The short answer is DOGE did not follow the law. The long answer is complex.
Judge Orders Thousands to Be Rehired
Yesterday, I noted Hello DOGE, Judge Orders Thousands to Be Rehired, What Will That Cost?
Before anyone gets into a Trumpian Tantrum over the obvious, I support workforce reduction, provided it’s done in accordance with the law.
But time and time again, Trump has issued illegal Executive Orders whose only purpose is to put Trump above the law.
That was a general statement. Today, I go over the ruling. But first we need to understand the Reduction In Force (RIF) rules.
A Primer on Reductions in Force
Lawfare Media has a nice Primer on Reductions in Force.
Trump seeks to reduce the size of the federal workforce using a complicated and arcane process.
Many employees affected by a RIF can challenge its validity at the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). One cannot easily generalize whether the Trump administration will follow the law governing RIFs. A RIF is not a governmentwide layoff; it is limited to a particular geographic area, organizational unit, and type of position. There will likely be hundreds of RIFs. The validity of each RIF, however, depends on whether the agency adheres to the arcane procedures that govern the process.
In an executive order titled “Implementing the President’s ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ Workforce Optimization Initiative,” Trump outlined two additional mechanisms by which he will seek to reduce federal employment. The order is sweeping, and its definition of “agency” suggests that it will apply to both executive departments and independent agencies. The order, however, excludes positions related to public safety, immigration enforcement, or law enforcement.
Section 3 of the executive order envisions the use of attrition to reduce the size of the federal workforce. The order states that agencies shall hire “no more than one employee for every four employees that depart.” Moreover, this section requires agencies to develop a “data-driven plan” to ensure that hires are made in the “highest-need areas.” The order requires the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) team lead to approve any hiring—subject to exceptions deemed necessary by the agency head. Although the team lead works with DOGE, an earlier executive order contemplates that the team lead is an employee within the agency in question—not DOGE.
Section 4 of the order instructs agencies to “initiate large-scale reductions in force.” For purposes of the RIF, agencies should prioritize “[a]ll offices that perform functions not mandated by statute or other law,” including “all agency diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives; all agency initiatives, components, or operations that my Administration suspends or closes; and all components and employees performing functions not mandated by statute or other law who are not typically designated as essential during a lapse in appropriations.” The order envisions a sweeping reduction in the size of the federal workforce, stripping agencies to the bare minimum number of employees needed to implement the laws enacted by Congress.
How many employees might be laid off as a consequence of this order? One estimate puts the number at more than 700,000 individuals. This estimate comes from the fact that the order instructs agencies to separate employees “not typically designated as essential during a lapse in appropriations as provided in the Agency Contingency Plans.” The contingency plans provide a rough estimate of the number of employees targeted by the order. The contingency plans also reveal that the effects of the order will vary from agency to agency. For example, the Department of Justice classifies about 84 percent of its employees as essential. By contrast, the Department of Commerce classifies only about 16 percent of its employees as essential. The meaning of “essential,” however, is subject to political jockeying. Nevertheless, even a small reduction in an agency’s workforce may significantly disrupt the agency’s programs and services.
Justifying a RIF
Under OPM’s regulations, an agency may begin a RIF only for a legitimate reason, including reorganization, budgetary constraints, and lack of work, among others. The MSPB may invalidate a RIF if the agency lacks a bona fide, fact-based reason that it acted pursuant to one of these reasons. For example, in Losure v. Interstate Commerce Commission, an employee alleged that the agency had begun a RIF to target her personally based on her “association with the office’s operation under the former supervisors.” The MSPB determined that the agency’s RIF was based on pretext and, therefore, invalidated the RIF. MSPB explained that “the Board will not allow the circumvention of adverse action procedures where the ‘reorganization’ has no substance and is in reality a pretext for summary removal.”
AFSCME, AFLCIO v Government
Unfortunately, there is no legal summary or case highlights yet.
However, we can watch the entire court proceeding at American Federation of Government Employees v United States Office of Personnel Management (“OPM”) and Acting OPM Director Charles Ezel
The video is 1:29:21 long and I played most of it. This brief transcription by me took many hours.
