US US Politics General 2 - Discussion of President Trump and other politicians

General Trump Banner.png

Should be a wild four years.

Helpful links for those who need them:

Current members of the House of Representatives
https://www.house.gov/representatives

Current members of the Senate
https://www.senate.gov/senators/

Current members of the US Supreme Court
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx

Members of the Trump Administration
https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Voyager was Obama, cool flashy presentation, same old shit(The Odyssey).
Enterprise was Biden, 'what the fuck happened.'

Deep Space 9 was Ron Paul.
No, DS9 was Daniel Daly.
AOC probably only ever watched TNG.
As someone who recently watched DS9 for the first time, this post hits pretty hard. lol.
I have been re-watching DS9 lately. Sisko is the best captain and kills tons of dudes in close combat, more than any other captain. He is also the only captain with a kid and an actually functioning family life.
 
Christ. If you can't connect the dots of something that isn't necessarily a 1:1/literal equation, whether you like it or not, you're lost. But OK: she put those things together because back 25 years before Andrew Jackson's Department of Education was elevated to a Cabinet-level agency after consolidating disparate and chaotic elements of other agencies in 1979, people had to sue states for desegregated schools. Brown v Board of Education, heard of it? Rhetorical, and see my comment immediately above. It happened in 1954, and it was a (unanimous) Supreme Court decision that confirmed segregation in schools illegal (unconstitutional). States' pre- and post-Brown disregard of the Constitution - and a time when children and children did have to be escorted to their rightful school by Federal officers - is one factor of why DoE became the overarching Federal agency it did - all of which pointed up the necessity for certain Federal agencies to be able to lay down and enforce certain requirements applicable throughout the United States...because states enforcing unconstitutional laws is bad. It can be debated whether DoE executes well, or overreaches, or whether education should be a Cabinet-level agency, but Idgaf what your opinion of it is, you should have been able to comprehend the connection being made - or at least have been curious enough to go look it up if you're going to try to slam the "dumb bitch" who mentioned it.
This doesn't explain why bringing up black kids being escorted to schools in the 60s is a valid argument against Trump cutting the Board of Education. If you think black kids are going to have to be escorted into schools by feds because the DoE got BTFO'd by Trump then you're pretty lost.
 
Fifth columnists practicing?
Maybe

All I know is that whomever got kicked out of Queens have been slowly making their way east to Long Island, to where Nassau County is the new Queens, and Suffolk County is the new Nassau County. It's also why Nassau County has seen an uptick in poos building houses all over the place.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: IAmNotAlpharius
Modern political outlook has been so warped by social media BPD-ness that I 1000% believe someone who votes for Trump could have this outlook. Consider that groypers are technically "on your side" because most of them voted for Trump but they're the first ones to start dooming when things don't go perfectly According to Plvn.
Groypers were never in anyone’s side but their own. And seeing as even Fuentes didn’t suooort Trump, they can’t be seen as Trump supporters. They didn’t vote for Trump, they voted against a black woman. Anyone dooming right now was never a supporter
 
Sheinbaum strikes me as someone who understands realpolitik. To become the female, Jewish President of Mexico speaks to that. She's also got a masters in physics and a PhD in energy engineering which included thesis work at Berkeley Lab, so I think it's safe to say she's not a complete idiot.

Canadians on the other hand? Good luck leafs, get ready for the rake.
>physics major
>PhD
>in politics

Oh so she’s a total retard.
 
I cannot edit that text. I don't know how many times I (or other users) can warn people before it becomes less of ignorance, and more a deliberate retardation
I know, it's gotten annoying af. I wasn't blaming you for letting it bothering you, I was just trying to help.
 
Nearly half the radical activists arrested Wednesday after storming a Barnard College library are Columbia University students, a Washington Free Beacon review found.
Some footage from the scene:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zw_x4mEgaOQ (archive.ph)(PreserveTube)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdKD-tsTC8s (archive.ph)(PreserveTube)

Why is Elon Musk so obsessed with 'ghost employees'?
NPR (archive.ph)
By Bobby Allyn
2025-03-06 05:00:00GMT
Shortly after Elon Musk's purchase of Twitter in 2022, he sent executives on a mission: Conduct a payroll audit.

Musk wanted to verify that all of the social media platform's employees were "real humans," a request that perplexed executives at the company. Nonetheless, managers were tasked with confirming that some of their direct reports were indeed alive.

