Some of it is over the top. That's the politics game. Frankly, they are acting shell shocked. They were completely unprepared for the position they find themselves in. They are in the same spot the GOP was in when Obama first rolled into D.C. It took awhile to get their feet under them and to craft an opposition platform and in the meantime were left to kind of impotently complain about getting steamrolled. By 2010 they had the House though....
Co-President Musk
- Thread starter Bowlmania
- Start date
Not sure what part of that link you are relying on or that you think contradicts my previous post.
Everything, Brad. How dare anyone try to give back money that’s being stolen from me. Just last week a mugger stole money from me and a good Samaritan stopped him. Don’t worry, I slapped the good Samaritan and gave the money back to the mugger.
The Appropriations Clause would appear to categorically enjoin the President and federal agencies to spend funds only as appropriated by Congress. Even where the President believes that federal spending is urgently needed, spending in the absence of appropriations is constitutionally prohibited.
....Nor may the President frustrate congressional mandates by refusing to spend directed funds.
An appropriation is often thought of as the specification of an amount of money. But an appropriation is more than a limitation as to how much money may be spent. The “Appropriations” required by the Constitution also must specify the powers, activities, and purposes—what we may call, simply, objects—for which the funds may be used.
[IUCrazy] I am saying that even the discretion given to spend the funds is regulated.
Don’t think it is that important, really, in terms of the fundamental fight here. It’s a short term issue.** Re executive power to do it, I’d prefer less executive power. Just as I’d like Congress to take back any tariff authority in the executive. I’m not conversant enough to predict an appellate decision.
But I’ve noticed the people objecting are doing so based on procedural issues, not underlying questions about executive authority to control his agencies or much of where this money goes.
**This assumes he's just pausing payments and reviewing USAID payments or vendors that he has discretion over. If it's a question of whether the Impoundment Act is unconstitutional or whether he can unilaterally veto a legislative funding act, I think and hope he loses that issue.
Last edited:
Trump is no doubt violating procedural protections with Musks operations. Stupid execution yet again. He can achieve what he wants without making these stupid mistakes and courts should make sure the laws that are constitutional are followed.
I’m also concerned about potential conflicts of interest. But Musk is already the richest man in the world—I don’t think he’d risk Washington up his ass for a few more billion, but who knows. I’m more concerned about the precedent this sets for the future.
But all this tinfoil hat speculation about Musk as if he’s some evil Bond villain seeking to become our next dictator is bizarre to me.
It is but not like you have posted. Congress directs USAID to spend for particular purposes. Trump stopping aid for tran comics in Guatemala (hyperbole) and shifting it to something else TBD, does not violate the Appropriations clause.
That is, many times Congress tells the Pres to go to store for the purpose of feeding the family in a nutritious manner and leaves the particular food decisions to the executive. As I understand it, that’s how the USAID funding is mostly written.
I’m willing to be proven wrong if someone wants to post a very long statute with exact instructions on how to spend all the money.
The idea that Musk is some noble, unbiased genius who just wants to help is kind of funny, too.
Could have used some of your dispassionate distance as folks around here were bedwetting about George Soros.
Soros we can point to where his funding went and it why it was a disaster. It’s premature re musk. May be a disaster. But today we don’t know
He's not unbiased, to be sure. He has an objective. It's apparently the same as Trump's. So Trump hired him to do this. Presidents get to do that (albeit, yes, they have to do it in the right way).
Soros isn't an evil Bond villain either. He's a rich guy who wanted to shape the way the U.S. operates and did. Just like the Koch Bros. did. I have no doubt that both Soros and the Kochs thought they were doing what was best for the common good. Just as I have no doubt the farthest left and the farthest right posters here at the Cooler want what is best for the common good as well, however they define it.
Well, except @UncleMark. That guy's just an asshole.
Last edited:
Musk has suggested every federal monetary distribution be coded in a way so that auditors and overseers can readily determine the payee, the spending agency, and the Officer authorizing payment. Why would any one resist this unless they intend hide the tracks of some payments.
It's a completely reasonable suggestion.
But I'm not sure that's what people are super worried about. Steel man their argument, CoH. This is an unprecedented move by Trump. It's going so fast, I suspect there's a lot to be worried about. I just think it'd be better to focus on real stuff, not the fear Musk is going to be a dictator or steal health data and give it to the Chinese.