AFSCME, AFLCIO v Government Partial Transcription
- The word “sham” came in just after the 6 minute mark (timeline on hover-over bottom – not the clock time on the right)
- At the 12-minute mark the attorney for the AFL-CIO requested everything the govt did be taken back.
- Government lawyer starts at approximately the 13-minute mark
- At the 16-minute mark, the judge blasts the Government repeats “sham” … “You’re giving me press releases” “I’m getting mad at you. You’re doing your best and I apologize” “sham” repeated at 20 minute mark
- 21:50 “I got mislead by the government”
- 28:50 the judge blasts the administration over recurring issues
- I then skipped to the 1:05:00 mark
- The judge further blasted the government lawyer after reviewing some reviews of top people being fired on “template letters”
- 1:08:00 “sad sad day our government would fire employees and say it was based on performance, when they know good and well that is a lie”
- “That should not have been done in our country. It was a sham in order to avoid statutory requirements.
- It also happens that when you fire someone for performance that they cannot get unemployment insurance. That makes it even worse, doesn’t it?”
- 1:22:00 “I may have made an error” (relying on the government) that employees had an effective remedy to appeal firing. But I didn’t know this at the time I made that ruling.
- I believe that is in reference to unions not having standing to appeal firings. If so, we might see a reversal in previous rulings.
The key point is the conclusion. One can skip to the 1:18:00 mark and start there.
In quotes are from Judge U.S. District Judge William Alsup. Anything not in quote or in brackets is my brief translation.
Judge U.S. District Judge William Alsup Conclusion
- The template letter (from the government) said you may have a right to appeal. “That has nothing to do with this case. It gives you a right to file an appeal” based on something that happened before you were employed.
- “If there is no ability to appeal, I don’t see how this can be channeled. To the extent the unions were seeking rights to vindicate, I may have made an error.”
- “I relied on the government’s representation, that Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) was an effective remedy. I thought it was and I am not yet ready to say it wasn’t. But I did not know all of this at the time I made that ruling.”
- The judge gave each side a week to respond as to whether the unions have standing, “based on the fact that a channel has been destroyed.”
- “If you want to appeal this, God bless you. I want you to because I am tired of seeing you stonewall on trying to get at the truth, giving me snippets. I want someone to go under oath and tell us what happened in these phone calls, and agencies claiming they did this on their own” [a clear reference to DOGE and OPM]. The judge demands Noah Peters appear under oath. [ Noah Peters is the author of the OPM Acting Director Charles Ezell’s … DOGE Plan”]
- “We’ve got a preliminary injunction, I have ordered discovery. Go ahead, put it up there on appeal and see if the Court of Appeals agrees with what I have done here today by way of relief. That’s fine. I am doing the best I can with the record I’ve got.”
- “I want to make it clear that right now I am just ruling based on service. I am raising the question whether there is an additional jurisdiction exists because the channel that Congress wanted to be effective [MSPB] has been ruined.“
- “I want to make it clear that I don’t think the council for the government has done anything dishonorable. I’ve given him a hard time. He’s doing the best he can with case he’s got.”
Comments from Constitutional Law Expert
I sent the video link to my Constitutional Law Expert Friend. He commented:
Congress passed a Reduction in Force Act that authorizes Agency heads to reduce workforce size. The plaintiffs argue that OPM ordered the agencies to fire people and did not make the particularized findings the the RIF law requires to fire people. The plaintiffs put on evidence of that direction and of a mandate to terminate every employee. Probationary employees include all new employees and all PROMOTED employees. The evidence was that employees with good performance records were fired for poor performance.
It’s really worth while to listen to Alsup’s decision from the bench at the end of the video, which lays out how awful these actions really were.
So the employees have been reinstated pending final hearing on the issues, probably not for many months. He prohibited OPM from further direction terminations. And he require agencies to fire people only consistent with the RIF law.
In other words, Alsup, in his nice Southern accent, said that the government can lay people off, but it has to do so in accordance with law. And the way this was done, the evidence shows, was not consistent with law. This is a very solid decision. Bill Alsup is very respected.
His decision is highly likely (70 percent) to be upheld on appeal.
Alsup Wants an Appeal
“If you want to appeal this, God bless you. I want you to because I am tired of seeing you stonewall on trying to get at the truth, giving me snippets. I want someone to go under oath and tell us what happened in these phone calls, and agencies claiming they did this on their own” .
