The problem with the DOGE approach is the mission may backfire spectacularly. 
Trump, USAID and the Rule of Law
Trump doesn’t have legal authority to close USAID without Congress. And although we have all seen absurd if not illegal payments, there is a right way to go about things.
I have discussed this before, and now the Wall Street Journal discusses a similar viewpoint in Trump, USAID and the Rule of Law
The rule of law is the foundation of our constitutional system, and Congress is—directly or indirectly—the source of law. The U.S. president must exercise executive authority within statutory limits. In moving to abolish USAID, Mr. Trump seems intent on defying Congress, which has expressed its will clearly on the subject.
President John F. Kennedy established USAID via an executive order, relying on authority granted to him by the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961. Had USAID remained in this status, Mr. Trump would be within his rights to eliminate it by reversing Kennedy’s order. But in 1998 Congress enacted a law establishing USAID as a distinct entity within the executive branch and distinguishing between its functions and those of the State Department. The law granted President Bill Clinton a few months to modify the plan, after which his authority to do so would lapse. His report to Congress stated that USAID would “continue as an independent establishment in the Executive Branch.”
Congress legislated on this subject again last year. According to Brookings scholar George Ingram, the 2024 Foreign Operations Appropriations Act explicitly prohibited a reorganization, redesign or elimination of USAID without congressional participation.
That is the legal case against the DOGE handling of USAID and it is rock solid. Nonetheless, hypocrites cheer.
Many pretend that what DOGE is doing is not illegal.
Those same Republicans chastised Biden, correctly so, for flouting the Supreme Court multiple times on student aid.
Unfortunately, both sides are fine with the President breaking the law as long as the result is what they want.
Fundamental Question and the Rule of Law
Mr. Trump is raising fundamental questions about the extent to which international economic assistance serves U.S. national interests. He has every right to do so, and the debate he’s sparked could lead to more clarity on the goals that overseas economic aid should promote. But he can’t translate his policy preferences into action without congressional involvement and new legislation.
Mr. Trump’s decision to abolish USAID will almost certainly be challenged in court—and if my reading of the law is correct, the judicial branch won’t allow the president to proceed.
What then? Will he comply with a court order to stand down, or will he do as he pleases, whatever the judiciary may decide? The rule of law hangs in the balance.
No doubt the hypocrites still don’t care. Don’t worry, because they will care the next time a Democrat acts the same way.
Some Fearless Republicans Agree
Please consider Trump’s USAID Shutdown Alarms Republican Allies
Some congressional Republicans who for years wanted to curb USAID’s activities are now watching its sudden collapse with alarm, saying they worry about the fate of programs they see as playing a critical role in protecting U.S. national security and countering China.
The 10,000-person agency was preparing to shrink to 600 staffers by midnight Saturday before a judge who was appointed by President Trump during his first term temporarily blocked the action until Feb. 14. In the hours before the ruling, U.S. Agency for International Development officials at American Embassies were pleading with State Department leadership, which now runs USAID, to spare their programs.
“They were funding a lot of stupid stuff. That’s a fact, but they’re also doing a lot of good stuff, too,” said Rep. Don Bacon (R., Neb.). “So you don’t want to throw the baby out with the bath water. Instead of taking a sledgehammer, let’s get the scalpel out.”
Rep. Michael McCaul (R., Texas), when he was the top Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, tried to address what he worried were excessive USAID overhead costs. He now says that Elon Musk’s strategy of shutting the entire agency down is an overcorrection.
“I’m eager to see an audit,” said Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker (R., Miss.) But Wicker also said, “I have felt for a long time that USAID is our way to combat China’s Belt and Road Initiative,” in places including Africa and South America. “So, we need an aid program to match the Chinese effort,” he said.
On Thursday, Rep. Joe Wilson (R., S.C.), who called himself one of USAID’s top Republican supporters, said he texted national security adviser Mike Waltz, a former House colleague, about concerns he heard from the foreign ministers of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania about a tech-focused program.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio is now acting chief of USAID. As a Republican senator, he repeatedly praised USAID’s work as bulwark against China.
Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart of Florida, the top Republican in charge of funding requests from State Department and other foreign programs, said this past week that he is worried about whether the USAID wind-down will leave enough workers to administer lifesaving projects overseas.