"As if there's just people collecting paychecks and not doing anything, as if they don't have supervisors," said Jay Holler, a former supervisor at Twitter who led an engineering team when Musk took over. "The whole idea was just fundamentally absurd and ignorant of how things actually work."

Now, with Musk leading the charge on a White House effort to radically reduce the size of the federal workforce, the billionaire's preoccupation with phantom workers has returned.

In recent weeks, millions of federal employees have been sent emails from a generic government account demanding that they list their weekly accomplishments in five bullet points — messages that have prompted confusion and mixed advice across dozens of federal agencies.

But Musk has made it clear: The emails are aimed at validating existing, breathing employees, a point he emphasized at a Trump administration Cabinet meeting last month.

"They're literally fictional individuals, or someone is collecting a paycheck on a fictional individual," Musk said. "So what we're literally trying to figure out is: Are these people real? Are they alive?"

It was a deja vu moment for former Twitter engineer Yao Yue, who worked under Musk. To her, the campaign to catch ghost employees lurking on the payroll is really about something else.

"Part of that is making his presence felt very acutely. 'I'm the boss. I'm now overseeing your work. You better make me happy.' So just putting it on people's mind," Yue said. She noted that Musk showed little tolerance for dissenters at Twitter after his purchase of the company. Yue sees the emails to government employees as a loyalty test.

"It's not so much about commitment to the company," she said. "In this case, I guess, commitment to the federal government. It's about a personal commitment to Elon Musk."

It's something Yue got used to following Musk's 2022 hostile acquisition of Twitter for $44 billion, a purchase the tech mogul turned into a splashy photo op by walking into the company's San Francisco headquarters carrying a white porcelain sink. He posted a video of the moment on Twitter with the caption "Entering Twitter HQ — let that sink in!"

After that had sunk in, Musk kicked off the hunt for nonexistent employees just before workers were set to receive a bonus, and Musk would not pay it out until the "ghost employee" theory was investigated, The New York Times reported at the time. Musk eventually renamed the platform X and turned it into a pro-Trump megaphone.

Musk and the White House did not return requests seeking any evidence that the federal government has nonexistent people on its payroll.

The possibility of dead people receiving Social Security checks has also animated Musk. He's said "tens of millions" of dead people are getting the federal support — which is not true.

"Be ready with 50 pages of code"
Some ex-Twitter employees, such as Holler, think the five-bullet-point emails are a performative stunt.

Holler remembers one moment from some of his final days at the company when a message arrived from one of Musk's assistants.

"You're scheduled to meet with Elon at 10:30 this morning. Be ready with 50 pages of code," said Holler, recalling a message he received on Slack, the workplace messaging app.

To check whether Twitter engineers were real, or productive, managers like Holler were told to print out the software code they had recently written, also known as "code commits" in engineering parlance.

"That was an interesting nerd snipe," Holler said. "Because we don't think about code in pages. You don't print code out. It's fundamentally run by computers. You edit it on a computer."

Ian Brown, a former Twitter engineer manager who left before Musk's acquisition, said this idea would be comical if it were not so offensive.

"The culture was absolutely focused on high-performing, talent-dense teams. There was no one phoning it in," Brown said. "The wild sort of paranoia of woke zombies not doing stuff is just complete fantasy."

In the end, Musk scrapped the idea and never evaluated engineers' printed-out software code.

But before he backed away from the plan, the company was — like the whole federal workforce right now — confused, scared and at the unpredictable whim of Elon Musk.

"Nobody is going to thrive in an environment like this," Yue, the former Twitter engineer, said of working under Musk. "But if the goal is to survive without losing your sanity, supporting each other, just talking through it, and knowing you're not suffering alone can help," she said. "To know you're not suffering silently."
Trump’s Cuts to Federal Work Force Push Out Young Employees
The New York Times (archive.ph)
By Madeleine Ngo
2025-03-06 10:02:03GMT
gov01.jpg
Alex Brunet is one of many young federal workers who have been caught up in a wave of firings as the Trump administration has tried to cull the federal work force.Credit...Kyna Uwaeme for The New York Times

About six months ago, Alex Brunet, a recent Northwestern University graduate, moved to Washington and started a new job at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau as an honors paralegal. It was fitting for Mr. Brunet, 23, who said he had wanted to work in public service for as long as he could remember and help “craft an economy that works better for everyone.”

But about 15 minutes before he was going to head to dinner with his girlfriend on the night before Valentine’s Day, an email landed in his inbox informing him that he would be terminated by the end of the day — making him one of many young workers who have been caught up in the Trump administration’s rapid wave of firings.