“Go ahead, put it up there on appeal and see if the Court of Appeals agrees with what I have done here today by way of relief. That’s fine. I am doing the best I can with the record I’ve got.”
The judge asks Noah Peters appear under oath. Noah Peters is the author of the OPM Acting Director Charles Ezell’s DOGE Plan.
One of the more amusing things is the tact that DOGE took may have given unions standing and the right to sue.
His previous ruling that DOGE cheered was that the unions were likely correct but had no grounds to sue due to lack of standing. Now Alsup says “I am raising the question whether there is an additional jurisdiction exists because the channel that Congress wanted to be effective [MSPB] has been ruined.“
So Stupid
This is all so stupid. Team DOGE did mass firings of people, including those with perfect reviews, on grounds of performance.
Then it “ruined” MSPB, a Congressionally approved method to challenge firings.
All these fired workers have to be reinstated.
Trump can appeal, but Peters will have to testify under oath.
What a hoot!
Alsup says that the government can reduce its force under the RIF Act, but has to follow the process. So why not follow the process?
As I have said in the beginning, on all of these cases, Trump would have been far better off going about these processes legally.
Heck, even some semblance of legality might have worked. But this was a clear “sham”, a word Judge Alsup used at least five times.
Another Ill-Advised Self-Inflected Mess
I support workforce reduction, provided it’s done in accordance with the law.
But time and time again, Trump has issued illegal Executive Orders whose only purpose is to put Trump above the law.
And time and time again, Trump has lost in court, and I have cheered.
Q: Why cheer?
A: Unlike others, I am not a hypocrite.
All I want Trump to do is follow the law. However, Trump wants to be King, not President. Sorry!
On February 6, I commented USAID Cancellation by Trump, the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly Details
The Right Approach
What Trump should have done is allow Musk to search for questionable items and report them.
Then Trump could legitimately block those items. Also he could have directed USAID to look at and question every expense, flagging and temporarily those that are questionable.
Instead, Trump blocked everything except for “critical items” whatever that means.
Lawsuits are pending and Trump will lose. We should not be in this setup.
“The unfortunate impact might very well be the courts block everything when some very good things may have happened if Trump took a legitimate case-by-case look.“
The Elon Musk Sponsored, Ted Mack Legal Amateur Hour
On February 9, I discussed The Elon Musk Sponsored, Ted Mack Legal Amateur Hour
The problem with the DOGE approach is the mission may backfire spectacularly.
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.
Correct Call
Supreme Court Rejects Trump’s Pause on USAID Payouts
On March 5, I noted Supreme Court Rejects Trump’s Pause on USAID Payouts
Cancellation or Timing?
The Supreme Court’s Wednesday order was brief, but it stressed that the case was still in preliminary stages and that the government wasn’t contesting the order by Judge Ali to pay the contractors, only the timeline he set for doing so.
So, team Trump is no longer even arguing USAID would be shut down. Fancy that after Musk’s hype about shutting it down.
Rather, Trump now just wants to approve the timeline at which payments go out, but it wants too long to decide.
This court smackdown is a good thing. I don’t want Trump running roughshod over the Constitution any more than I did Biden. Hypocrites, of course, don’t see it that way.
DOGE Makes Huge Mistake Firing Nuclear Workers, Now Seeks to Rehire Them
On February 17, I commented DOGE Makes Huge Mistake Firing Nuclear Workers, Now Seeks to Rehire Them
When you fire people without understanding what they even do, you make big mistakes.
What a Total Clown Show
Q: How did this happen?
A: Trump surrounded himself with complete legal idiots on DOGE, on firings, and on birthright citizenship.
To work in the Trump administration, a requirement going in was that one had to believe every idiotic thing Trump believed on tariffs, on the economy, and on all legal matters.
When you surround yourself with economic and legal fools, this is what happens.
Q: What do we call this?
A: Winning, silly.
Q: Why?
A: Everything Trump does is winning by definition. Contradictions cannot exit.
For a discussion of tariff contradictions, please see Lutnick Says Tariffs Can Eliminate the IRS and Balance the Budget
The stupid thing about these firings is all Trump had to do was get Congress to go along. Congress would not have agreed to all of the cuts Trump wants, but it would have agreed with some of them.