“I’m not disagreeing with why they’re doing what they’re doing,” Diaz-Balart said in an interview. “But here’s the issue: There are some folks out there that are doing jobs that are crucial.”
Last year, Rep. Andy Barr (R., Ky.) and several other Republicans proposed with Democrats to inject $40 million more a year into USAID to fortify Taiwan’s relationships with other countries, countering China’s efforts to isolate it. On Friday, Barr said he supports a top-to-bottom agency review to refocus it. Asked about Congress’s role in that, he said, “We’ll be seeing what the administration does, and then we’ll offer them feedback.”
In a recent X Spaces conversation including Musk and Sen. Joni Ernst (R., Iowa), the senator appeared to push back delicately against Musk’s conclusion that the agency was “just a ball of worms” and should be abolished.
“There is no apple,” he said. “And when there is no apple in this, you’ve just got to basically get rid of the whole thing.”
Ernst later gently countered: “There are probably some arguments to be made about what could be important work that falls under USAID.” Later, she added: “If there are truly good pro-American programs, then let’s move them to the State Department. Let’s make sure we have proper oversight.”
A vote on that measure would put some lawmakers in a tight spot. “I haven’t reached that conclusion,” said Rep. Jim Baird (R., Ind.) when asked if the entire agency should be eliminated. “I think it deserves some evaluation.”
Court Showdown
I side with Senator Ernst. “If there are truly good pro-American programs, then let’s move them to the State Department. Let’s make sure we have proper oversight.”
But that takes an act of Congress.
A USAID official said Trump, Musk and Rubio have shown no sign of reversing course on closing the agency, whose signage was removed from its headquarters Friday.
What to Expect from a USAID Shutdown
- My constitutional law expert says “Contractors will sue. There will have been no valid legal basis for stopping contract payments. So, under the contracts, the federal government will pay a bundle in penalties and equitable adjustments.“
- The courts will force a reversal. And no good will come from this approach.
This is the Elon Musk sponsored, Ted Mack Legal Amateur Hour.
As noted above, some fearless Republicans agree, easily enough to kill the idea of eliminating USAID entirely.
The only sound approach is to proceed down the path Senator Ernst suggested. Properly tailored, the Senate just needs to find 7 Democrats willing to go along.
CIA Buyouts
CBS News reports CIA offers buyouts to employees as Trump aims to transform federal government
The CIA confirmed that it offered buyouts to employees who volunteer to resign, the latest group of federal workers to receive such a proposal as President Trump pushes to transform the federal government.
The Office of Personnel Management has already offered millions of federal workers about eight months of salary if they agree by Thursday to leave their jobs. The CIA and other national security agencies were initially exempted, but the CIA offers suggest few corners of the government will escape Mr. Trump’s overhaul.
Mr. Trump has long criticized America’s intelligence agencies, and his new CIA director, John Ratcliffe, has promised big changes, claiming the CIA has strayed from its original focus on human-collected intelligence.
I don’t object to the idea the CIA is a political swamp. But I do question the means.
Team DOGE has no authority to pay staffers 8 months to do nothing. Moreover there are contracts in place.
Government Employment Bargaining Unit
If these buyout offers are in violation of any union contract, and people are dismissed, several things will happen, none of them any good.
What to Expect
- About 40,000 people accepted an offer that was illegal to make. Those 40,000 are likely the best and brightest of the bunch who accepted the offer because they are skilled enough to find another job. Hooray, free money.
- Those who stay are likely the worst of the lot and some will be dismissed.
- If dismissal is in violation of any union contract, they will be rehired with back pay and penalties.
What happens to those who accepted an illegal offer is a mystery.
Once again, this looks like the Ted Mack Legal Amateur Hour.
Cheer if you want, and one seriously misguided friend does. So do all the hypocrites who think Trump is above the law and Biden isn’t.
Elon Musk and Team DOGE Run Into the Brick Wall of the Court
On February 6, I commented Elon Musk and Team DOGE Run Into the Brick Wall of the Court
Well, that was expected, fast, and generally correct.
President Trump and Elon Musk might be able to ignore the squawking of Democrats in Congress and the press, but they can’t ignore the courts.
Expect more defeats, some likely to be spectacular blowups.
Court v. DOGE Shutdowns
With many things Trump has been doing, there are plusses and minuses. USAID is complex.
