcore sovereigntists don’t like the second part, because it requires behaving like an adult and being a reliable friend. Trump thinks that makes us suckers. I think it makes us grown-ups."
@JonahDispatch
4:33 PM · Feb 5, 2025
Like the left, these sellouts love their false dilemmas, too.
"Healthy balance" = "whatever lines my pockets"
Ah, I see:
NaziBitter clingersNaziDeplorablesNazipopulistNaziChristian NationalistNaziSovereigntist
They do love their little made-up terms, don't they?
Fortunately, they unironically believe that smart-ass comments and pointless rhetoric about "principles" and "ideas" is more politically effective than actually doing anything, so they're hardly a threat.
Alliance-supported hegemonism is all behaving like adults until the LatinXes get all uppity about being called LatinX.
Apparently JonahDispatch didn't learn anything about being part of the adults in the room while Joe sidled slowly and obviously into dementia and everybody around him was too busy staring at their toes and avoiding eye contact to say anything about it, like adults.
Just how much money went from USAID to The Dispatch?
how much of any monies spent by the U.S. any has ever help maintain a democracy or create a new democracy. i say none since Korea and i say they don't want o create democracies because they believe dictatorships are easier to control and change at a whim. these people are playing power games for fun not for the benifit of anyone anywhere. I say The U.S. has become evil to other nations
"Rather, they see a massive Institution, with both abstract and physical components...but "Democracy" is their personal and group identity."
- if you just change it from "Democracy" to "Democracy (TM)" it makes much more sense.
When Trump won the first time, through democracy, they spazzed and said he was illegitimate. When he won the second time, with the popular vote, they still insist Democracy is dead.
Therefore, they never wanted democracy. Democracy (TM) is when the left and leftist institutions win. Everything else is fascism
After Trump won the first time, the left spent huge amounts of effort and cash (Zuckerbucks) to transform democracy via fortification into Democracy (TM).
The fact that he won this time despite all the fortification is very telling.
Projection. Virtually everything the left denounces is simply an admission of things they are currently doing but that they don't want the other side to do.
I agree with your well thought analysis, but that leaves me to believe that they may now think there is no other alternative but more subterfuge and even violence to protect their flawed beliefs
If you’ve seen Reddit recently, your conclusion makes perfect sense. The number of calls for violence there are stunning.
"...he should respect constitutional limits on his power. So far, he has not done a good job of that..."
Cite seems to have gone missing from that assertion.
"Lawsuit claims UC schools still use race-based admissions, despite ban"
[...]
"Despite bans on affirmative action by California’s voters and the U.S. Supreme Court, a conservative group is accusing the University of California of illegally giving preferential treatment to Black and Hispanic applicants at the expense of Asian American and white students..."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/lawsuit-claims-uc-schools-still-use-race-based-admissions-despite-ban/ar-AA1ypLTs?ocid=BingNewsSerp
Like Biden and his give-backs on student loans, the sumbitches can't seem to understand that racism is bad. There is no good racism.
Was not race-based admissions in public schools the norm in Topeka, Kansas in 1953?
Yeah, that was "bad" racism, not "good" racism as UC does it!
Oh, they understand very well. We need to understand that "racism!" is just a tactic, and power is the goal.
Yup.
Their bible has been Kendi's how to be an antiracist, and it directly prescribes 'good' racism or discrimination.
James Lyndsay gave the best one-off summary of antiracism and CRT, in that it is "calling or finding everything racist until you control it"
"Trump signed an executive order banning transgender men from competing in women's sports"
Good on Liz for refusing to call such people "transgender women".
But I think "male to female transgender person" would be a clearer way to discuss such people.
Or, perhaps, "men with fantasy lives".
That might be a little over-broad. How about "autogynopheliacs"?
Men with gender dysphoria/delusion would be the most accurate. Id be OK with cutting to "mentally ill men"
Dudes with tits.
Chicks with dicks.
No such thing exists. Only dudes with tits.^
According to a certain absentee video store clerk, that’s children’s programming.
But I think "male to female transgender person" would be a clearer way to discuss such people.
Antisogynists
"Crazy people"
A judge just ruled against prisons sending men back to male prisons. It is insane.
Judge said it was a violation of the 8th to not allow men in women's prisons.