But Trump does not want to be President, he wants to be King. The courts wisely said no.
Everyone should applaud because the next President may very well want to be a Democrat King.
I Support DOGE
I want to reiterate that I am 100 percent behind the mission of DOGE. I want to reduce costs and get rid of departments.
I am on board with getting rid of the Department of Education.
The problem I have had with DOGE is my repeated warning that Trump should do this legally or it would backfire.
No one can honestly say I got this wrong.
“I understood the decision by Judge Alsup was already overturned in spite of the “highly likely 70%” it wouldn’t be. Their prediction lasted a few hours. Am I missing something?”
Different Case
And I supported Trump on DEI Twice
Praise Trump for Ending DEI. But Unrooting Infestation Will Take Time
https://mishtalk.com/economics/praise-to-trump-for-ending-dei-but-unrooting-infestation-will-take-time/
Academia Learned Nothing from Trump’s Revolt Against DEI Nonsense
https://mishtalk.com/economics/academia-learned-nothing-from-trumps-revolt-against-dei-nonsense/
Can u say: I made a mistake
I have many times. It seems you are the one who won’t admit I am correct.
So do you want to continue to pay these deadbeats? If you do, then take their pay out of your paycheck!
I certainly don’t want to pay them, for doing NOTHING!
Where did the liberals go?
Since Pres. Garfield’s assassination The Civil Service of Federal Workers has never gotten smaller only larger. We can no longer allow this to continue due to money cost and political cost. Laws will need to be written to allow this reduction in Force of the Federal Administrative State in DC to continue to preserve the Republic
Congress should eliminate the run-around and get rid of the stupid law so that government can operate like business. Government workers don’t deserve special treatment.
Mish’s frequent in-the-pants orgasms every time a judge blocks one of Trump’s attempts to roll back the state provide a good illustration of why radical steps are necessary. (So did James Buchanan’s insights thirty years ago.) “The Law” (Mish’s reverence justifies capitalization) is no more sacrosanct than any other aspect of state metastasis over the last hundred years. As most of us have been around for failed Republican efforts to cut and trim via the legislative process, it’s not surprising that Trump has a lot of support for blunter methods. His goals appear to be revolutionary, so far without need for trundles and committees for public safety. So I hope he’s successful. We don’t know what the next time might look like.
I should have added that Bastiat’s The Law puts the question in a perspective totally absent in Mish’s reverential babble.
For me, “. . . Everyone should applaud because the next President may very well want to be a Democrat King.”. Is exactly what will happen, the next one will consider trumps actions as precedent.
That’s why it’s important to support legal pushback to set the boundaries clearly.
It’s no bad thing for Trump to push the boundaries, the pushback is inevitable, and there is perhaps a better chance of better boundary setting than if everything done in an ambivalent way.
You maybe correct in that the law was not followed. But I still think it is a very strategic move that these laws are pressed. Much easier to get the general public supporting a law change pressing their represenatives when they see that it’s bullcrap in the first place. If you don’t push these items for the general public to see how the system is working you will never achieve any change. Just talking about these items will never get the same attention.
Great strategy keep pushing on every point you can!
There’s no reasoning with TDS.
When Trump faced the dems pink panther Xi was not in. On Mar 11 Wang Yi China foreign minister met the Nation People’s Congress. He mentioned the word “stability” fifteen times. Stability is the inverse of centrifugal forces. Stability is iron fist. China has a big ace: Tesla. Will Ilan be loyal to Trump or Xi. Was he trained in “stress tolerance”.
The Chinese GDP: consumption, Inventory change, import, Export…If Export plunge the Chinese GDP might deflate or grow less. The stoneface Wang Yi has an econ plan: increase consumption, increase defense by 7.2%, increase debt, increase social programs to the poor and the elderly, increase the budget deficit from 3% to 4%, create 12 million new jobs to reduce youth unemployment in the major cities. DeepSeek and Unitree/Uniparty Robotic bs.
if China pushes Tesla too hard their EV’s will not make it into many outside big markets…
Great job explaining all this, and very clearly – thank you!
Trump is cleaning the Augian stables using a method not used since Hercules’ time and of course some rats get drowned but most can swim and survive but they have to live elsewhere since a clean stable can’t support a rat population.