I openly root for DOGE to come up with any and all proposals of things that need dismantling.
The problem is the approach, not the idea!
These moves all risks blowing up if not done legally. And unfortunately that’s the path repeatably taken.
For further discussion, please see USAID Cancellation by Trump, the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly Details
Once again, I am not arguing against the DOGE idea. I openly cheer the idea behind DOGE.
Instead, I am arguing against the methods.
Hypocrites may be happy with the approach, but I assure you that Trump can achieve much more by going about this in a constitutional manner.
Greatest defense of an entrenched bureaucracy is time. They will remain long after the change agent is exhausted or gone. You must act swiftly. Executive branch may have to spend funds authorized by Congress, but almost absolute power to reorganize executive branch.
The issue is revealed here, in Mish’s own words…
“Rep. Michael McCaul (R., Texas), when he was the top Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, tried to address what he worried were excessive USAID overhead costs.”
Be clear about this: He TRIED and FAILED. Again and again, people TRY and FAIL to emasculate the Federal Monster, and the programs get bigger, and employment increases, and deficits and debt get bigger and bigger, and bigger. And all those ‘trying and failing’ politicians get richer and richer, and richer.
The last thing Congress will do is reign in its own corruption.
I am not a lawyer so I do not know the legal issues. I do know legal action takes forever and in the meantime money is flowing down a rat hole. The country is on the verge of insolvency so what happens when they can not pay the contractors??
Mish, we need to reconcile the Concepts of WANTING USAID dismantled versus WANTING USAID DISMANTLED LEGALLY.
It is like going after a Drug dealer and making it SO hard to LEGALLY ARREST THAT DEALER that a JUDGE STEPS IN AND SAYS: “Now, wait a Minute, you have not followed the Rule of LAW” while trying to stop a drug dealer that has not boundaries SELLING DRUGS TO KIDS and ADDICTS.
USAID IS ACTING LIKE A DRUG DEALER – – right in our FACES and the JUSTICE SYSTEM is being lined up to protect it.
It is like a PROTECTION RACKET (which, incidentally, saw my Grandpa’s Brother MURDERED IN ILLINOIS after the Syndicate Thugs NAILED HIS DOG (left over night in his bar) to the OVERHAND at the front door.
Uncle Merlyn told them to EFF OFF and he was found dead the next morning.
We are dealing with EVIL ENTITIES tied into USAID. Something must be done by the JUDGES TO FREE US FROM THE THEFT therein and it appears that they are being paid off, TOO!
What I am inferring is that Trump and his people will need to pay off Judges and that is POSSIBLE but not likely because they would impeach him immediately.
There is a fine line here. TRUMP IS NOT A TRAPEZE KIND OF GUY.
Maybe I’m naive but defunding the agency seems to be the best way. Simply, don’t appropriate funds for the agency, that results in riffs and closing the doors. Unfortunately, congress would never do this, so we are stuck with lesbian coffee houses and transgender Africans, all on our dime.
NGOs=Human Misery, Child Sex Trafficking, Drugs, Disease:
Carl Radle Commented Below – “Also keep in mind, many/most of the USAID “contracts” are actually grants or funding agreements to NGOs or other providers (go look at foreignassistance dot gov).
According to Darien Gap Imbedded Journalist/Investigator and Retired Green Beret Michael Yon: “since the shake up at USAID, Panama’s Darien Gap flow of Northbound illegal aliens has decreased by 95%”
The NGOs that finance the vast majority of the illegal human trafficking have not gotten funds since this shake up and it is already having dramatic effect on this human misery horror show.
Mr Yon was put in contact with Border Czar Tom Homan earlier this year and he informed Mr Homan of the vital importance on defunding the NGOs involved.
One of the most vile, unAmerican, Soros loving NGOs is none other than HIAS, the ‘Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society’.
And you, me and every other tax paying American is feeding this parasite that has the sole intention of aiding and abetting hundreds of millions more third world folks into this country.
the fly in the ointment is time. Our Congress, D & R, are they capable of making decisions in a timely manor? Time is not on the DOGE side. Files will be lost, code altered, savings postponed or negated. Congress needs to embrace this effort and pledge the time necessary to hear, consider and rule on an expedient basis!
Trump has no choice: He is facing tremendous odds against people who will stop at nothing. If he does not kick out the props sustaining those forces fast, he will be buried.