“It’s discouraging to all of us,” Mr. Brunet said. “We’ve lost, for now at least, the opportunity to do something that matters.”

Among the federal workers whose careers and lives have been upended in recent weeks are those who represent the next generation of civil servants and are now wrestling with whether they can even consider a future in public service.

The Trump administration’s moves to reduce the size of the bureaucracy have had an outsize impact on these early career workers. Many of them were probationary employees who were in their roles for less than one or two years, and were among the first to be targeted for termination. The administration also ended the Presidential Management Fellows Program, a prestigious two-year training program for recent graduates interested in civil service, and canceled entry-level job offers.

The firings of young people across the government could have a long-term effect on the ability to replenish the bureaucracy with those who have cutting-edge skills and knowledge, experts warn. Donald F. Kettl, a former dean in the School of Public Policy at the University of Maryland, says that young workers bring skills “the government needs” in fields like information technology, medicine and environmental protection.

“What I am very afraid of is that we will lose an entire generation of younger workers who are either highly trained or would have been highly trained and equipped to help the government,” Mr. Kettl said. “The implications are huge.”

The administration’s downsizing could have a lasting impact, deterring young workers from joining the ranks of the federal government for years, Mr. Kettl said.

About 34 percent of federal workers who have been in their roles for less than a year are under the age of 30, according to data from the Office of Personnel Management. The largest single category of federal workers with less than a year of service are 25- to 29-year-olds.

The federal government already has an “underlying problem” recruiting and retaining young workers, said Max Stier, the president of the Partnership for Public Service. Only about 9 percent of the 2.3 million federal workers are under the age of 30.

“They’re going after what may be easiest to get rid of rather than what is actually going to make our government more efficient,” Mr. Stier said.

Trump administration officials and the billionaire Elon Musk, whom the president has tasked with shrinking the federal government, have defended their efforts to cut the work force.

“President Trump returned to Washington with a mandate from the American people to bring about unprecedented change in our federal government to uproot waste, fraud and abuse,” Harrison Fields, a White House spokesman, said in a statement.

Mr. Trump has vowed to make large-scale reductions to the work force, swiftly pushing through drastic changes that have hit some roadblocks in court.

Last week, a federal judge determined that directives sent to agencies by the Office of Personnel Management calling for probationary employees to be terminated were illegal, and the agency has since revised its guidance. Still it is unclear how many workers could be reinstated.

The abrupt firings that have played out across the government so far came as a shock to young employees.

They described being sent curt messages about their terminations that cited claims about their performance they said were unjustified. There was a frantic scramble to download performance reviews and tax documents before they were locked out of systems. Some said they had to notify their direct supervisors themselves that they had just been fired.

On the morning of Feb. 17, Alexander Hymowitz sat down to check his email when he saw a message that arrived in his inbox at 9:45 p.m. the night before. An attached letter said that he had not yet finished his trial period and was being terminated from his position as a presidential management fellow at the Agriculture Department. It also said that the agency determined, based on his performance, that he had not demonstrated that his “further employment at the agency would be in the public interest.”

Mr. Hymowitz, 29, said he was dumbfounded. “My initial thought was, obviously something is wrong,” he said. “How could I get terminated for performance when I’ve never had a performance review?”

Mr. Hymowitz, who had worked on antitrust cases and investigations in the poultry and cattle markets for about six months, said he was not given many further instructions. The next day, he decided to walk into the office and drop off his work equipment. “I just assumed that’s what people do when they get fired,” he said.

gov02.jpg
Nicole Cabañez was terminated from her role as an honors attorney at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.Credit...Kyna Uwaeme for The New York Times

Around 8 p.m. on Feb. 11, Nicole Cabañez, an honors attorney at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, found out that she had been terminated after she realized she could not log into her work laptop. Ms. Cabañez, 30, worked in the agency’s enforcement division for about four months, investigating companies that violated consumer financial laws.

“I was prepared to help make the world better,” Ms. Cabañez said. “It’s honestly very disappointing that I never got that chance.”

During her first year at Yale Law School, Ms. Cabañez said she originally planned to work at a large law firm, where she would have defended companies and made a lucrative income after graduation. But she said she wanted to work in public service to help people get relief through the legal system.