Yeah, I think the point is about momentum and signalling, but Trump now needs to show the ability to course-correct and refine. He still has time to do that before mid-terms and recession blues. This is the real test. All presidents do stupid things. All of them.
New employees probably will be dismissed after this works its way through the court. The promoted employees will probably not be dismissed. Including promoted employees as probationary looks like a screw up to me.
Trump liked it so much he got some more. AOC: spineless Chuck gave up. Yesterday wily Chuck numbed the reps. Next time around he might shut the gov down bc the debt is too high. Chucky the libertarian.
Mish: By the way, great post! Thanks for the work that it took to pull that all together.
A lot of work doesn’t mean that he and his legal friend are right !
You’re absolutely right Michael. A lot of work means squat, if it doesn’t produce results. An awful lot of work went into allowing Girls to get the crap kicked out of them by Boys, “Legally” but it was god awful work!
This example however, has Mish and His Friend doing “Hard Work” and Producing “Hard Results” that matter. Barking up the wrong tree on this example…
What most people miss or choose to avoid talking about is that both Trump and Musk ran organizations where they had total control and no accountability to an independent board of directors. Also, Musk and Trump have a history of flouting regulations and the law with their businesses. Trump, in particular, has a history of breaking contracts or threatening to break contracts to renegotiate the terms at points in time when the counterparty has little leverage and is only left with the option to spend a fortune to litigate.
None of this ignoring the law and normal procedures should surprise anyone who knows who they are dealing with.
don’t lecture me !
Judge shopping.
Nonsense – I was right on DEI and I will be right on this
This is entire article is nonsense and a terrible analysis. It has already been overturned so this prediction didn’t last more than a few hours.
“I understood the decision by Judge Alsup was already overturned in spite of the “highly likely 70%” it wouldn’t be. Their prediction lasted a few hours. Am I missing something?”
Different Case
And I supported Trump on DEI Twice
Praise Trump for Ending DEI. But Unrooting Infestation Will Take Time
https://mishtalk.com/economics/praise-to-trump-for-ending-dei-but-unrooting-infestation-will-take-time/
Academia Learned Nothing from Trump’s Revolt Against DEI Nonsense
https://mishtalk.com/economics/academia-learned-nothing-from-trumps-revolt-against-dei-nonsense/
Thanks for clarifying. Hard to follow this for regular folk.
That’s correct, but most of the commentators are impressed by the legal mumbo
jumbo.
I understood the decision by Judge Alsup was already overturned in spite of the “highly likely 70%” it wouldn’t be. Their prediction lasted a few hours. Am I missing something?
“I understood the decision by Judge Alsup was already overturned in spite of the “highly likely 70%” it wouldn’t be. Their prediction lasted a few hours. Am I missing something?”
Different Case
And I supported Trump on DEI Twice
Praise Trump for Ending DEI. But Unrooting Infestation Will Take Time
https://mishtalk.com/economics/praise-to-trump-for-ending-dei-but-unrooting-infestation-will-take-time/
Academia Learned Nothing from Trump’s Revolt Against DEI Nonsense
https://mishtalk.com/economics/academia-learned-nothing-from-trumps-revolt-against-dei-nonsense/
https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/KO1crwJ.ldECU2TcyqwjPQ–/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTI0MjtoPTQ4/https://s.yimg.com/os/creatr-uploaded-images/2023-09/ee6ba310-4dcd-11ee-abb6-d9983ff24d1b
You Might Not Make Enough Money To Get Musk’s Potential DOGE Dividend Check: Here’s the Salary Cutoff
Those radical judges are not above the law. If they left behind traces of bribes and corruption they should be brought to congress to be either humiliated in public or impeached. That’s the best way to stop the dems tsunami of lawsuits.
If you truly believe that the way the Trump administration has handled these firings is according to statute and the law, you are delusional.
How many have been rehired? None and I doubt any will. What one judge can do another judge in a higher court can undo and this judge’s doing will be undone.
Vivek to lead DOGE would have been lot better. As he said that his plan was to do it legally and constitutionally while Elon’s plan was to do it with help of technology
Vivek is a technocrat. Musk is a visionary leader.
