Below is my column in The Hill on Musk-mania gripping Washington. Democrats are using Musk to double down on rage rhetoric and rallying supporters to “fight in the street” in a declared “war.” It is a familiar pattern for many of us.
Here is the column:
Across the Internet, politicians and pundits are in a monstrous mood. The same people who spent the last year declaring the imminent death of democracy if Donald Trump were elected are now insisting that the real threat is the “monster” he has unleashed upon the federal bureaucracy.
It is the thing of legend, a Beltway monster that you told your children about around campfires late at night: An outsider who comes to town and lays waste to government waste, firing thousands and slashing budgets. Part Frankenstein, part Bigfoot, that creature never had a name, but would be beholden to no one and uninterested in the status quo.
The monster now has a name, and it is Elon Musk.
Democratic politicians are now claiming that reducing government is equivalent to destroying government. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) yelled dramatically to an outdoor crowd this week that Musk’s government efficiency efforts are “taking away everything we have.”
For decades, both Democratic and Republican presidents have run on reducing government and making it more efficient. But everyone knew that such campaign pledges would be quickly discarded after each election.
What is so terrifying this time is that Musk means it. We know that because he has done it before.
When Musk bought Twitter with the promise of dismantling its censorship system and culture, he started by firing virtually everyone. Critics immediately declared that he was a fool and did not understand how to run a social media company. Former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich said that Musk’s firings meant the death of Twitter and triumphantly declared, “You break it, you own it.”
It did not exactly work out that way. Musk fired as much as 90 percent of his staff and the company survived. Liberals only grew more determined, seeking even to boycott his other companies and bar Space X from needed national security missions.
As liberal media and pundits raged, Musk stayed firm and survived. Now Amazon has increased advertising on X, which is now the sixth most popular social media site. It has reportedly hit 500 million subscribers and a reported 40-plus percent profit margin. It is set to make billions with a greatly reduced overhead due to the firings.
Musk’s model has been watched — and to some degree replicated — by other companies. The only way to change a culture is sometimes to change the people.
Take the U.S. Agency for International Development, where Musk led an effort to freeze operations at the agency and move it to within the State Department. Notably, they are not shutting down the agency, and Trump has said that he wants to continue foreign aid needed for core missions like clean water and disease prevention, for example.
There are good-faith reasons to be concerned that vital programs must not be abruptly ended. However, the complaint is that USAID is the ultimate example of a bloated agency with a high percentage of funding going to administrative costs over field operations.
The State Department reportedly plans to reduce the USAID workforce from over 10,000 to less than 300. It is vintage Musk. It is easier to take the trauma upfront and then rehire the employees needed to fulfill the mission with a leaner workforce.
That process is easier if you can get people to leave voluntarily. Part of it is performative like Musk showing up at Twitter with a sink — to let reality “sink in” for the thousands of employees.
It appears to be working. Many employees are taking an offer to leave with a generous severance package. The idea is simple: If you throw a badger into a crowded car, people will get out. Musk is that badger.
As for Musk being a democracy-devouring Frankenstein, the rhetoric is again outstripping reality. The fact is that liberals rarely hunt monsters, they create their own monsters.
The making of “Muskenstein” can be found in the cancel campaign launched against him as soon as he pledged to restore free speech on Twitter. An unprecedented alliance of government, corporations, media, and academia were arrayed against him.
This same alliance has worked countless times to get corporations and CEOs to comply with its demands for censorship. But Musk, the wealthiest man in the world, was unbowed.
Liberals correctly saw Musk’s defiance as an existential threat. For years, they had exercised virtual total control of social media, legacy media, and academia. Opposing views were denounced as dangerous disinformation.
The key to their system was that you maintain orthodoxy by coercing people into silence. During the COVID pandemic, scientists who challenged the enforced view of masks, COVID-19 origins, and other issues were banned or fired. Others remained silent as they watched colleagues exiled for expressing their opinions.
Musk had to be destroyed, or others might start to believe that they could also defy the groupthink.
The problem is that intolerance for opposing views creates thousands of renegades and outsiders. I was one of them. I was once associated with liberal academia, which frankly worked to my advantage in favorable media and academic opportunities.
I then began to question the growing orthodoxy in academia over the loss of free speech and viewpoint diversity, including the purging of faculties of conservative and libertarian voices. I was quickly targeted for it. But that campaign gave me an even greater understanding of the dangers of the anti-free speech movement from outside the system.
On a much higher level, Musk seems to have felt the same liberating aspects of being declared persona non grata. They turned Musk into the very monster they feared.
They are now doing the same thing with Mark Zuckerberg. After the head of Meta announced that he was going to end the robust censorship system on Facebook and other sites (as well as downsizing staff), the left went after him with the same unhinged hatred.
Like Musk, Zuckerberg had been celebrated as an industry icon, but is now condemned as a grotesque abomination. Politicians such as Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) — who once threatened Zuckerberg not to restore free speech values like Musk — are now set against him. There is talk of boycotts as many liberals retreat into the safe space of BlueSky, a site that essentially protects liberals from opposing views.
BlueSky’s appeal is that it stays close to shore, where the waters are safe and shallow. The problem for many on the left is that more and more people want to venture beyond those navigational buoys. Like Musk, they want to consider new horizons and possibilities.
In Pirates of the Caribbean, Captain Hector Barbossa warns Captain Jack Sparrow, “You’re off the edge of the map, mate! Here there be monsters!” For liberals, we are now off the map where creatures of mythological shapes dwell.
