I'm starting to think eliminating fraud would balance the entire budget.
Conversation
Here's what is doing with DOGE, and why he's doing it that way.
First of all, he's fully aware that, for the past 20 years or so, a gang of thieves has replaced the US federal government, and is wearing it as a skinsuit.
But I don't think he wants to belabor that point out loud, because a lot of people haven't realized this yet, and it'll sound like a loony conspiracy theory until they do.
So he decided to show them.
That's what targeting USAID is about.
When you have to eat an elephant, the way to do it is "one bite at a time", but there are some very specific reasons why he selected USAID as the first bite.
USAID, you see, is a slush fund.
Way back in the days when the grass was still green and the pond was still wet and the clouds were still clean, and the song of the Swomee-Swans rang out in space...
When the US federal government was a real elected government...
The houses of congress had the power of the purse. They set the federal budget.
The problem with this, from the standpoint of a thief, is . Or someone like him. There's one or two in every congress.
If you want to put some kickback or patronage or theft in the congressionally-approved federal budget as a line item, then he's going to find it, as he and his staff comb through that bill.
And he's going to get up in front of congress and the press and tell everyone about it. And then the opposition party, whichever that happens to be, is going to pile on, because they smell blood in the water, and its going to get cancelled and you're going to be embarrassed.
You need a way to hide your expenditure of federal tax dollars.
So how do you hide a rock? In a gravel pit. How do you hide a man? In a crowd.
And how do hide a fraudulent expenditure?
In a general fund.
So here's what you do. With the help of friendly presidential administrations, you create a bunch of agencies with names like the Federal Bureau of Saving Cute Puppies With Waggy Tails.
These are nominally part of the executive branch, handling detail work, but they are staffed by hired (and therefore not elected) bureaucrats, and they are funded in lump sums by a single line item in that budget.
Now, you don't have a whole bunch of "$50K for a transgender opera troupe in Bangladesh" items.
You have one item, which is "$50 Billion for the Federal Bureau of Saving Cute Puppies With Waggy Tails".
And if Thomas Massie starts asking questions, you act shocked and outraged, and demand to know why he wants cute puppies to die.
So what is all this money actually for?
Well, it's for stealing. You give it to companies owned by you, to do silly things. You give it to companies owned by your friends, to do silly things. You give it to publishing companies, to do silly things, and then later, when you leave office, they give you a $65 million book deal for an autobiography no one's gonna read. You give it to Wall Street firms, to do silly things, and then they regularly pay you a quarter of a million dollars to come give a twenty minute speech. You give it to literally anyone, to do silly things, and then they make a donation to your private charitable foundation. Or they put your cousin on the board of directors, for half a million dollars a year to do two hours of work a month.
See the common theme?
Doing silly things.
Because it doesn't really matter what the tax dollars are paying for... it matters who the tax dollars are being paid to. It's obscure, it's circuitous, but at the end of the fiscal year, it all makes its way into someone's pocket.
And everyone who's part of the network gets a taste.
Now, these bureaucratic agencies are nominally under the control of the President, but in reality, they start to have a power base of their own.
This is because their money comes from Congress, so it's not easy to turn off the tap, and the head of each agency has to be approved by the Senate, so it's not easy to dig into each agency and fire the careerists aiding the corruption.
Couple that with Congress delegating regulatory powers to agencies, and courts deferring to their judgements, and now you have a fourth branch of the federal government, with the powers of all three, whose whole job to loot the treasury.
That's why all these "public servants" on modest salaries are retiring as multi-millionaires with three vacation homes, a huge stock portfolio, and a private jet. Because all that baksheesh is being spread around to everyone whose cooperation is required to make the scheme continue to run.
So what happens when you elect a billionaire real estate developer, who doesn't need to loot the treasury, and would rather have a boom economy to do real estate development in?
He wants to take the steal machine apart.
And what happens when he appoints the richest man in the history of the known universe, the single least bribeable man on the planet, to audit all the federal departments and stop the theft?
Well, Musk knows he's going to face fierce opposition. So he needs to get unstoppable political momentum and public support behind him, fast.
So he had to hit the ground running, before the Federal Bureau of Saving Cute Puppies With Waggy Tails could rally its behind-the-scenes power to get in his way.
Go to the center of power, follow the money, cut off the money. Work around the clock.
But he also knew that DOGE would be talked about, intensely, in its first few days and weeks, and these would set the tone for the rest of the 4 year term.
If it gained public support fast, any sort of defense or the status quo would be seen as evidence of corruption.
So he had to gain goodwill fast, and discredit the opposition. Coming off the election momentum of a hugely popular incoming president is great, but it's not enough to carry support for a full four-year audit of the entire federal budget. He needed a target that would generate goodwill right away.
Some federal departments, like the IRS, and the ATF, are very unpopular....
... but there's a better choice.
USAID.
Why?
Because USAID is a special, maximally unaccountable, small-projects slush fund.
He knew that when his team wrenched the lid off it, all they had to do was publicize what they found... and force democrats to defend it.
The sheer ridiculousness of some of these small projects would frame the public discussion exactly as it needed to be framed.
Now the debate has become, not a difference of opinion on how much oversight agency spending should undergo, or whether Musk was the one to do so, but a difference of opinion on whether taxpayers should foot the bill for a $1.5 million effort aimed at "empowering women to adapt to climate change in northern Kenya."
Try defending that.
Just try.
But they have to.
Why?
Because this isn't just about turning the money faucet off. It's about people going to jail.
These people fussing about how Elon Musk has access to your social security number through OPM — as if OPM hadn't leaked these same numbers to criminals years ago — they aren't trying to defend the slush fund.