Ms. Cabañez said she was now applying for jobs with nonprofits, public interest law firms and local governments. But she said she worried that the job market, especially in Washington, would be “flooded with public servants.” She said she could not file for unemployment benefits for three weeks because her agency had not sent her all of the necessary documents until recently.

The impacts have stretched beyond Washington, reaching federal workers across the country, including in Republican-led states.

At 3:55 p.m. on Feb. 13, Ashlyn Naylor, a permanent seasonal technician for the U.S. Forest Service in Chatsworth, Ga., received a call from one of her supervisors who informed her that she would be fired after working there for about nine months. Ms. Naylor said she initially wanted to stay at the agency for the rest of her career.

“It was where I have wanted to be for so long, and it was everything that I expected it to be from Day 1,” Ms. Naylor said.

Ms. Naylor, 24, said she felt a mixture of anger and disbelief. She said her performance evaluations showed she was an “excellent worker,” and she did not understand why she was fired. Although she said she was devastated to lose her job, which primarily involved clearing walking trails in the Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forest, she was not sure if she would return to the agency in the future.

“It would be really hard to trust the federal government if I were to go back,” Ms. Naylor said. She said she was considering enrolling in trade school and possibly becoming a welder since she is still “young enough” to easily change her career.

Although some said their experiences have discouraged them from pursuing jobs with the federal government again, some said they were intent on returning.

Jesus Murillo, 27, was fired on Valentine’s Day after about a year and a half working as a presidential management fellow at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, where he helped manage billions of dollars in economic development grants. After standing in countless food bank lines and working in fields picking walnuts to help his family earn additional income growing up, Mr. Murillo said he wanted to work in public service to aid the lowest income earners.

“I’ve put so much into this because I want to be a public leader to now figure out that my government tells me that my job is useless,” Mr. Murillo said. “I think that was just a smack in the face.”

Still, he said he would work for the federal government again.

“For us, it’s not a partisan thing,” Mr. Murillo said. “We’re there to carry out the mission, which is to be of service to the American public.”
New Zealand’s top diplomat in London loses his job over remarks about Trump
Associated Press (archive.ph)
By Charlotte Graham-McLay
2025-03-07 02:28:08GMT
WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) — New Zealand’s most senior envoy to the United Kingdom has lost his job over remarks he made about U.S. President Donald Trump at an event in London this week, New Zealand ‘s foreign minister said Thursday.

Phil Goff, who is New Zealand’s high commissioner to the U.K., made the comments at an event held by the international affairs think tank Chatham House in London on Tuesday.

Goff asked a question from the audience of the guest speaker, Finland’s Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen, in which he said he had been rereading a famous speech by former British wartime leader Winston Churchill from 1938, when Churchill was a lawmaker in the government of Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain.

Churchill’s speech rebuked Britain’s signing of the Munich Agreement with Adolf Hitler, allowing Germany to annex part of Czechoslovakia. Goff quoted Churchill as saying to Chamberlain, “You had the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, yet you will have war.”

Goff then asked Valtonen: “President Trump has restored the bust of Churchill to the Oval Office. But do you think he really understands history?”

As the audience chuckled at the New Zealand envoy’s question, Valtonen said she would “limit myself” to saying that Churchill “has made very timeless remarks,” according to video of the event published by Chatham House.

Valtonen’s speech on Tuesday was billed as covering Finland’s approach to European security at an event entitled ‘Keeping the peace on NATO’s longest border with Russia.’

In response to questions from reporters, Foreign Minister Winston Peters said that Goff’s remarks were “disappointing” and made the envoy’s position “untenable.”

“When you are in that position you represent the government and the policies of the day,” Peters said. “You’re not able to free think, you are the face of New Zealand.”

Officials would “work through” with Goff the “upcoming leadership transition” at New Zealand’s mission in London, said Peters.

Goff has been New Zealand’s envoy to the U.K. since January 2023. He did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Officials were “in discussion with High Commissioner Goff about his return to New Zealand,” according to a statement from New Zealand’s foreign minister.

Former Prime Minister Helen Clark — who was Goff’s boss during his time as a lawmaker — denounced his sacking in a post on X, where she wrote the episode was “a very thin excuse” for removing a “highly respected” former foreign minister from his diplomatic role.
Trump deepens NATO’s crisis of trust on sharing intel
Politico EU (archive.ph)
By Antoaneta Roussi and Amy Mackinnon
2025-03-06 03:11:09GMT
Intelligence sharing among NATO countries is in danger as members become increasingly wary of one another, and the earthquake unleashed by Donald Trump risks making things worse, current and former alliance and security officials from across the alliance told POLITICO.