They found them exactly where they thought they would be. After all, they created them. They have made monsters of everyone who challenges the confines of their known world.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
Indeed the Bureaucracy Agencies are rife with; Over Staffed, Over Paid (plus Benefits & FERs), and lack of accountable-diligence.
A Bureaucratic Monster. Musk merely asked for an Auditable analysis of the Departments spending, and he got a Resignation (USAID Dept head) because He knew that it was not possible and that once it was Audited there would be the consequences of the miss-distributed and miss-appropriated funds to account for.
(He saw the writing on the wall – and split! – Nothing happened on my watch – This ain’t my mess, it was broken before I got here, and it will be broken after I leave). The rest of the Hullabaloo by our favorite Democrats was the rhetoric of, ‘They’re taking away your Governmental ATM Card’ to induce panic an rage in the streets, and to CYA their own butts.
Crypto – Crypto is a digital record of transactions, think of it as the paper sales receipt you get at the check out, only the sales receipt is a collection of sales receipt end-to-end forming a Chain. One big long transaction record. Sales Receipt requirements were a aberration if the Interstate Commerce Act, so you can see that Congress may soon be enacting a Interstate Crypto Act at sometime to account for and establish an Auditable record (At least in the Federal Level and individual States as adopted).
The Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board ( FASAB) and Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) will also adopt new standards for this Governmental Crypto Accounting Standard(s), once the legislation is codified.
Musk is correct in the reasoning is that there is no Auditable Trail regarding the Treasury and departments there under. This would also include the Federal Reserve to which Vivek Ramaswamy addressed in his campaign. For Years and Years, no one was allowed to look at the books and behind the doors of these Bureaucracies, as the Monster surely lurked beneath the surface.
What Crypto Trails uncover are only a part of the revelation, the other revelation will be that of the corruption of Officials and Clerical Offices. The correction may not get rid of the Free Handouts (Political favors) however it will make the Budgeting more ridged. The days of using the U.S. Government as an ATM are coming to an end.
Musk says Treasury, DOGE instituting reporting changes to all government payments
The payments will include a new categorization code and a “rationale” for the money spent.
By: Ali Bianco ~ 02/08/2025
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/08/elon-musk-doge-government-payments-014920
Re: Elon Musk ~ 𝕏 @elonmusk
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1888314848477376744?mx=2
“Crypto – Crypto is a digital record of transactions,”
Your post was generally thoughtful and accurate, with an exception. Your definition of “crypto” is either completely incorrect, or compressed beyond clear comprehension. The term “crypto” is an abbreviation for “cryptography” and/or “encryption”. Both refer to encoding data items in such a manner that only someone with the correct decoding key can restore the data to intelligibility.
But you get the Idea. Ok
Maybe I should have used the term “Block Chain”, but that requires a bit more depth.
I simplified it by describing a Block Chain as a continuous string of Sales Receipts, so older people would have something tangible to relate it to. A Crypto Coin is actually reminiscent of the Paper Sales Roll (copy) of the Cash registers Sales receipts. But you get the idea.
For those interested in what Number 6 and I are discussing here see:
How and where to view crypto transaction histories
https://cointelegraph.com/news/how-and-where-to-view-crypto-transaction-histories
In Short:
A blockchain is a digital ledger that records every transaction on its network. Most blockchains, like Bitcoin and Ethereum, are public, meaning anyone can access transaction records.
For those of you to Young to know what a Cash Register was see:
https://vintagepointofsale.com/category/system-manufacturers/ncr/
lol
“Maybe I should have used the term “Block Chain”, but that requires a bit more depth.”
OK, gotcha. Defining “Block Chain” does require a good bit of detail. OTOH, referring to it as “crypto” is kinda misleading. As a retired InfoSec wonk, I tend to be a bit anal about accurate terminology 🙂
You may have information that demonstrates this, but I am also somewhat skeptical that most Federal accounting systems use block chain at all. In the past, Federal systems have very much lagged state of the art in both hardware and software. When I began my IT career, systems written in COBOL (yes, I am THAT old) were beginning to be phased out in corporate environments, but IBM was able to keep its mainframe systems running that language going strong at many Fedgov agencies (including Pentagon) for another decade or two.
My missive is to imply ‘what’s to come’ (the application of block-chain accountability to Governmental systems), Musk seems to have grip on it, so it’s a matter of the Federal Legislature to devise a Bill to pass into Law (just a matter of time IMO).
I started with Fortran and Punch Card Decks at Whirlpool Corp. – We’ve come along way since.
“I started with Fortran and Punch Card Decks at Whirlpool Corp. – We’ve come along way since.”
My first Data Processing education (as it was called before the term “Information Technology” came to the fore:-) was a COBOL programming course. My first job was punching 96-column cards for payroll & cost accounting programs run on an IBM System/3 using RPG. That morphed into creating data input on an IBM 3741 key-to-disk machine, and running that data (PR/cost, again) on a System/32 (RPGII). I started reading the CL job logs while batches were running (occasionally took hundreds of pages of log printout home with me to read), and leveraged what I learned by doing that to pull myself up by my bootstraps in the profession. I then spent a few years developing and coding delivery control and accounting programs for retail heating fuel vendors (including a transition from IBM midrange systems to PCs), followed by modifying and supporting an IBM MAPICS system (COBOL, again) for a manufacturer of data matrix switches marketed to the recently deregulated Baby Bells. Retired as IT Security Manager and Executive Technology Advisor for a 100 MM mining company after putting 38 years into the profession. So I’ve seen at least my share of changes… And yes, we have come a H** of a long way, in spite of numerous false starts down ultimately unproductive technology paths. I am currently undecided whether AI is one of those or not, and I am also not completely convinced that crytpo-currency is what it is touted to be, although, as you claim, the underlying block chain technology is clearly an advance, and is here to stay in any event.