DOGE- Is this what passes as evidence of a "massive problem"? A single post from someone on X? In your life experience, have you ever known of a contract unilaterally cancellable at will by one side without compensation to the other party? Especially in employee-employer relationships, the employee always gets the benefit of the doubt. Talk about dog whistling to rile up the base.
"...In your life experience, have you ever known of a contract unilaterally cancellable at will by one side without compensation to the other party? Especially in employee-employer relationships, the employee always gets the benefit of the doubt..."
New low-watt bulb alert!
Look up "at-will employment" before you make a public ass of yourself. Again.
have you ever known of a contract unilaterally cancellable at will by one side without compensation to the other party? Especially in employee-employer relationships, the employee always gets the benefit of the doubt...
Completely ass-backward. They are claiming to have never known of something that is the rule, not the exception. Having job protection is the exception. These asshats confuse the lecture they got on what mistakes employers make that can create eligibility for unemployment insurance with actual employment law.
As someone who has been fired after 3 with a company for no other reason than the owner of the company decided he didn't like me after our very first meeting, comments like that make me want to kick the commenter in the crotch. Repeatedly. Until they are dead.
This ain't it fam. Big oof.
Trump might not be an isolationist; he instead looks a bit like a sovereigntist, writes Jennifer Mittelstadt.
LOL. Good luck explaining that distinction to the "The US needs cabotage laws more like the EU's" and "We need open borders but Kyle Rittenhouse shouldn't have been in Kenosha" retards at Reason/Cato.
one of my favorite major fails is the 40+ year effort to make use of "retard" not funny
It has been a retarded effort.
Musk is running rampant over federal law and the Constitution. Everyone should oppose this, even if they support the end goal. He has no authority to anything that he is doing.
LOL
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1887038847629877714.html
Jesse posted this link above. Seriously read it.
Molly is Tony in a dress, so he doesn't care if they are lying to him or not.
I did. And if Musk was acting as an advisor, and the temporary employees were bound by conflict of interest laws, then we would not have a problem. But Musk is doing far more and acting outside of federal law or accountability.
"...But Musk is doing far more and acting outside of federal law or accountability..."
Molly.
Godiva.
Is.
A.
Lying.
Pile.
Of.
Lefty.
Shit.
Who should fuck off and die.
Molly wanna cracker? You parrot the dumbest shit from the MSM on this.
Her paycheck from usaid didn't clear
So you didn't read it.
Care to elaborate or do you just want to stick with this gross generalization?
It might be helpful if you could cite a specific thing he is doing and then provide the reason why he does not have the authority to do so, perhaps citing a contravening law, some SCOTUS decision or even Constitutional text?
Musk has no legal authority to aces the Treasury payment system. He has no legal authority to aces the Medicare database. He has no authority to destroy USAID.
Bullshit. The EO covers the USDS’s access to audit these agencies. If the audit winds up folding an agency conceived by EO into the State Department, then so be it.
You protest far too much, Molly. Afraid of them finding payments to you?
He’s trying to save us money because we are broke.
Musk is running rampant over federal law and the Constitution.
How so? You already know that DOGE is just the United States Digital Service repurposed. The Department already existed to do a similar function. No "new department" was created. To say it is unconstitutional is a lie.
Musk's actions are illegal. He has no authority to access the data he is, nor fire people, nor demand access to classified information, nor set policy for departments, nor to block spending.
"Musk's actions are illegal..."
Molly.
Godiva.
Is.
A.
Lying, steaming.
Pile.
Of.
Lefty.
Shit.
Who should fuck off and die.
You have evidence or just conjecture?
Musk's actions are illegal. He has no authority to access the data he is, nor fire people, nor demand access to classified information, nor set policy for departments, nor to block spending.
Trump can give him access in his authority as the President, and he's not doing any of the other bullshit you're claiming, anyway. I realize your side is desperately trying to make this "President Musk" propaganda stick, but your CIA buddies in USAID just got their manufactured narrative machine cut off from funding, so it's not going to land.
Musk isn't accessing the data retard.
"Musk's actions are illegal. He has no authority to access the data he is, nor fire people, nor demand access to classified information, nor set policy for departments, nor to block spending."
You weaselly lying fuck. The Chief Executive Officer of the United States of America is free to hire anyone he wants to do so, and Musk isn't accessing anything he hasn't been cleared for.
These are the financial records of government departments, not nuclear secrets. It's time to stop lying.