The idea that there are better legal means at hand does not grasp that the institutions and people in them are evil and nothing can be expected appealing to rules and authorities.
USAID is a rogue institution that hides and facilitates mendacious intent.
It’s not just a bunch of good and bad projects.
It’s full of fraud (which always vitiates all other legal considerations) and the executive must treat it the same way as organized crime rings.
MAGA!
To avoid confusion I would avoid using the term “Union Contracts” What federal employees who are considered part of the “bargaining unit” (which includes most folks nor managers and policy makers) often have with their agencies is a Collective Bargaining Agreement which is miles away from a union contract.
Government unions are not like the Teamsters, UAW, ALPA, etc. because for better or worst feds have little leverage since they can’t strike and can’t force collection of dues from the people they cover. As such, the CBAs don’t give the type of job protections, work conditions, pay, etc. you would see in a contract with Ford or United Airlines.
At USAID for example, anyone can google Collective Bargaining Agreement American Foreign Service Association (AFSA). You can read the sections on Reduction in Force (layoffs), or for Admin Leave. The union’s “negotiations” didn’t get much out of the agency, and there’s not much protection from RIFs. you can look at other CBA’s at other agencies as well, they’re all very weak.
Keep in mind that most fed employees are COVERED by a bargaining unit but very very few are DUES PAYING MEMBERS. I had paid my dues (which is based on grade, and for me was quite expensive) but when the time actually came and I needed their help, they literally had no power, so I quit paying dues. They are nice folks but pretty much powerless. Most feds don’t know who their union is or who their reps are. The CBA is usually not worth reading.
Not saying this is fair or a good idea, but don’t pretend the CBA changes anything. Again, have a google and look.
“My constitutional law expert says “Contractors will sue. There will have been no valid legal basis for stopping contract payments. So, under the contracts, the federal government will pay a bundle in penalties and equitable adjustments.“
well, your expert doesn’t do a lot of federal contracts, I guess. Whenever we issue a contract award or a purchase request, MoU, etc. clearly written in the contractual terms of our standard template, used thousands of times each year, is pre-filled with the language “Subject to the Availability of Funding”. Which means if funding is not available to the agency, the Contracting Officer can stop work on the contract without penalty. For the contracting officer to “promise” to keep paying when their is no money available would be illegal under ADA, so this is every award notice I’ve ever seen in 25+ years
Every contractor I work with (mostly those big names you see on the building in the Dulles corridor) understands the simply fact that we do not have a FY25 appropriation for most agencies, and under the Continuing Resolution, all agencies must make critical funding decisions, and so the continuation of funding for existing contracts is not assured, even with partial, incremental funding of a CR. At this point, all my contractors are calling me telling me they’re waiting on official directives from the Contracting Officer each month to stop work or proceed . It’s pretty standard across agencies, not sure what expert is referring to that the gov’t is going to be open to liquidated damages. In any event, the most any contractor could plausibly claim damages under a “STAF” clause is funding for the next five weeks through March.
Likewise I would direct your expert to the Federal Acquisitions Regulations for Termination for Convenience. The government retains quite a lot of latitude to end a contract. We use this all the time, and I’ve not been to court for it. No government contract is written without thought – for example, my contracts literally have 110 pages of FAR clauses that don’t give the non-gov’t party signing the agreement a lot of options in a contract dispute.
Also keep in mind, many/most of the USAID “contracts” are actually grants or funding agreements to NGOs or other providers (go look at foreignassistance dot gov). Apart from the disaster relief for food or services, many/most are not commercial “contracts” in the usual sense, and are subject to the very tight terms of the grant RFQ or other MoU and they do not leave much in doubt to the diminished rights of the non-Government party.
This ^ read it and fucking weep.
Yeah, I am not so sure you are with Joni Ertz on this Mish. She wrote a piece for the WSJ today. USAID may have funded creation of the Covid virus. USAID would only let her look at documents in chambers with no notes allowed to be taken. They even threatened her staff with the Espionage Act.
So to summarize your point, Mish, you think that DOGE is shooting itself in the foot by going after USAID in an illegal fashion. Even if USAID is a near criminal organization, the way Musk and Trump are moving against it is illegal. You probably have a legal scholar telling you this.