As is usually the case, Turley’s piece begins with a flawed premise— that Real President Muskrat is merely “reducing” the size of government. From that incorrect assumption, Turley proceeds to argue that Democrats are lionizing Real President Muskrat unfairly.
Real President Muskrat arbitrarily demanded that federal employees either resign, retire or be fired, without any analysis of what their positions entailed, whether there were people to replace them and he canceled all new hires, including nurses and counselors hired to work for the Veterans Administration. The only way such an arbitrary process could be defended would be to assume that no one on the federal payroll does anything worthwhile. Real President Muskrat backed down when the hue and cry came from the VA which has been chronically understaffed.
Then, there’s sending in his own employees, who do not have security clearances, and locking out government employees and members of Congress while they paw through confidential information on government servers that includes Social Security numbers, medical information for Medicare and Medicaid recipients, personnel records and bank account routing and account numbers— they have conveyed this information via unencrypted emails.
They have shut down the USAID and are planning to shut down the Department of Education— tell us, Turley—what authority does the largest campaign donor to a presidential candidate have to do any of this, especially shutting down USAID and the Department of Education, which were established and funded by Congress? And since I already know that such authority does not exist, why are you attacking Congressional Democrats for speaking out, other than to sell MAGA media propaganda to the disciples?
Gigi. You attack Turley’s premise, but do not explain why it is wrong.
If you think that Trump is not “reducing the government,” then what else do you think he is doing? Because it sure looks like he is getting rid of government waste and bloat to rational observers.
The government’s operations can be reviewed and evaulated to determine where cuts could be made, but that’s not what Real President Muskrat has done–he arbitrarily demanded that ALL government employees resign, retire or be fired and he cancelled new hires, including nurses and counselors at the VA, which has been chronically understaffed. He also shut down USAID, which has left food and medicine sitting in warehouses and on loading docks, and he’s trying to unilaterally abolish the Department of Education—things that ony Congress can do because only Congress can set up such agencies and programs and fund them. WHY do you arbitrarily believe there is “government waste and bloat”? WHAT part of government is wasteful and bloated? Be specific. You don’t just take a sledgehammer to the US government, demand that everyone quit, retire or be fired, without any idea what these people do and what their loss will mean for the American people, send in people without security clearances to go through classified and confidential records, transmit date on unencrypted lines and block members of Congress and employees of these agencies from going inside. Trump has already violated Court Orders. What King Donald and Real President Muskrat have done is what is done in authoritarian countries–ignoring lawmakers and disregarding Court Orders. We have a system of checks and balances and Federal Courts are a check on unrestrained and unconstitutional power by the Executive Branch. King Donald does not have unilateral authority to fire all government employees or demand that they retire, and that’s why Courts have issued temporary restraining orders to stop him.
Gigi: As is usually the case, Turley’s piece begins with a flawed premise….
and
George says: February 10, 2025 at 9:54 AM
Per usual, Turley leaves out a lot of details that make his ‘defense’…..
Peter Shill / Svelaz / George / Wally / Sammy / Natacha / Gigi….
This is my last BFF tip…
As an academic writer and fluent in multiple languages, I have given you pointers to your writing skills so that your trolling copy/pasta comments might be read by some of those readers who have an IQ lower than 70. However you haven’t listened. I have told you repeatedly to enroll in the UCLA West Hollywood campus, “Beginners creative writing course” to beef up your writing. It is so predictable, unpersuasive and no matter what name you use they all read the same way! You can do better! I believe in ewe!
please enroll in that “creative writing course” at the West Hollywood UCLA campus down the road from your apartment. A George Soros organization could pay the bill via USAID funds! But you must act quickly
before USAID funding is killed much like DNC operative and meth dealer, Ed Buck did to his gay tricks in WeHo
Do it now!
Democrat Political donor Ed Buck sentenced to 30 years in prison for fatally injecting 2 men with meth
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ed-buck-sentenced-30-years-fatal-injections/
Buck deserves life without parole.
“Federal judge blocks Elon Musk’s DOGE from accessing Treasury records after Democratic AGs file lawsuit”
– Fox News
______________
“Musk calls to impeach judge whose order blocks DOGE from Treasury systems access”
– MSNBC
____________
“The difference between God and a federal judge is that God knows He’s not a judge.”
– Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN)
_______________________________
The singular American failure is the judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court.
Musk sharing anyone’s personal information is a felony crime under the Privacy Act.
That explains Trump acting with Plausible Deniability. Musk will probably be the one Trump figuratively throws under the bus.
Trump will likely say he never told Musk to break any federal laws.
Trump’s top national security threat should be drastically reducing the annual budget deficit and longterm debt. So it’s curious that he is choosing political wedge issues like USAID (which has virtually no impact on the national debt) instead of tackling bigger issues with bigger agencies.
In just a few years, more than 50% of our federal tax dollars will go to debt service exceeding the amount for national defense and homeland security.
Trump’s frivolous lawsuits are paid for by our tax dollars. Since many are totally frivolous, Trump is increasing waste, fraud and abuse. Trump then fired the IGs (Inspectors General) whose job is to reduce waste, fraud and abuse.
Independent non-partisan economists believe Americans will receive a huge tax increase in 2026 just to service longterm debt.
Why aren’t Republicans focusing on these much bigger issues putting country ahead of partisan politics? None of Trump’s cutting so far even make a dent in reducing longterm debt.