Musk has not fired a single government employee. Not one.
Molly.
Godiva.
Is.
Full.
Of.
Shit.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
Cut the propaganda, you stupid lefty whore.
>>Bad news:
have you ever heard the parable of the growing seed?
"Meanwhile, Wired is attempting to drum up opposition for the team of young and talented engineers Musk has hired to help him cull the federal government computer systems of waste and inefficiency. Note the deference to "experts" here:"
The Left and government employees are all freaking out over the status of these guys' security clearances.
They all have security clearances. The administration has stated such.
The thing that people should be questioning, but somehow aren't, is why should they need security clearances to audit USAID or Treasury?
They don't need security clearances to audit USAID or DoT. But they are not auditing anything, they are taking over the agencies. And they were given clearances by dictate, not by the normal process of investigation.
Molly.
Godiva.
Is.
Full.
Of.
Shit.
And needs to fuck off and die.
>>they are taking over the agencies
Big Ears said he was running usaid from State now.
BTW, you steaming pile of lying TDS-addled shit, the POTUS is free to declassify and give any and all info wot whomever he wishes.
Fuck off and die, asshole. Make the world a better place.
They don't need security clearances to audit USAID or DoT. But they are not auditing anything, they are taking over the agencies. And they were given clearances by dictate, not by the normal process of investigation.
LOL, stop lying. Filling out paperwork for a clearance is time-consuming if you're applying for a TS, but a Secret is child's play and typically gets confirmed within weeks, especially for young people in their early 20s with hardly any credit or background history whatsoever. This would have all been done in the period following the election.
"Taking over agencies" is just left-wing bullshit and doesn't need to be accepted at face value.
You have to translate 1984-style American left-speak. "Taking over agencies" means removing the head lock progressives had on some department.
Tell me you don't know how classification works at any level without telling me. It is the power of the executive.
Even if they were taking over the agencies, why would they need a clearance? Do people working at USAID need clearances to work there?
What sort of compartmentalized work are they doing exactly? And why?
The "security clearance" shit is misdirection anyway. First off, getting just a Secret is actually pretty quick and typically doesn't require more than a basic background check. I had mine confirmed about four months after I submitted the paperwork in basic, and it only took that long because I was in tech school, had no government email at the time, and it wasn't that easy for the investigator to get in touch with me. That's something that's often waivered, depending on what you're going to be accessing, until the clearance is formally confirmed.
The left is trying to make it sound like these guys are digging in SCIFs and SIPRnet sharedrives without confirmed clearances. That's clearly not the case, and even if it was, it's likely they already have their Secret clearance confirmed anyway. All the shit being laid out on Twitter is stuff that was probably just sitting in USAID's ERM sharedrive on NIPRnet.
The other main point here is that the left is flat-out lying when they claim these are security violations. Absolutely none of the shit these autists are digging in to are classified. If they were, the funding lanes for USAID wouldn't be getting posted all over Twitter, and Trump has the full authority to de-classify them even if they were. The HR paperwork is PII, which is NOT classified and can be accessed by anyone authorized by the governing authority--in this case, the President--to do so.
Not to mention that, libertarian first principles; an individual has a right to privacy from their government, not the government has a right to privacy from the people... or *some* other government employees...
It's plain bad faith misdirection. Especially relative to the raid at Mar-a-Lago where FBI agents were, apparently a priori, cleared to handle *unknown* information that even a sitting President wasn't able to clear.
>>Look, I'm not especially sympathetic to federal employees (ahem), but this is a massive problem:
why is a federal employee entitled to taxpayer money beyond the scope of a rescinded contract?
>>"The right wing of Japan Airlines Flight 68 struck the tail of Delta Air Lines Flight 1921 while the planes were taxiing at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport,"
have you seen the size of those JAL planes? the asian driver jokes write themselves ...
>>and any female athlete of any variety is aware of how high-impact contact with biological males presents a real risk to safety.
I let 115lb. mme. dillinger beat on me with her TKD sparring gear which is hilarious fun to even just play defense ... and yes one connection by me & she's the guy on the floor
"A longer, more alarmist Politico feature..."
I think Politico should maybe sit this out for now.
>>a unitary conception of the executive branch, which treats the president as supreme within his domain, but toward limits on executive power in the interbranch struggle
this required explanation by Yuval Levin?