Thing about the law is usually each case has a slew of prior cases that validate both points of view. So whatever the judge wants to rule, he can point to legal backing.
In the end though, judges typically buckle to public opinion, and they will eventually rule how the public wants them and destroying USAID is a public wish now. In this case, my guess is SCOTUS will give Trump most/all he wants and may throw a bone to the bureaucracy.
I do not agree with your contention though is that USAID would just stand pat if Trump did things a certain “legal” way. They were ALWAYS going to sue.
I agree. They would not have just stood by, and nothing has been shown that DOGE is performing any of these audits in an illegal manner. Everyone, including the judges, simply assume they are. Trump & his administration knew going in that they didn’t have the legal authority to shutdown USAID; however, they’re okay with the controversy adding to the outrage over what’s going on.
This approach certainly doesn’t make it right, but the difference is that Biden wasn’t elected with a mandate to eliminate all student debt. On the other hand, Trump was elected to do exactly what he’s doing, find & eliminate the waste, fraud & abuse. USAID isn’t the hill Trump plans to die on. It’s simply the first salvo fired with many more to come that illustrate how corrupt the system is.
By the time we get to the end of Trump’s first 100 days, no one is going to care that Trump overstepped his authority. However, conservatives hopefully will be pleased with the results, a much smaller USAID program with a new name & new mission that’s vastly reduced in scope.
“Many pretend that what DOGE is doing is not illegal.”
Mish, many believe the rule of law effectively does not exist anymore. They have seen the corruption, they have heard the endless unfulfilled promises to “reform” Washington, and they have seen with their own eyes that you get as much justice as you can pay for.
Many believe the entire system is corrupt and have no patience to listen to the stuffy argument that dismantling Leviathan must be done according to Leviathan’s ruleset.
Let it burn.
Excellent post. So far Musk has just shut down USAID with no interest in how to make it better, For him, it is simply $40bn in savings toward his target. More interesting is what he doing in Treasury. Had to have access to the payment system, but for what purpose. What is his goal, efficiencies?, stop certain payments? Why won’t he disclose what he doing? Having worked in a large organization, typically the bill payment system is more concerned that the payment and payee were properly authorized, but does not make a judgement about why the payment was made. Assumes if the VP signed off, it is legit.
It isn’t a coup…?
They’ve had years to “make it better”…..how’s that working out?
I mean DC has known that this thing is a slush fund for the connected for years….why do you think they want to “fix” it?
Every government contract’s payment info is in one place because a standard clause of every federal contract is the vendor must use IPP (the invoice processing system of US Treasury Bureau of Fiscal Service).
The BFS system has different roles such as
there’s nothing too Top Secret in the BFS invoice/payment processing management systems. For instance a typical invoice says “Contract X, for work in Jan. 25, $XXX dollars for Contract line item #1, $YYY dollars for Contract Line item #2”. The system records the payments.
Almost all of this info is publicly available at USAspending, SAM dot gov, foreignassistance dot gov, etc. (some contractor pricing details are restricted as “trade secrets”, but often they can be easily deduced from this public info and the public Request for Quote)
Access to the system is not super controlled as long as you have a legitimate use, and I have a hard time believing it will take more than a couple days for Musk’s team to meet all legal requirements to see whatever they want to. Some parts they should not see, of course (bank deposit info of contractors, for example, since they have no need to)
As someone who is in these systems all the time and can see millions of dollars of stuff unrelated to my work, I am having a hard time understanding this drama. It sounds like people are confused.
again, I’m no fan of these people but there’s plenty of legitimate criticisms.
Alternative take regarding Schedule F and other foundational aspects of Trump’s dismantling of the Blob.
https://www.wcdispatch.com/p/reclaiming-the-presidency?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1788464&post_id=156808782&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=ch1ue&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
Does congress have tanks? Guns? Bombs? Drones? Swat Teams? Global surveillance? Social media sites to spread propaganda?
No?
Congress can STFD and STFU.
You’re becoming unsociable!
So what you are saying is that you support the SDNY ex Parte ruling by a corrupt Partisan hack, forbidding the confirmed cabinet appointee from running his own department.
Oh. Ok then.
We shouldn’t offer any buyouts unless required by contract. Trump should just fire them with NO severance or benefits. I want EVERYTHING to be done legally regardless of how I feel about the legislation/act, etc.