Anonymous, excuse me but if you don’t pay your taxes your information will be shared with law enforcement if necessary. Information about the people who make up DOGE is already being shared by the press in an attempt to dig up any dirt they can find. Your panties in a twist over sharing personal information is laughable at best. If you possessed any modicum of fairness your outrage would be directed toward the sharing of dirt dug up by the left to smear the young people who are exposing the payoffs to your liberal friends. Your call for privacy is a joke of the sickest nature. I will indeed admit that you are always true to form.
Oh my head hurts! I drank too much last night. Oh! Now to where you are off base:
First, Trump STARTED with USAID. What makes you think that is all he plans on getting into???
Second, getting into the Medicare and Pentagon spending, will help drastically reduce the deficit. Trump is doing that.
Third, reducing the size of the Federal workforce will help drastically reduce the deficit. Trump is working on that.
Fourth, sometimes little things mean a lot. USAID’s buying and selling of journalists is what soldiers call a Force Multiplier. My father taught me about that. Like Forward Air Control, to make the bombers more effective. Like that, buying off journalists has an outsized effect.
Fifth, training is important and experience. Starting off on a smaller job allows you to refine your auditing technique. USAID was a good place to start, so that the DOGE Young Guns could develop their algorithms.
So now, you can apologize to Trump and MAGA, and take back what you said!
Squeeky states “Oh my head hurts! I drank too much last night.”
Watch out when Annie aka Annie crumpets and Max-1 start commenting on your posts.
Me and PD watched the Superbowl, and drank too many margaritas. She had stopped watching the NFL games, but fell off the wagon for the game.
I wonder if the Democratic Party Troll Operation has started using AI to save money. There is a lack of human intelligence behind some of these comments???
@Squeeky
Assuming you are not just an assumed persona: none of us have forgotten what a pain you were previously, nor have we forgotten what an unrepentant racist you were. Why you popped up again after literal years begs a whole lot of questions. You aren’t fooling anyone. Go blow.
“Second, getting into the Medicare and Pentagon spending, will help drastically reduce the deficit. Trump is doing that.”
If Musk/DOGE do the same take-no-prisoners job classifying and tracking Pentagon spending as was done re USAID, Trump should be happy that he chose a VP who is down with his program, because the overwhelming probability is that quite a few people who are far more entrenched in the Deep State (and who have access to unlimited munitions) are going to be VERY pissed off. I would suggest that Trump and Vance should stay physically far apart during this phase. I think I’ll keep a seriously large popcorn supply at hand…
Nicely put and sorry for your headache.
Getting into Medicare and medicaid and some of the unaffordable care act changes will be like walking into a morass.
Something that many people missed were the billions of dollars that Obama took from Medicare to “pay for the unaffordable care Act”.
And Biden took more billions from Medicare to “fund other programs” and to try to make Medicare Advantage Plans less and less desirable. They are highly popular and generally deliver excellent care at less cost than traditional Medicare.
Musk himself having the data is illegal under the Privacy Act.
“Musk sharing anyone’s personal information is a felony crime under the Privacy Act. ”
I am becoming very tired of seeing the unwarranted assumption that access to confidential personal information is involved in the DOGE auditing process repeated endlessly by those on both sides of the debate. These computers are nothing like your phone or laptop, where all of the data is typically protected by a single password (or none at all for some foolish folk). Systems such as those that Treasury (et al) use to process financial transactions have data structured in such a way that access can (and usually MUST) be granted in a granular fashion to certain discrete categories of information. It is highly unlikely that a taxpayer’s name, address, social security number, annual income, etc. are in the same access tier as disbursements to NGOs and other information of that kind. So, the odds against Musk or his team needing or having access to any individual’s personal data are very high.
It won’t shock me if the Big Ballers keep digging somewhere we’ll find that our tax dollars went to BLM and ANTIFA.
$25MM went to BLM. You can guess what they did with it based on the riots and the buildings they burned. To add insult to injury, BLM’s leader, Patrisse Cullors embezzled millions from her org. No prosecutions, but The Los Angeles Times wrote a lovely puff piece on Ms. Cullors.
😂 Doesn’t the treasury print money? Just one huge trillion dollar bill? Do you want that in million dollar bills? Maybe 100 billion dollar bills with a picture of Mars on it? What’s the largest dollar bill?
There are 2 million employees in the executive branch. Hard to manage. The Roman catholic church has 1 million employees. Money maker and Oklahoma is making it more lucrative. Walmart is 2 million employees, no union.
Mr Bessent, treasury sec, said those are treasury employees gathering data and he hired 2 of them. Hey! He’s gay! There’s that…
What a congress…
“Doesn’t the treasury print money? ”
The Treasury prints currency, not money. That may seem a nitpick, but it is a very important distinction.
Dear Mr. Turley, with their loss in November, the Democrats were desperate to find a new scapegoat and it looks like they may have found it in Mr. Musk. Their real problem is, he is way too far above them morally, intellectually and too wealthy to be hurt in any significant way. I am thankful that he is exposing the waste at USAID. I agree with Suze. Great comment!!!
Laughing at all of these comments about “private” “personal” data.
U r not important.
the DOGE boys are running programs that identify 100s if not 1000s of cases of FRAUD.
They don’t have the time, inkling, or desire to look at your “private” “personal” data.
u r insignificant to the project.
a blade of grass — not a tree – in the forest
What “fraud” have they found? None. They are attacking stuff MAGAs don’t like.
MAGAs also dislike waste and abuse. Perhaps those are okay with you?