Does putting an entire agency that had a codified existence on admin leave and announcing it's going to be 'shut down' go way the hell beyond what your just described?
Could another radical President decide to disband the military and dwarf the DOD down to 500 admin staff? And claim they are still fulfilling Congressional authorization?
Last edited:
What’s wrong with the Water Cooler? We have to many liberal lawyers posting dumb
lawyer shit. You people don’t think Trump hasn’t confided in a team of legal experts before he makes a move. If you don’t, you’re stupid.
lawyer shit. You people don’t think Trump hasn’t confided in a team of legal experts before he makes a move. If you don’t, you’re stupid.
Not necessarily Musk, his army of 20 year olds. But yes, Musk isn't beyond finding a way to capitalize on an asset.
Musk is the tool used by Trump in the analogy. If Musk worked for Biden, our friends would be very upset.
Most dictators have a right hand man they lean on, then off them when their power gets too big.
You think billionaires ever say "yup, I have enough money. I'm good"
I doubt he is worried about legal trouble. He has Trump to pardon him as long as he stays loyal
Booz Allen Removes Subcontractor Who Wrote Report on DOGE Access
(Bloomberg) -- The government contractor Booz Allen Hamilton on Friday night said it had dismissed a subcontractor who prepared a draft report saying that Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency access to the Treasury’s payment system poses an “unprecedented insider threat risk” and...www.yahoo.com
DOGE breach of US Treasury data may harm CIA intelligence assets, officials warn
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS have raised concerns that allowing Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DoGE) access to Treasury Department databases could expose human intelligence …intelnews.org
If any of our Intelligence agencies are actually paying human sources in a way that has any direct link to the Treasury with their name or any type of identity attached they're doing it desperately wrong...
They should be paying those types of sources from a compartmentalized fund that the fewest individuals possible have access to... If they're giving them Treasury identifiers they'll eventually get them all caught, turned or killed...
If that's really how our Intelligence agencies are operating then they Do need to be taken apart brick by brick and rebuilt...
So running an independent audit is illegal?
Your stupidity is showing! There’s not a businessman in this country that does not have a team of lawyers!
National Security and Clandestine Ops should all be disbursed to larger masked funds within the agencies themselves and Never directly from the Treasury... Even Coding a disbursement to say the NSA or the CIA specific agencies could have a black designation (and be masked again as a collectively grouped, broad brush allocation to "National Security")...
This could be done in such a way as to retain security protocols if they really wanted to do it... You just carve out that group as a no deep dive area of forensic bookkeeping... That would still leave you with the rest of the Federal government to ride herd on....(and designate an auditor team with the highest of clearances to ride herd over "National Security")...
I'm aware but that's not what I'm speaking of... Those committees should be the consumers of the cleared auditors information not be the auditors themselves... (and those committees should Never have access to individual specific compartmentalized information unless their purview led them directly to such areas in an investigation of perceived wrongdoing...)...
Last edited:
What exactly is so wrong with 20 years olds?
Democrats LOVE 20 year olds when they go on tv to lecture people about gun violence. They make them Vice Chair of the DNC.
They love Swedish teenagers that lecture people on how they are going to kill the planet. They go to Davos and the U.N.
Democrats love teenagers who emote. Who will lecture their elders about how they’re ruining the planet.
What they don’t like very much is industrious, competent young people with marketable skills.
I'd love to see your reaction to a 20 year old telling you you are doing your job wrong.
I work with some right out of college that are quite clearly more talented than myself and 99% of the company. When they speak, I listen, even though I’m much more senior.
It isn't that he is a Bond villain per se. He's someone who doesn't seem to believe rules apply to him. That isn't someone I necessarily want to have totally unfettered access to things.
Look, no way, now way people like Mc let Soros in this position just because he is a billionaire. And rightfully so. I have heard Soros, Bezos, Gates demonized as being elite. Why isn't Musk? I may be closer to Gates, and I greatly appreciate his work putting chips into the COVID vaccine, but I never said, "Give Gates unfettered control over the COVID response".
I think people facing bankruptcy from student loans is a real problem, I am certainly not one cheering their economic problems. But at the same point I agreed that Biden didn't have the authority to unilaterally cancel their debt. I expect the same rules to apply to all presidents, whether my president or their president. The zealots don't see it that way, and that's what I am calling out. Should we have turned over all of COVID to Gates and said he didn't need to follow any existing rules?