I read appropriations and regs for a living. The “Dept. of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2024” is just that, funding and constraints on **FY2024** funding.The law didn’t say there couldn’t be a re-org or consolidation. The law said you couldn’t used the funding from this law to do it (unless certain conditions were met)
FY24 is long over, and so are these spending constraints unless specifically extended. They were not. We are in a containing resolution. The text of each CR specifically says what parts of the previous year’s funding language us still in effect (in those cases, there will be sections of the CR that say “change PL 123 sec. 1132(A)(2)(b) to read ‘fiscal year 2025’). Otherwise, the general terms of the CR apply, which is basically continuing at previous year’s rate of spend. There is no such language in the CR.
And the idea that the foreign service officers at USAID won any victory Friday is similarly disconnected from reality. Almost none of their Proposed Motion was adopted by the judge because literally the DoJ did not have time to file a brief. They got a week of pay to sit at home. No one there should be too optimistic
Similarly, Elon and Co.’s TRO preventing access to Treasury finances is similarly easily overcome by the Trump team, as anyone can do their FISMA training in 20 minutes. A PIA takes about 2 days. They are already interim TS/SCI. There’s no legit reason to prevent access unless a specific law applies. Again, the whole idea that the gov’t lawyers are backfooted doesn’t pass smell test.
not agreeing with Trump, but calling out people who don’t know how this workds
to my understanding, none of USAIDs expenditures were explicitly outlined in any budget legislation. So, cutting payments off that have not been explicitly authorized doesn’t seem to be a problem. reducing the staffing is also completely within the executive’s prerogative, so unless you can show me that the last budget bill set aside $70,000 for LGBTQ aid in Guatemala, or whatever, but rather simply allocated funds to be sent as USAID saw fit, what is the problem. what laws have been broken?
What laws broken?
There is no legal authority to shut down or move USAID.
I suggest you learn how to read
How to balance the urgency of the moment with quality of execution? Certain areas of government should not be weakened by staff departures willy nilly, the best people will leave and the ball could be dropped. Food inspection for example, in the face of bird flu and other bacteria. Most will applaud smaller goverment on principle alone, but there also seems to be a cash crunch going on driving this.
I know everything about everything, including every government entity and what every employee does for it.
Trust me. It’ll be fine. About the time full self driving is released, we will enter The Golden Age!
Love me!
personal experience here: By law, the regulation of America’s food supply is divided into:
There is a USDA inspector at every meat processing facility EVERY DAY. If he/she/they are sick, the facility is not open.
However, the vast majority of the food supply is “regulated” by FDA-CFSAN. No lie – their average time between FDA inspections is more than 20 years. If you file a complaint with FDA, they will look into it at their next inspection in a few decades (again, I saw this with my own eyes – ask the google if you think this is made up)
Pretty much all food outbreaks are dealt with by state health departments. I’ve seen FDA people literally praying in emergency inter-agency Zoom meetings that the food had meat in it (so it was USDA’s problem) or if not, that the outbreak happened in California or some other state that could afford someone to deal with it.
there’s almost 1,000 people in FDA CFSAN (and thousands more “CSOs” in FDA field offices), and not one of them does what you think would they do. I am not saying fire all them, but what they do is mostly legally required compliance and reporting, oversight of contracts and grants, project management, IT security, industry outreach etc.
their absence would not have a public health impact IMO
why were bill clinton’s buyout deals legal but trumps are illegal?
That guy actually ran something they could present as a surplus from 98-01. What a psycho…. the wealth of the 1% was greatly impacted by such fiscal retentiveness. It’s no wonder we had to get into 2 wars to get the wealthy the money they deserved. PEOPLE DIED, and all because Clinton wanted to flaunt a budget surplus.
He may not be able to abolish USAID, but God bless him if he can starve it to death unless giving a political publication over 8 million dollars sounds good to us…..
Agreed. And USAID is simply the tip of the iceberg. We need an outside group doing these audits. While I think DOGE is a great idea, unfortunately, it does provide a good example of Trump “possibly” not thinking things through with putting Musk in charge. However, Musk is known for hard charging, get things done, so there’s that as an upside.
The FREAKOUT on the part of the liberals is nothing more than their coming to terms with so many of them being outed for being on the take. I look forward to more information coming out about how much waste, fraud & abuse exist in SS, Medicare, DoD, Dept of Ed and all other government run departments and their programs.