MAGAs don’t like the concept of a government at all. They can’t tell the difference between waste and legitimate.
Franke @ 11:59 AM: Do you mean to make a distinction between legitimate waste and illegitimate waste? If so, which type of government waste of your tax dollars do you support?
Can you tell the difference between conjecture and logic?
The ends don’t justify the means. If there is waste and abuse, get Congress to slash the budget. If you don’t think Congress can identify waste and abuse, why did you elect them?
“If there is waste and abuse, get Congress to slash the budget. If you don’t think Congress can identify waste and abuse, why did you elect them?”
A popular definition of “insanity” is “doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results”. What you propose was done over and over, and, thanks to the gradual, but inexorable, distortion and corruption of the Constitution that you pretend to admire, led directly to the horrid financial crisis in which we find ourselves today. On November 5th the voters decided to stop doing “the same thing over and over”, and elected Donald J. Trump to be President, with a mandate to do EXACTLY what he has done so far.
Here’s a fun one!
FEMA sent $59Million to luxury hotels in NYC for illegal aliens!
https://x.com/amuse/status/1888960712820560269/photo/1
Dear Prof Turley,
The trouble with USAID is the CIA and other clandestine U.S. gov./media organizations using it as a slush fund for some of the most despicable and reprehensible programs ever devised under the guise of ‘humanitarian aid’. The fake ‘vaccine’ push in Pakistan/Afghanistan in 2011, e.g., to gather biometric data on OBL/’terrorists’ is what real monsters are made of – diabolical.
The largest recipient of US AID in 2024, e.g., was the $16b to the Ukraine government (sic). Under the guise of ‘macroeconomic development’. With that kind of money, I could install plumbing/running water to every shack in Appalachia. .. and make it the ‘Riveria of North America.’
I, for one, have no problem with genuine, reasonable U.S. foreign humanitarian aid, especially in response to clear crisis .. . notwithstanding, according to the NYT, I come from the poorest (white) county in the entire U.S.
Top of that list should be U.S. aid to all those suffering souls in Gaza, mostly women and children. They have it worse than the [white] trash living on Pig Turd Point. As Trump points out, it’s a living hell-scape.
Otoh, I no longer support any U.S. AID to Israel presently, overtly or covertly. For obvious reasons.
Furthermore, any *savings* from USAID expenditures should be accompanied by an apology to any aggrieved nation-states, where necessary, or it will ring hollow. A Trump/Musk inspired establishment of a long overdue U.S. Dept. of Humility would go a long way to address these concerns going forward.
*special note. for only $999,999.95/yr, in three easy payments, I can do that.
* In the future, the quickest, most equitable way for Musk to resolve any lingering ‘labor issues’ – both public and private – is a fair and reasonable mandatory profit sharing scheme. .. cut the TDS afflicted Lib commies off at the pass./
USAID has not provided direct economic assistance to the State of Israel for many years.
One of the Anonymi commented below:
” a business student friend worked as an intern at NPR Boston, and set out to learn everything. After almost a year he quit, because,
putting together the (so-called) nonprofits’ 990, he saw that the 12+ VP’s each made over $225k/year, people who had a few years experience and same or less education.
Whose responsibilities were less than his as an intern. Their sole talent, they knew how to politic with top mgmt. They were crazy liberals.”
I suspect that is what Musk will find permeating the Federal Bureaucracy. A bunch of highly paid people, who have impressive titles, and who do nothing except toady up. Some will be relatives of The Powers That Be, others will be agents and cronies.
A Hard Rain’s Gonna Fall
No show jobs & double dippers
Elon Musk should be careful when a signature is required by the mailman.
Those government issued pens constantly malfunction.
A country is free only when the population has power over its laws and those laws are respected. What Musk is doing is violating federal law and thus the Constitution.
I am seeing MAGAs excuse this lawlessness because Musk is “saving money”. It is truly frightening that people would be so eager to destroy the US as a free county just to save a few bucks.
The Gaza plan will cost trillions of dollars, blow up our deficit to record levels, and will take us into war.
This is the MAGA brain damage… Trump says no more nation building, America first. MAGA’s mantra is anti-neocon and against meddling in the Middle East.
Then Trump says, we need to own a piece of the Middle East, and MAGA suddenly changes its tune and now says America first means meddling in the Middle East.
There’s not a MAGA on this comments board who’ll say they disagree with Trump’s Gaza desires.
To Franke @10:23: Okay, smarta$$, describe how YOU propose to weed out fraud and abuse of tax dollars by unelected government officials, or do you propose to do nothing and just let it be?
Step 1: Don’t fire the people in the government whose job it is weed out fraud and abuse of tax dollars.
Trump fails that.
Musk is unelected and not a government official.
Zero Hedge has a good article on this, and a really good answer:
One final suggestion. If left-wing regime-party judges can issue emergency restraining orders with “immediate nationwide effect,” why couldn’t a politically mature district judge in, say, Alabama do the same, overturning the order issued by his left-wing colleague on an “immediate, nationwide basis?” I offer the idea free and for nothing.
—————-
There is also this excerpt:
“Humankind,” said T. S. Eliot, in “Burnt Norton,” “cannot bear very much reality.” Similarly, Bureaucrats cannot bear very much transparency. Like vampires, the sunlight is fatal to them.
How will Trump respond? We do not know yet. I hope it will be at least partly as Andrew Jackson is said to have responded in his contretemps with Chief Justice John Marshall. In 1834, the Supreme Court determined that the Cherokee Indians owned Northern Georgia. Nevertheless, Andrew Jackson evicted the Indians, reputedly observing that Marshall “has made his decision; now let him enforce it.”