Lucy mentioned audits, audits are great. I had a job where I was part Tech, part Accounting. In that time I went through 2 financial audits. Both were conducted by people trained in and certified in financial auditing and overseen by a CPA. The paperwork, the questions, all were well documented. No one sent in a coder to do the financial audit.
In the computer audits, also two, things were done very similarly. In fact the format of the audit was created by accounting auditors with the person who would head up the IT side. So it makes sense it was pretty identical. The people that came were IT people, again with IT certifications. They didn't bring in people adept at totally different fields.
People have a goal in mind and they want to get there no matter the path. That's my point about dictatorship. It is fine to cut government. Musk may hit upon some great things. But he has to stay on the path we have codified. You aren't always going to like the president. Don't fall victim to the "it's ok when my guy does it" trap because it ain't always going to be your guy. It isn't always going to be a goal you want. The rules have to be the rules for everyone.
Before you had over classified info, or even Social Security numbers and health records, the people need vetted. That' simple. I will guarantee you any reasonable CPA would say that's true. @stollcpa , would you advise a client to turn over SSN and HIPAA data to unvetted people?
In the computer audits, also two, things were done very similarly. In fact the format of the audit was created by accounting auditors with the person who would head up the IT side. So it makes sense it was pretty identical. The people that came were IT people, again with IT certifications. They didn't bring in people adept at totally different fields.
People have a goal in mind and they want to get there no matter the path. That's my point about dictatorship. It is fine to cut government. Musk may hit upon some great things. But he has to stay on the path we have codified. You aren't always going to like the president. Don't fall victim to the "it's ok when my guy does it" trap because it ain't always going to be your guy. It isn't always going to be a goal you want. The rules have to be the rules for everyone.
Before you had over classified info, or even Social Security numbers and health records, the people need vetted. That' simple. I will guarantee you any reasonable CPA would say that's true. @stollcpa , would you advise a client to turn over SSN and HIPAA data to unvetted people?
You think auditing is all he is doing?
And I never said anything about what he is doing and being illegal. I said he wouldn't worried about being caught if he did something illegal.
And yes, Trump has lawyers. Doesn't mean he listens to their advice.
Maybe before jumping to insults, you should actually try to understand someone's post. Otherwise you just make yourself look stupid
You have an eye for finding talent. And obviously the ability to develop it. Combine that with your innate leadership skills and it’s no wonder these young kids are already vital to your concern. It’s like young lamine yamal at Barca. Great organizations with great leaders identify talent early. No different with you. No different with musk’s wonder kids. Very different with government
We’re pissing in the wind here. The most successful man of our time. The most innovative and inspiring man of our time wants to help our government and Dems hate it.
We have the government we deserve
Presidents and their department heads come and go while the bureaucrats hold their positions for years and years.
Over the years in executing the laws the bureaucrats adapt old laws to new challenges. It can be argued in executing the laws the bureaucrats alter the original intent of Congress which passed the laws in the first place.
Finally we cannot ignore Congress which provides the money so the bureaucrats can enforce the laws.
Given all this, presidents historically have complained about being powerless. Trump and Co., however, seem determine to change history.
No he doesn’t! I suggest you study how Space X became the dominant space company on the planet in less than a generation.
what's that have to do with saying he needs to follow the rules?
So you want him as dictator? Isn't that a leader who doesn't follow the rules is called?
Quit repackaging what I said. There are miles and miles of daylight between being innovative and creative and a dictator.
He doesn’t need to follow all the rules. Mindless rule following and group think is the reason we are in a fiscal mess.
Stop lying. I said he has to follow the rules, the laws. You said no. I made no reference to innovation and creativity. You said he does not have to follow the rules. Congress has power of the purse, not musk nor Trump. Why are you granting them extreme boundaries but didn't Biden? What rules and laws exist for your president must apply to my president. Only a crazed zealot partisan disagrees with that.
lol. just follows rules that he likes lmao
All Hail King Trump and Queen Elon. Our new overlords who get to decide on their own which rules they shall follow. Nothing could go wrong with that.
I guess that means when a dem becomes president, we won't be hearing from you when they don't follow the rules since rules are apparently optional.