There have long been strains caused by distrust between the alliance's traditional Western members and newcomers from the ex-communist east. That grew worse following Russia's attack on Ukraine, when pro-Russia Hungary, joined recently by Slovakia, are seen as unreliable, said eight current and former NATO and security officials with knowledge of intelligence sharing at the alliance. Many were granted anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter.

But now the U.S. shift toward Russian under Trump is shaking the core of the alliance — prompting countries to wonder about the risk of sharing intelligence with Washington, said five of the officials.

The confusion around the reliability of the U.S. worsened this week, with reports that it temporarily cut off intelligence sharing with Ukraine to put pressure on Kyiv to come to the negotiating table with Russia.

“There are a lot of whispers in the halls of NATO about the future of intelligence sharing within the alliance,” said Julie Smith, U.S. ambassador to NATO under Joe Biden until November, adding she had “heard concerns from some allies” on whether Washington will continue to share intel with the alliance.

According to Daniel Stanton, a former official at Canada’s foreign intelligence service CSIS, “at a time when they actually need more intelligence, there will be less going into it.”

“There’s less of a consensus about who the common enemy is” and “people are going to be more reticent to share,” Stanton said.

Trump’s pick for director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, has also caused concern, said Gustav Gressel, an analyst at the National Defense Academy Vienna and former European Council on Foreign Relations fellow.

Gabbard has echoed Russian talking points over the wars in Ukraine and Syria, and she met with former Syrian President Bashar Assad, who had been isolated by the international community for his use of chemical weapons against his own citizens.

Last month, the Financial Times reported that top White House official Peter Navarro is pushing to cut Canada from the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing network, a forum that also includes the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand and is considered the most intimate multinational intelligence-sharing group in the world.

Several officials said the U.S. shift hadn’t yet affected intelligence sharing but expressed fears that it could do so soon.

One current NATO official said that following the catastrophic White House meeting between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Trump on Friday, there were "naturally a lot of questions." But staff were "keeping calm and carrying on," the official added.

"Of course there is corrosion because of the approach on Ukraine," the same current official said, "but we remain of the view that Trump has no real issues with NATO beyond spending ... so that’s something."

A former NATO official confirmed that a lot of intelligence sharing was happening bilaterally rather than in meetings among all NATO members. “That was always the case if the going got tough,” they added.

Some officials denied the recent shocks to the alliance had impacted intelligence sharing.

"Intelligence folks can share and talk to each other under conditions that others cannot," the official said. "We haven’t seen any reduction in that."

Who controls information
Intelligence sharing among NATO's 32 members has never been as close as among Five Eyes, mainly because of fears of leaks and suspicions that some national intelligence agencies could have been penetrated by the Russians.

Allies “don't really share their crown jewels when it comes to formats like that … We knew they were coveted by hostile services,” said Stanton, the former Canadian intelligence official.

Sharing intelligence can be very powerful, as happened when the Biden administration trumpeted about Russia’s preparations to attack Ukraine, which played a decisive role in alerting allies and rallying a response.

But three years on, and with a decisive political shift under Trump, the future role of U.S. intelligence is in question.

“The question now is whether intel sharing will remain a key feature of transatlantic work at NATO, given the questions allies have about whether or not the U.S. is impartial in its handling of the war in Ukraine and future negotiations,” said Smith, NATO ambassador from 2021 to 2024.

The wariness about Washington is something new.

NATO countries agreed last year to boost and share more intelligence based on technical retrieval — from electronic and satellite surveillance and signals interception.

When it comes to HUMINT — information collected by real-life spies and their sources — the sharing has always been more circumspect and based on “circles of trust” between small groups of partners and on a strict need-to-know basis.

Sharing information has always been "the best thing about NATO," said a former official, saying it improved collective security and helped smaller countries get up to speed on threats.

National governments "are the owners of the information" and determine who they'll share with, said Robert Pszczel, a former Polish diplomat and NATO official.

Cutting ties to Moscow
In the years after the fall of communism, Western intelligence services were especially cautious about sharing significant intelligence with their counterparts in the former Warsaw Pact countries as they joined the alliance.

And doubts have persisted about some Central European agencies — notably Hungary’s security services since the political rise of Russia-friendly PM Viktor Orbán.

These suspicions have affected access granted to Hungary since the Ukraine war broke out — with Slovakia also becoming an issue following the return to power of pro-Kremlin populist Robert Fico in 2023 — according to six officials.