Lincoln responded in a similar fashion to Chief Justice Roger Taney in 1861. In April of that year, Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus between Washington, D.C., and Philadelphia. This allowed military commanders to imprison suspected saboteurs without indictment. Taney said (in “Ex Parte Merryman”) that Lincoln did not have the authority to do this. Lincoln basically ignored him, invoking the novel doctrine of “nonacquiesence.”
As usual, Lincoln demonstrated his deep understanding of the issues involved. “Are all the laws but one to go unexecuted,” he asked Taney, “and the Government itself go to pieces lest that one be violated? Even in such a case, would not the official oath be broken if the Government should be overthrown when it was believed that disregarding the single law would tend to preserve it?”
In my view, Trump’s actions to expose the partisan corruption of the administrative state are in response to an existential threat is as grave, if less bloody, than the Civil War. The permanent bureaucracy that rules us has for decades been erecting and fortifying a nearly impenetrable edifice from which to preserve its privileges and power, stifle criticism, and export its globalist agenda. Donald Trump was elected to deconstruct that edifice. Elon Musk is one of his most potent aides in accomplishing that task. Of course, the left is hysterical. Their gravy train is being derailed before their eyes. The people who elected Trump are delighted.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/trump-musk-deep-state-battle-over-transparency-begins
Trump is the poster child for Partisan corruption.
Trump, Musk and DOGE are pointing out the Democrat corruption.
@Franke
Sure. Because you can’t use your own words or experience. 😂 Cite the propagandists, always the leftist move. Pretty convinced now that you are paid to be here, and likely one of the other trolls wearing a username. 🤷🏻♂️ Go blow. This doesn’t work anymore, generally; never worked on this particular forum.
“If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal,” Vance said in a post on the social platform X. “If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that’s also illegal.”
I hope trump tells the SC where to go. Imagine that, telling a president that he has to abide by the Constitution. What gaul do these SC Judges think they have that they can tell the President what the Constitution allows. JD sure has balls to come right out and say trump is king.
When a judge issues a ruling we like, it’s always, “Imagine that, telling a president that he has to abide by the Constitution” (as if judges never get reversed on appeal). When a judge issues a ruling we dislike, he’s a rogue activist member of the unelected judiciary.
These types of reactions are lazy and content-free. It would be more meaningful to explain *why* the judge’s ruling was appropriate or inappropriate. But that would require at least some mental effort so don’t expect it to be forthcoming from anonymous trolls like the commenter above.
So if you don’t like a ruling just ignore it? Sorry, that is not how our Constitutional Democracy works. If you don’t like a ruling, appeal it. You obey whatever the court has ordered. When the SC rules, that is the rule of law. JD vance is saying nope, we can do what we want. IMHO, JD Vance should be impeached as he is calling for the President to not follow the Oath of office.
If Biden had ignored the courts you would be going bonkers to rein him in, trump does it and you justify it. Sorry, this is not how to run a country.
You changed the subject, which is understandable since I made a point you couldn’t answer. Now the new topic is JD and his comments criticizing the ruling.
Sorry but judges are not beyond criticism. And nowhere did he indicate the administration was going to disobey. He suggested the judge had exceeded his legitimate authority. Earth to anonymous: the authority of federal judges is not unlimited, so that is a valid line of criticism whether or not you agree with him. Impeached for that? You’re delusional.
The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 limits the executive branch’s authority to decline to spend or commit to spending funds that Congress has appropriated. The statute limits impoundments by sorting them into two categories and imposing sharp limits on each.
Limits on Deferrals: A deferral is a delay in the obligation or commitment of appropriated funds. The executive branch must apportion funds for agency activities: It must spread out the funding over the fiscal year so no shortfall arises. Absent specific statutory authority, executive officials cannot delay spending based on disagreement with the policy underlying it.
Limits on Recissions: A recission occurs when the executive branch wants to cancel spending altogether. The ICA does not allow the executive branch to make a recission. It can propose a recission but Congress must enact it. Spending can be put on hold while Congress considers a recission, but holds may not last longer than 45 days of “continuous session” in Congress. After that period, the ICA requires the release of the funding.
The ICA was designed to put Congress in the driver’s seat when it comes to federal spending, subject to some executive flexibility.
Congress attempted to establish an additional form of impoundment with the Line Item Veto Act of 1996, but SCOTUS held that this was unconstitutional in Clinton v. New York.
This statutory framework is clearly not being followed by Trump/Musk/DOGE.
Trump will likely try to get SCOTUS to hold that the ICA is unconstitutional, relying on some form of the “history and tradition” argument of historical impoundment. But, examples of pre-ICA impoundment do not support a constitutional authority to defy the ICA’s specific limits on impoundments. At best, they demonstrate a practical background understanding, shared by Congress as well as many presidents, that governing statutes before the ICA allowed presidents to impound appropriated funds in some circumstances. But stepping in to regulate this practice, Congress abolished that prior understanding and limited impoundments by statute. Presidential practice before the ICA thus should not provide precedent for actions defying it.
Re: USAID
Can the President Dissolve USAID Without An Act of Congress?