The slush fund is gone. They know that. They are trying to generate enough counter momentum to avoid going to federal prison.
(Now think about what that deal with was really about, and who was intended to see that. )
But here's the thing. It's too early for DOGE to talk about indictments.
Oh, the evidence is being gathered. Behind closed doors, names are going on lists.
But the verbal public support needs to be there. Because we are looking at possibly a huge number of arrests. Not just high-ranking careerists and appointed officials, but elected Reps and Senators.
Unless this idea is overwhelmingly popular, it would look like a power grab, and no one would pay attention for long enough to realize, hey, these people really are guilty.
That part needs to come from us. Every time someone in office, or a federal job, defends this stuff, or calls DOGE a coup... we need to call for investigations.
Suggest they are involved. (Because they probably are.)
Recommend they find a nice tropical island with no extradition treaty. (And pray they do, because when the first one breaks and runs, it's really over.)
Target them. Personally. Make them so busy defending themselves that they have no energy left to defend the steal machine.
Meme them until they cry. Then make memes about them crying.
And be sure to remind everyone that politico had no revenue. It was just a propaganda puppet run with stolen money.
Your stolen money.
USAID - Lawyer’s Perspective on & Taking On Govt Waste
After digging into the real truth about DOGE (see the link to my other thread below) I decided that I should absolutely dig into the truth about the “shut down” of USAID. Just like the lies about DOGE - neither Trump nor Musk has not actually shut down USAID and they are currently just exposing the waste they have found. While I really cannot see a way to save something so corrupt, they have not actually even formalized their long-term plans for USAID yet.
Everything you are hearing from the left and the press is simply propaganda from people mad that their grift has been exposed and shut down. @VigilantFox
As you can see in the announcement above, USAID has put everyone except “designated personnel responsible for mission critical functions, core leadership and specially designated programs” on administrative leave. This means the agency still exists and is still carrying out mission critical functions. So why all the screaming and crying from the Democrats and the left? Because Trump and DOGE do not believe that funding corrupt programs used to pad the pockets of corrupt political figures or other programs that do nothing to benefit America are actually mission critical. This means that those programs will likely not be continuing after the pause. Below are a few examples of such programs.
So USAID has not been eliminated and the idea that is has been is a lie. To further demonstrate this, you should recognize that the President likely does not actually have the authority to eliminate USAID entirely.
A number of people have correctly noted that USAID was created by an EO but they then mistakenly think that means Trump can end it by altering that order. That might be true except for the fact that USAID was eventually recognized under statutory law (this happened in 22 USCS § 6563 and other statutory references exist as well). Once an administrative agency has been created by statute it is unlikely the President would have unilateral authority to eliminate it… but again - Trump was very clever and did not eliminate USAID.
So what did Trump do? Well a couple of things. The first is that Trump issued the EO below putting a 90 day hold on all foreign aid. During this period each of the foreign aid programs are to be evaluated to determine if they are aligned with the foreign policy of the President. Importantly, this evaluation and additional authority are given to the Secretary of State to ensure the evaluations are properly carried out. Obviously DOGE is involved in assisting the SoS as the DOGE order puts DOGE teams in all government agencies.
This order was brilliant because under the Constitution, the President gets to set foreign policy and thus would have substantial control over foreign funding. This position is supported by numerous statutes and judicial decisions. So ultimately the President clearly has authority to evaluate these programs and create a temporary pause in spending. This also ties in to two other critical points.
The first is that the President successfully merged the State Department and USAID without actually changing their structure legally. He did this by very cleverly appointing SoS Marco Rubio to also be the administrator for USAID. This means that Trump did not have to make any changes to the statutory structure or position of USAID but that it was still ran under the authority of the SoS. Congress literally has nothing to complain about here.
The second is the importance of the pause being temporary. While the President does have substantial authority over all things foreign policy, it would be arguable that money that is earmarked to be sent off on some of these programs is beyond the President’s authority to reign back in. Instead of risking this fight, Trump wisely created a temporary pause which would almost certainly be legally within his authority.
This gets even better when you look at what happens during that 90 day pause. Remember the continuing spending resolution in Congress? Well a new spending bill will have to be passed during the 90 day period and that bill will be in front of an entirely Republican Congress so these guys should absolutely include language that eliminates USAID.
Oh - and if RINOs concern you - that is where Elon Musk and X come in. Musk and DOGE have not stopped reporting about wasteful spending from USAID and it is perpetually viral on X. With this much awareness, any Republican that does not stand up for eliminating USAID (or at least remaking it better) will be as good a gone next election cycle.
So this whole thing is a nonsense. Trump and Musk did not shut down USAID. Trump simply paused spending and Musk/DOGE looked into what was happening there and exposed it. Now that people know the truth the Dems and leftists know that their gravy train is politically dead. The real kicking and screaming has nothing to do with the legality of what Trump and Musk are doing - it is absolutely all legal - rather, it is about the exposure and political push to end wasteful government spending.
One last note. The CRS (which is supposed to be providing neutral research for Congress) was asked to put together a report on this topic. The report was titled USAID Under the Trump Administration and was anything but neutral. In fact it looks like it was written specifically for the press and is certainly not a neutral evaluation of the situation. Perhaps not surprising, the Hill then immediately picked this up and spun it to promote the idea that Trump is trying to shut down USAID and that his actions are illegal. Based on this post you can see that such an assertion is an outright lie.
BTW - It may be worth noting that the “independent researcher” from CRS (Emily McCabe) has been actively involved with USAID and lists Bill Gates as one of her “top voices”.
No comments:
Post a Comment