Musk is a drug addled nepo baby that gambled his parent’s money and got lucky.
When the radical dems hear “Musk” their amygdala blowup. Small business owner don’t park their Tesla near their store or office.
It’s a legal sinkhole: u and your legal friend got in but can’t get out. The bottom line: Pelosi court cannot dictate the federal gov what to do.
The Federal Government is not above the law. Ruling, appeal, decision, appeal, final ruling by SCOTUS—that is how it works. It’s called the rule of law. That is kind of the backbone of our system—co-equal branches of government. I am sure that you have heard of that.
They could not conduct pretext mass firings (which are Reductions in Force) by claiming it was based on poor performance.
Even probation workers are afforded some protections, as there would have to be documented poor performance over several months.
Just wait until he sends the unwilling into court to charge Habitat for Humanity et al with criminal conspiracy and fraud for taking taxpayer money to combat climate change. Because you know, climate change is a fraud and they know it and just a scam to fleece the government. Some people are going to looose their law licences for such frivolous filings. lmao.
Just dropping this. Don’t say you weren’t warned. April 20th is Hitler’s birthday. I predict we will see some type of martial law declared by Trump around this date.
Because what he did was against the law.
“Alsup, in his nice Southern accent, said that the government can lay people off, but it has to do so in accordance with law.”
This judge has the audacity to say that the government must follow the law? This is an outrage.
The point is to cause chaos. Start with that premise and you will understand why. You will know by May why they did this. They want mass protests so they can instate martial law and arrest protesters.
“Emergency” gun laws will follow.
Only against those not supporting Trump.
… so stock up now, and learn to use them.
I once fired an employee from a non-profit for theft. She was able to obtain unemployment benefits, even though I provided proof and evidence of fraud. But, this person had friends in the applicable government departments, so she got it.
Another outstanding, extremely informative article Mish ! Thank you!
I agree there is substantial waste. But Trump wants something different: to go very abruptly and extremely back to the 1800’s style total patronage system where the new boss fires everybody and gets stooges into jobs. This is EXTREMELY unstable for careers, given our electoral system, puts loyal hacks into the jobs, and puts the applicants in a position of promising anything for the job. The system had drifted there somewhat already. There must be a better way. It would be very good to stop the creeping politicization of many jobs.
No person should go into government for a career. Go there to serve your country and then return home.
And instead the business community will just volunteer to clean the air and water and pay to support the old, poor and disabled … I think we’ve seen this movie before. They wont.
Surely the megachurches will pick up the slack with a bake sale or two.
You still have the USAID issue wrong. And your legal expert got it wrong as well. He got it wrong in his original analysis. And he got it wrong in predicting what would happen.
And OBTW. I got it correct. On both counts. And I’m just a retired poor country lawyer.
Not one dime has been paid. The 48 page decision by Jusge Ali admitted he lacked jurisdiction beyond the named plaintiffs, which is about 2 billion worth of work allegedly performed. Not the 20 billion he originally said had to be paid. And he gave the parties until March 14 to devise a solution.
Judge Alsup is an 80 year old Clinton appointee partisan hack in the most liberal state and one of the most liberal districts in CA. He’s also a complete disgrace in the courtroom. A great example of why term limits are needed.
Did you normally refer to judges as old hacks when you supposedly were a lawyer?
From CLEF
“Bill Allsup was a brilliant lawyer who graduated from HLS, worked as a litigator in one of the top law firms in the United States, and did a stint at the Solicitor General’s office, the most elite unit in DOJ. (Chief Justice Roberts Kavanaugh, and Alito served. He is not 80, but Clinton did appoint him.”
“I can’t follow his diatribe on why I was wrong. What did I say about the USAID that was wrong?”
He was born in 1945. I’m getting a clearer picture here.
DOGE is definitely improving the economic situation of lawyers!
For the rest of the US they are probably costing more money than they save.
Hey Walt, you don’t seem to understand something very, very important to your “Lack of a Point”
“Nobody” and that covers “Everybody” has to wonder, ask, think about, or want to know the answers too, ALL that DOGE is doing. They have a “Website” (You can see it on your Computer, Laptop, IPad, EVEN Your Phone)!