No, not lawfully. In 1961, USAID was created by an E.O. issued by President John F. Kennedy (E.O. 10973), based in part on authority provided in the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961. But a later act of Congress (The Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998, 22 U.S.C. 6501 et seq.) established USAID as its own agency. In a section titled “Status of AID” (22 U.S.C. 6563) it states:
(a) In general
Unless abolished pursuant to the reorganization plan submitted under section 6601 of this title, and except as provided in section 6562 of this title, there is within the Executive branch of Government the United States Agency for International Development as an entity described in section 104 of title 5. (emphasis added)
The key language here is “there is within the Executive branch of Government [USAID]” (see sections 6562/6563). Those are the words Congress uses to establish an agency within the executive branch. It would take an act of Congress to reverse that – simply put, the president may not unilaterally override a statute by executive order.
The 1998 statute also transfers only certain functions of USAID to the State Department, and in essence requires USAID to handle all other pre-existing USAID functions described in the Foreign Assistance Act. This means that, at a minimum, Congress asserted a role for itself in such transfers of functions as well as early as 1998.
Also in the 1998 Act, Congress gave the president a near-term, time-limited opportunity to reorganize these departments (22 USC 6601). Specifically, the Act provides, among other things, that within “60 days after October 21, 1998,” the president may, in a “reorganization plan and report” to be provided to Congress:
“(1) … provide for the abolition of the Agency for International Development and the transfer of all its functions to the Department of State or (2) in lieu of the abolition and transfer of functions . . . provide for the transfer to and consolidation within the Department of the functions set forth in section 6581 of this title; and may provide for additional consolidation, reorganization, and streamlining of AID . . .”
President Bill Clinton submitted the statutorily-envisioned report to Congress on Dec. 30, 1998, within Congress’ specified 60-day window. In that report, the Clinton administration explicitly chose to retain the independence of USAID as its own agency (while providing for certain forms of coordination and resource sharing). It stated:
(d) United States Agency for International Development. Effective April 1, 1999, the United States Agency for International Development shall continue as an independent establishment in the Executive Branch.
Congress provided the president the opportunity to modify or revise that plan (6601(e)) until the effective date of the reorganization plan, which the 1998 Act specified as no later than April 1, 1999 with respect to some USAID functions, and Oct. 1, 1999, with respect to the opportunity for abolition of the agency (6601(g)(2)). No prospective modification or reorganization authority was granted to the president beyond those effective dates.
Finally, a much more recent provision of law – section 7063 of the FY24 State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Act (later incorporated into the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024) – explicitly requires both congressional consultation and notification to Congress for reorganizations, consolidations, or downsizing of USAID. Absent consultation and notification, actions to “eliminate, consolidate, or downsize” USAID or “the United States official presence overseas” would not be lawful.
In short, Congress established USAID as its own agency and asserted its role in transfers of functions between USAID and State. It authorized the president to abolish or reorganize USAID for a moment in time, in accordance with the plan it authorized the then-president to provide in 1998. That reorganization occurred, with USAID’s independence retained. And there is no additional authority granted by Congress to the president to abolish USAID as an agency.
The Dems have lost the levers of power in the legislative and executive branches. The real audience for their rage rhetoric is judges who they hope will run interference for them. It has been successful so far, so it will continue.
This will remind Trump 2.0 if the importance of the judiciary and, one hopes, cause him to make the appointment of federal judges a priority as it was in Trump 1.0.
Per usual, Turley leaves out a lot of details that make his ‘defense’ of Musk laughable. Musk laid off a substantial portion of twitter, sure. But Turley didn’t mention the fact that Twitter is losing money, it’s barely making even according to their last financial filings. He’s also a so-called free speech absolutist who is currently suing advertisers because they chose not to spend money on twitter because of its racist slants and literally telling them to fvck off. The free speech absolutist is upset that advertisers who are exercising their free speech right to not associate with his platform and demands they advertise with him. Turley left that embarrassing tidbit information.
Elon’s antics with government agencies and dictatorial declarations of who gets what money is unlawful. He was not elected or confirmed by congress yet he has been doing things that multiple federal laws prohibit. Congressional Republicans are sitting idle, giddy over the chaos and supposed “efficiencies” he’s finding while upending in years of work in days, even hours.
He’s already threatened and called for the impeachment of judges who get in his way and even VP Vance has hinted that the administration will simply ignore court orders. Pretty much being as lawless as they can while courts try to catch up. I thought lawless government was a bad among conservatives. Even MAGA is getting concerned about Elon’s meddling with private data and arbitrarily deciding what should and shouldn’t be funded. Nobody knows what he’s doing. Even congress and that is not going to look good. Stephen MIller and Vought are running the show. Trump is just the convenient conduit to run their project 2025 agenda.
Prices are still climbing and inflation will rise. All because Trump and President Elon are having their way with government without regard for their supporters who are starting to notice that’s not what they wanted. All the damage they are causing now will play right into the Democrats favor in the mid-terms.
You said, “Prices are still climbing and inflation will rise. All because Trump and President Elon are having their way with government without regard for their supporters who are starting to notice that’s not what they wanted.”
You are partly right – bad economic news will most likely be in our future. That has been baked in for years, and Biden made it worse. See this:
Former Wall Street money manager and financial analyst Ed Dowd of PhinanceTechnologies.com is back with a new report called “Danger of Deep Worldwide Recession in 2025.”
The new report shows how a weak economy was propped up under the Biden Administration and how a crash, this year, is inevitable.
Dowd says,
“What we are going to have going forward is the reversal of deficit government spending, which was juicing the economy with illegals.
Some of them got jobs, but a lot of them got benefits. They got housing accommodations. The NGO system was flush with money to facilitate this massive, purposeful logistical operation. People don’t understand that the net legal migration in the US is one million a year. That’s one million people a year. The last four years, we brought in 10 million to 15 million people. That is a new economic variable, and it distorted the economy.