Jeffy shits himself with rage:
J.K. Rowling @jk_rowling
Congratulations to every single person on the left who’s been campaigning to destroy women’s and girls’ rights. Without you, there’d be no images like this.
Hair sniffing is notably absent.
saw that too.
I don't often compliment the sly, backhanded British humor, especially when it comes from a woman, but it really is a good photo.
>(though Wired used to seemingly be on the side of engineers).
The problem with Wired is that journalism, liberal arts, and English majors are the ones writing the articles, not engineers. The former, over the years, exerted slow pressure to change the ideological focus of the mag from tech to 'social activism' as they do with every other one. See: Scientific American - almost nothing written in there by scientist but by 'science communicators'.
Any organization not explicitly right-wing will become left-wing.
Seems like the buyouts are legit...TV news just a judge just gave the federal employees 3 extra days to decide.
Edit
Surprise!
Talking head grossly misrepresented what happened...
A federal judge paused the deadline for federal employees to accept the Trump administration's offer of buyouts.
The judge said he would hear arguments at a court hearing on Monday on the merits of a lawsuit challenging the legality of the buyout.
The hearing comes as more than 60,000 people — about 3% of the federal workforce — have accepted the offer.
A federal judge in Boston paused the Thursday night deadline for federal employees to accept the Trump administration's offer of buyouts.
Judge George O'Toole Jr., during a brief hearing Thursday afternoon, said his injunction suspending the deadline would continue until at least a hearing Monday, where he will listen to arguments on the merits of a lawsuit by employee unions challenging the legality of the buyout.
O'Toole's order Thursday came as more than 60,000 people — about 3% of the federal workforce — have accepted the offer.
The judge said federal agencies must notify employees who received the buyout offer that the program has been enjoined until Monday.
The Trump administration earlier Thursday in a mass email to federal employees said that the deadline for accepting the buyout offer would not be extended beyond 11:59 p.m. ET.
I'm starting to suspect this was mainly an effort to get the goldbrickers and upper management true believers out of the seats, similar to what happened when Musk did this with Twitter.
Even most of the USAID billets weren't eliminated, they were just re-organized under Rubio.
"Judge George O'Toole Jr., during a brief hearing Thursday afternoon, said his injunction suspending the deadline would continue until at least a hearing Monday, where he will listen to arguments on the merits of a lawsuit by employee unions challenging the legality of the buyout."
Next step, ban federal government employee unions.
Well, exposing all of this USAID fraud and allowing the Deep State and Radical Left to lose their minds reacting to it, very publicly, is at least having some effect among regular people:
https://x.com/IsaiahLCarter/status/1887290743032561803
"The deadline is today, when federal employees may decide to voluntarily leave and be paid through September 30."
that's only if you believe that the offer is legitimate (no opinion), that they have the authority to offer it (they do not - it is illegal), and they really intend to follow through (highly doubtful based on past practice). maybe you could present the topic a little less credulously?? presenting a neutral position on something that is in debate is not a bad idea for a journalist.
You never read the Constitution, did you? Learn about Article II. Nothing about this is illegal.
Let go of your dishonesty.
please cite the specifics to which you refer. the offer is a violation of at least 2 public laws, the anti-deficiency act and the adminstrative leave act. neither is unConstitutional. Article II has nothing to do with it. apparently you need to read up.
"all of the efficiency focus seems perfectly defensible—perhaps even what the federal government should have been focused on all along"
calling something an "efficiency initiative" does not make it one. none of what we've seen thus far fits that description. cutting is arbitrary. elimination of DEI seems to be the only part that is focused and thought through, but is being approached with such obsessive mania that it is itself inefficient. agree with efficiency and with reducing the currently unreasonable size and scope of federal government, but that work needs to be done with careful consideration and with a scalpel rather than with misguided rage and a machete.
scalpel rather than with misguided rage and a machete
"If you're going to drain the swamp... bring a scalpel."
Do you morons even hear yourselves?
"Trump should do this via the proper mechanisms, and he should respect constitutional limits on his power. So far, he has not done a good job of that." - I think stronger language is in order, maybe an explanation of those constitution limits being blatantly ignored and how they are being violated. Don't minimize or excuse such violations. Once the genie is out of the bottle it will be nigh impossible to put it back in.
They can't do that. They are unable to provide such an explanation.