Just keep repeating $36T+ in national debt plus nearly $2T annual budget deficits. It’s paramount DOGE / Musk succeeds for America’s sake.
The Democrat 90%party members Administrative State in DC was one election away from morphing into the one party control of America. The CCP is their role model.
Who needs 2.3 million employees in 400 agencies paid $575 million per day?
No one in their right mind is going to deny that this administration has the right to administer USAID consistent with its priorities and in a way that values taxpayer dollars. Trump has done a great job on the border, after all of Biden’s whining that he needed Congressional action. That has been proven false (we all knew he was lying).
USAID is under the SECSTATE and he can fire people & reconstitute the agency. No Congressional action required.
Apparently you either cannot read or have TDS Type II and are a hypocrite, or all three
All of the above. It’s a useful cluster of psychiatric deficiencies.
President Trump did not close USAID. President Trump has Constitutional authority to withhold spending of any funds he chooses. President Trump is acting according to the Constitution. Misinformation and activist judges are expected. Six members of the Supreme Court have read the Constitution.
That is just bullsh*t
The constitutional issue regarding impoundment remains open.
Line Item Veto Act of 1996. The act amended the ICA “to authorize the President to cancel in whole any dollar amount of discretionary budget authority, any item of new direct spending, or any limited tax benefit signed into law.” Such moves required certain conditions, including reducing the federal budget deficit and not impairing “essential Government functions” or causing “harm” to “the national interest.” Congress could override a spending cancellation by the president using an expedited process.
For years USAID’s budget was only a couple of billion dollars. Trump gave it the largest increase in its history doubling its budget in his first term from I think around 5 billion to around 11. Some might say that he is as much responsible for this as anyone else you might want to blame.
USAID provided terrorist organizations a few hundred million dollars in cash equipment, etc. These terrorist organizations killed Americans. There are laws against funding terrorists. I am guessing that most of the upper echelons of USAID as well as the folks delivering this aid knew what they were doing. Probably a few hundred employees of USAID need to go to jail. We cannot have this type of criminal on the payroll.
It’s never going to be done “legally”!
Welcome to the end game for the republic!
Why would MAGA care about the rule of law? MAGA is the polar opposite of conservatism; it wants and needs to break things to feel better about the world. The only thing funny about this situation is that the conservatives of this country got into bed with people who have no respect for the Constitution.
Ah yes ….”conservatives” the eternal “Judy” in our ongoing political Punch and Judy show!
Worthless!
I believe you’re almost certainly right, Mish, but all legislation – including the 2024 updated – has clauses that can be interpreted differently. We’ll see what the courts say. DACA was clearly illegal, but once it was in place, SCOTUS accepted the facts on the ground as worthy of consideration.
if you read the SCOTUS decision, the decision was not decided on the merits of DACA, the Court simply said that Trump admin did not follow the Administrative Procedures Act.
It’s not that hard to follow the APA. There’s a bunch of steps that take up the better part of a year: issue a Notice of Proposed Rule Making in the Federal Register, provide a rationale for the proposed rule, have a public comment period, address comments as appropriate, issue Final Rule.
In fact it’s almost impossible to stop an admin issuing regs; they can pretty much do what they want if they follow the APA. But ya gotta follow them rules.
The prior DJT admin were not very savvy and just impatient and so they lost in court for taking shortcuts. For better or worst they seem to know the rules better this time
What’s legal about stealing US Taxpayers 💰Who’s to say, it’s not legal to Audit? And to bring info to Chief Executive Officer/ American People.
Nothing and I never said or even hinted otherwise.
In fact I am rooting for DOGE, legally of course
It’s being folded into state. Formed by EO, destroyed by EO. simple as that.
It’s as simple as this: Illegal and won’t stand without change from Congress.
But I endorse the idea.
the only newsfeed i ready almost every day. thanks for you work and objectivity.
Thanks!
If USAID was formed by EO by Kennedy, then why cannot it be folded into State by EO? If Congress had created USAID, that would be another story…
OK, I see that Congress later solidified the legal standing of USAID. So I guess a more legal approach would be to gut the funding, leaving only the good parts. At least Trump is trying to save taxpayer money, whereas Biden’s loan giveaways were an unauthorized spending of billions of taxpayer dollars