Gressel, of the National Defense Academy Vienna, said information on Russia, China and technical intelligence about the adversaries’ weapons systems are being exchanged bilaterally or within smaller groups.

“Hungarian intelligence is only informed about urgent counter-terrorism threats, nothing else,” said Gustav. “You do not want that information to go to Moscow.”

But it’s not just Budapest and Bratislava that face mistrust.

A former Bulgarian government official said that Sofia was currently not receiving all intelligence information over fears there are "Russian assets in key services."

Wariness over sharing intelligence is nothing new.

In an interview with POLITICO last year, Richard Dearlove said that when he was chief of Britain’s MI6 between 1999 and 2004 he was highly selective about what he would share with Germany's BND, fearing it would leak to Russia. “There was certain highly sensitive stuff we wouldn’t have given them in a month of Sundays,” he said.

Pszczel said that there were other past examples when countries considered some members suspect. “For example, in Greece during the regime of the colonels,” he said, referring to the right-wing military junta that ruled Greece from 1967 to 1974.

But none of those worries involved the United States.
Diplomats Decry USAID’s Dismantling in Dissent Cable to Rubio
Bloomberg (archive.ph)
By Nick Wadhams and Jason Leopold
2025-03-05 05:03:15GMT
usaid01.jpg
Demonstrators display a sign and offer supplies during a “clap out” in support of USAID workers on Feb. 27.Photographer: Kent Nishimura/Bloomberg

Hundreds of US diplomats wrote a formal letter of protest to decry the dismantling of the US Agency for International Development, saying the move threatens US national security and caused “irreparable harm” to millions of people.

The so-called dissent cable, addressed to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, said the Trump administration’s attacks on the aid agency endangered US personnel and eroded trust in the US. The signers said USAID staff had also been subjected to a smear campaign based on claims that “fail even the simplest scrutiny and fact-check as false.”

“The dismantling of USAID programs endangers American personnel, diplomats, and military forces overseas,” the writers said in the cable, a copy of which was seen by Bloomberg News.

“We dissent not out of opposition to the administration, but because we have dedicated our lives to making America safer, stronger, and more prosperous,” they said, invoking the same words Rubio used in his confirmation hearing to justify foreign policy spending.

USAID managed more than $43 billion in appropriations as of fiscal 2023, and its work has almost completely ground to a halt. The agency has come under sustained attack from President Donald Trump and Elon Musk, who called it a “criminal organization,” while about 4,000 of its 10,000 employees have been fired or put on leave.

The State Department declined to comment on what a spokesperson characterized as leaked internal communications. Rubio, who once called USAID “critical to our national security,” has repeatedly defended the crackdown on the agency by saying it had gone rogue and wasted taxpayer money.

The dissent channel is a system that lets diplomats and staff voice dissent confidentially to top policymakers without fear of retribution. A person familiar with the matter said the letter on USAID had already drawn more than 600 signatures, half of whom chose to remain anonymous. The writers said that by getting rid of USAID, the Trump administration was ceding the field to adversaries such as China.

“These actions will lead to increased economic hardship in developing nations, undermining U.S. commercial interests and reducing markets for American goods and services,” the writers said. “In regions where the U.S. retracts, strategic competitors such as China and Russia step in, using economic leverage to extract political concessions and expand authoritarian influence.”

The cable refers to administration moves taken in February, including a move to terminate about 1,600 positions on Feb. 23. It also refers to more than $1.5 billion owed to USAID implementing partners that execute the agency’s aid projects overseas — a figure that appears in a case that’s now before the courts.
 

Jamie Raskin is a fucking moron. No, Jamie. The lower courts do not get to tell the Chief Executive Officer what he can and can't do. It's a literal violation of article 2 of the constitution, and a violation of the separation of powers. If you took a basic ass Social Studies / History course in school growing up, you would actually know this.
this is true, and i hope these rogue lower courts get BTFO'ed, but we really need to stop pretending the constitution means anything to any of these people and really holds any weight at all.

The supreme court doesn't technically have the power to do what they do half the time as laid out in the constitution, yet they do it and everyone goes along with it so in a very real sense they do have the power. The real limiting factors for each branch of government don't truly come from the constitution, those are just words on a piece of paper, They come from the other branches of the government doing their jobs and impeaching unconstitutional actors or rulings, or go full Jackson and flat out ignoring their orders entirely.
 
Back