It never got us into expansion territory, but it papered over a lot of the ills we were seeing.
Trump’s policies are going to reverse that all out. . . . The velocity of money under Joe Biden really started to rise. . . . Illegal immigration is very inflationary…
In the fourth quarter, the velocity of money is already rolling over. The Trump effect began the moment he was elected. We’ve seen self-deportations. We have seen new tenant rents plunge, and that’s what has been holding up the housing market.”
How bad is the economy going to get?
Dowd predicts,
“We are seeing a recession in 2025. The rest of the globe is already starting to roll over. It’s going to be a worldwide recession. There is going to be a mini housing crisis. Housing has been stagnant for the better part of the year. There is no transaction volume, and nobody can afford homes. We are hitting the 18-year housing cycle. The last housing cycle was in 2007, and you add 18 years and you get 2025…
The economy for the middle-class is going down. . . . As time goes on, we are going to see GDP numbers go lower and lower and lower. . . . It’s kind of a perfect storm for the Trump Administration. There is no way to avoid the pain.”
When can we expect things to get better?
Dowd says,
“This is much like Ronald Reagan in his first term. He was elected with -2% real wages. This was the same phenomenon going into the 2024 Election. So, we are going to have a recession . . . Then, Trump gets his policies, and he has a very short window of opportunity to get all of his policies enacted. If he does, we will be booming on the other side of this.”
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/danger-deep-worldwide-recession-2025-ed-dowd
Floyd,
Bookmark that article so we can remind those who are economic illiterate when the recession starts!
Danger of Deep Worldwide Recession in 2025 – Ed Dowd
https://usawatchdog.com/danger-of-deep-worldwide-recession-in-2025-ed-dowd/
Take just the first sentences in George-Svelaz’s post, and one can see how little he knows.
“Per usual, Turley leaves out a lot of details that make his ‘defense’ of Musk laughable. Musk laid off a substantial portion of twitter, sure. But Turley didn’t mention the fact that Twitter is losing money, it’s barely making even according to their last financial filings.
I make money even where my investment doesn’t provide income. THAT IS GOOD. I DON’T HAVE TO PAY INCOME TAXES ON INCREASES IN WEALTH. You don’t understand that. An IQ of less than 70 doesn’t provide you the luxury of knowledge.
I don’t care if Musk is or isn’t a monster. No one should have access to my data in the U.S. Treasury’s payment system, which manages disbursements such as Social Security benefits, except for congressionally approved entities. It’s the law. We can’t have it where we follow the rules when it suits us and violate them when it suits us, claiming that the violation was okay because it didn’t suit us. This is how MAGA thinks and why it’s not really a conservative movement.
The age old question, “Who regulates the regulators? The answer is clear, when the unchecked corruption evidencing theft and fraud of billions of taxpayers money, whomever the President the people elected wants.
You’re arguing that Trump has no limits to what he can do. If he thinks it’s right, you support it, even it means violating laws, the congress or the courts. What you support is, in fact, the definition of a dictatorship.
You said, “No one should have access to my data in the U.S. Treasury’s payment system, which manages disbursements such as Social Security benefits, except for congressionally approved entities.”
Uh, ahem, er, The Secretary of the Treasury is the head of just such an entity, and he is entitled to use whatever personnel he wants, to see where the money is going.
Federal law limits who can have acess to sensitive data, and the SoT can not overrule that.
Can you show me that particular law??? I wonder what it actually says.
Do you really need the language of a specific law which says if you work for an organization that possesses sensitive data, you can’t offload that data onto your personal computer?
Yes, I would l like to have it, please. I am curious as to the language, and what is permitted and what is not permitted.
Thanking you, in advance!
Anonymous, your premise misses an important point. The Secretary of the Treasury is approved by Congress. And he appoints people who have access to your private data (IRS employees). If the Secretary of Treasury can appoint some to look at your stuff, then he can appointment others to do likewise and at the same time conduct a long overdue audit of the system. Not a MAGA thing. Just common sense.
“… appoints people who have access to your private data…”
You’re rationalizing. IRS employees are brought in through a legally vetted process and their actions are legally governed by rules. The head of the IRS could no more bring in a contractor with no background check and let that contractor made decisions outside of a rules based process. Any contractor for the IRS cannot transfer your data to his computer. That’s against the law.
Question: what do you have against Musk complying with the established rules? Because, so far it seems what you’re ultimate saying is “they didn’t follow the rules, so we don’t have to follow them.”
It’s really something to see, the hysteria at the thought of exposure by methods that would have formerly been considered routine, and that the private sector engages in every day. Very sad what the dems have become over the past sixteen years, it’s tough to even conceive of the levels of corruption they’ve embroiled themselves in. Thanks for a great article.
Something? Don’t get your hopes up. Its just the media directing a narrative. MAGA has to deal with dem courts.
@Anonymous
🙄🙄
Wish I could roll my eyes harder than an emoji can represent. Whatever. Pfft. If you were smart, you’d be putting that energy into whatever you are going to do when your grift collapses for good, because it is going to. Nobody here cares, and they never have, the trolls picked the wrong site to troll. Maybe move to Britain? Pfft.
what i find interesting is that shortly after the election thousands fled X and headed over to Blue Sky Social – a social media platform created by the same individual that created Twitter. Over there BSS saw a tremendous increase in censorship requests. They saw 3500 requests per hour while in 2023 they saw a total of just over 350,000 requests. Those how left X kept saying that Musk was going to censor people when in fact he implemented Community Notes which has been very popular. that being said I see all sorts of Democratic politicians and their fellow travelers posting over on X. Why?