So next time you have a comment, even as silly as yours here, simply look it up, and save yourself the embarrassment. It’s all there, and “Transparent” for you to see, question, review, ask for clarity if needed, ETC.
No need to wonder anymore, and I am happy I could help!
Fake news! Fake news!
Only if your heads in the sand, allowing you to lose your Focus…
Well, being anti-Biden/DNC/WEF and anti-Trudeau/WEF doesn’t seem to be working out that well. The hopeful shift rightwards has over stepped by FAR. Now all the left side needs to do is become more centric. The anti-Trudeau will be going Carney in my house at least. Trump is mighty good at making things clear.
Sadly, I feel I can count on the left to overplay its hand, the first moment it gets the chance. So we will continue these gyrations and divisions. There has been decay for about 30 years now, at least, from both sides of the aisle. Finally we are reaching a point of everyday functioning of the system shaking. The electorate is too small-minded and selfish to discipline its reps.
Your legal analysis may be spot-on, but we have a problem when one rando district court judge (of 26 judges in that district) can boss around the entire federal government. Judge Alsup’s district covers only a portion of one state. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_District_Court_for_the_Northern_District_of_California
Apparently one is all it takes.
Hmmm – the last president (who ever that actually was) did act like a King. I remember something about illegal deferments and retirements of legitimate student loans. I do agree that there is a process to fire folks particularly coddled government employees, but what does one do with a bunch of workers performing and not performing unnecessary tasks. Maybe DOGE should just require that all of those jobs be shipped to North Dakota or somewhere.
Also, the President should definitely require bureaucrats to be in their offices playing video games rather than sitting at home playing video games. Maybe the forced commute will get a bunch to up and quit.
Kings don’t lose elections.
Hmm… Tell past Kings that, and see what they say, if they could talk, because they are dead, or imprisoned, as it happens all the time!!!
A few quick examples…
Changing political landscapes, civil unrest, and the spread of democracy have led to the abolishment of monarchies in several countries over the past few centuries.
King Louis XVI of France took the throne in 1774, but food shortages and economic troubles prompted mass rebellion in the form of the French Revolution in 1789. The monarchy was then formally abolished in 1792. King Louis and his wife, Marie Antoinette, were imprisoned and eventually executed by guillotine.
Manuel II was the last king of Portugal, ruling from 1908 until the country became a republic in 1910. He unexpectedly became king at age 18 after his father and older brother were assassinated in Lisbon. Manuel then fled to London in 1910 when the revolution broke out.
Greece was first declared a republic in 1924 by the Greek National Assembly. King George II went into exile until 1935, when the Populist party rose to power in the Assembly and reinstated the monarchy. It was abolished for good under a military regime that declared a republic for a second time in 1973. A government election was held the following year. Constantine II was the last king of Greece, ruling from 1964 to 1974.
…and which of these happened because of elections?
I thought it was obvious captain?
I went to see dad in downtown Chicago in the 1980s when he worked in the Amoco building. This is real private sector office work. If you want workers that work the whole 8 hours, open a factory. Office work is NOT “work 40 hours straight every week” work. Following in his footsteps, I got a job (for 35 years) with the Federal Govt in an office. Same thing, more or less. We were there to support the employees they REALLY valued — the bosses. We spent our time with assigned projects and doing reports — 3-5 people per manager. That, my friends, is office work. We were hired to justify paying supervisors $150k+ a year to sit in meetings. Fire them all, dont fire them all. All that “work” and supporting the darling managers will have to be done by someone long after Trump is gone.
Simple unstated problem Mish. What lawfare and you judge to be illegal may or may not be. We all miss Hillary. And, Everything would be fine if Joe Biden were still leading the USA.
No we do not miss Hillary, who only cared about fast flights to LA and back to NY for parties. She is why we’re having this dictator problem in the first place.
Hillary had the temerity to sport female genitalia, as did Kamala. The pant suits didn’t help at ALL.
Neither did scheming to underhandedly get the nomination in 2016 nor not being primaried in 2024 after not even getting 5% early in the 2020 campaign and communicating that the Biden-era would continue 4 more years.
It is obvious it wasn’t simply a gender issue, so surly you don’t need that pointed out.
The only thing Joe Biden lead was his sonny boy grifting on a Ukrainian oil company.