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.”
I found your blog post to be well-researched and thought-provoking. The information you presented was clear and concise, making it easy to follow. If you’re looking to gain more knowledge, click here.
Although Turley does not read the comments, I am very curious as to his opinion on the legality of DOGE’s creation, and combine through the government for waste.
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN12493
I am ecstatic that Musk is ruthlessly sifting out government waste. We have no business getting quail high on coke, or publishing trans comic books in Peru, when it takes years to rebuild communities after natural disasters, our public education is a failure, and homeless stagger around like legions of the walking dead.
However, I don’t know anything about the legal basis of this decisive move.
Does the Executive Branch have the authority to slash wasteful spending like this?
I very much hope so.
Think of Musk as an unpaid consultant hired to advise the administration on where to find the waste and how to get rid of it. He doesn’t have any authority to make the cuts himself, but he can point them out when he finds them. As a result, there doesn’t need to be any grant of authority from any law, as he’s not on the payroll and can’t enact any policies. All he can do is call attention to waste and inefficiency in the government, which is clearly visible to anybody who makes even the slightest effort to see it. The biggest thing he is exposing is how much the people in government have turned a blind eye to it just to preserve their own agendas.
So you believe it’s ok for him to look into yours or anyone’s accounts anywhere on the federal “systems “ as well as top secret agencies?
I found this on Facebook. Hopefully, it answers the question!
“I came across a lawyer, Tom Renz, who actually read Trump’s DOGE Executive Order and, expecting some illegal power grab, found it to be airtight. Turns out Trump and Musk didn’t create anything. Obama did.
Obama created United States Digital Service (USDS) in 2014. It was meant as a bureaucratic patch job to fix the Obamacare website meltdown.
Fast forward to 2025. Trump rebrands it DOGE (United States DOGE Service). Keeps the acronym, keeps the funding, but gives it a whole new mission: Find the Receipts
Legally untouchable because it was already fully funded and operational. Trump invokes 5 USC 3161, which allows him to create temporary hiring authorities. DOGE teams get embedded inside every single federal agency. Each team consists of a lawyer, HR rep, a zoomer nerd, and an investigator. They report to DOGE, not the agency they’re embedded in.
But wait, there’s more! Trump invokes 44 USC Chapter 35, which governs federal IT and cybersecurity oversight. Since USDS was originally an IT oversight body, DOGE now has full access to all federal data systems. Yes, that’s right. All of them.
His executive order is written to block legal challenges. Includes language that overrides conflicting executive orders. Orders every agency to comply. Refusal means they violate presidential authority.
Congress can’t defund it because it’s not a new program, just a repurposed one. DOJ can’t sue for overreach because Trump used existing laws exactly as written. Democrats trying to file legal challenges run into standing issues because DOGE operates within existing frameworks.
Obama literally built the perfect Administrative (read: Deep) State IT backdoor. Trump and Musk just hacked the system and took the admin controls. Musk now has legal oversight of every major agency’s internal systems. The Administrative State can’t stop it without rewriting multiple federal laws.
They legally outplayed the system and there’s nothing anyone can do about it.
Obama created DOGE.”
That was a terrific explanation. Thank you for providing it.
The next ‘buyout’ will be an offer to relocate disgruntled democrats to any other country of their choice.
Also on the table will be selling Hawaii to Japan….for enough coin of the realm to help reduce our overall budget deficit. One wonderful benefit is we can all say goodbye forever to Mazie Hirono!
You think this is fiction?
Yup —- I’ll bet you do.
Here’s what the Left is howling about: That Clinton is firing “thousands of government workers and slashing budgets.”
Oops. I meant Trump. Clinton fired more than just thousands. He canned some 275,000 federal employees and dramatically cut federal budgets. And he offered buyouts.
Said his administration:
“The cuts were long overdue. People had long since grown tired of new government programs initiated each year, with none ever ending.”
But now, somehow, cutting government means fascists are destroying democracy and violating the Constitution.
Sam
Don’t forget that Musk is the dumbest billionaire that AOC knows.
She studied economics in college, so she can judge that type of thing.
I wish the DOGE team well.
“She studied economics in college, so she can judge that type of thing.”
Yeah, no doubt it was the “economics” of d1ck-teasing bar customers to get bigger tips.
Trump literally has the libtards rabidly defending wasteful government spending.
And the “smart” dem leaders and “brilliant” press have the rank and file duped into going along with the them cuz “musk bad” and “private info at risk”. LMAO
This is the most hilarious thing I’ve seen in politics in my lifetime.
It’s so idiotic on the Dem side that James Carville thinks there is a mole putting out these bonkers talking points.
Trump won voters making under $100k. Harris won voters making over $100k.
Biden had 2 billionaires for every 1 Trump had.
75% of hedge funders gave to Kamala.
9/10 richest counties and 65% making over $500k are represented by Dems.
Gigi is a duped, delusional liar.
A poor or working class vote is equal to a rich man’s vote, and there will always be more of the former than the latter.
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.”
Schumer loves releasing the whirlwind against those he dislikes so that they pay the price, six ways from Sunday at getting back at them. Schumer looks more and more like Louisiana Governor / Senator Huey “Kingfish” Long.
Sen. Schumer: ‘You said regular federal authorities would be in charge.’
President Trump: ‘Elon is regular federal authorities.’
And that is precisely the point.
They never had “everything.”
What they had was freedom…
sufficient to be self-reliant.
Self-reliant? Fine. Go out and find some garden space and build yourself a little hut. Be happy.
An non-exclusive list of things I am against:
– transing minors, including genital mutilation and hormone treatments for kids especially without parental involvement
– biological males pounding the crap out of women and girls in competitive sports
– biological males in girls’ and women’s private spaces like locker rooms and showers
– open borders encouraging child sex trafficking, drug trafficking, and the invasion of criminal gang networks from other countries
– hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars spent promoting wokeness and socialism abroad and generally wasted on things that have no benefit to Americans
– government secrecy and resistance to audits of all that spending
– government heavy handedly pressuring social media companies to censor all biews not aligned with the official state narrative
Now not only am I against these things, I believe that anyone who is for them is both wrong and insane, or perhaps evil. Yet the talking points of an entire major political party in America is so in favor of them that that party is pulling out all the stops to resist any effort to curtail them.
# Well, you’ve listed a number of perversions. No, I have no idea what causes them.
“Judge pauses Trump effort to cut thousands from USAID’s workforce”
– NY Post
____________
US District Judge Carl Nichols must be charged by Attorney General Pam Bondi under the Title 28, U.S. Code, for conspiracy to subvert the president and government of the United States, for acting under the color or authority to usurp the power of Article 2, Section 1, of the U.S. Constitution, and under 18 U.S. Code § 1752 (a) (2) knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions;
What Musk doesn’t understand is that buyouts don’t have the same effect in the public milieu as they do in the private. Public servants volunteering for buyouts will overwhelmingly be the most-skilled, most employable workers in the bureaucracy. What will remain and refuse to seek work elsewhere will be the dregs. Inefficiency will increase. He should’ve began with firings, if a more efficient government was his actual goal. Now when he begins firing, it will be done from the worst employees, leaving a smaller group of incompetents to manage things along. This failed miserably in Greece when the IMF walked in with their reforms and it will fail here.
Economics is not a strong point of this administration.
What you don’t understand is that the government unions need to be dealt with, and enticing as many employees as possible to take the very generous buyout will make cleaning up the mess easier. I’m guessing fewer NGO’s will get funding, and better guardrails and performance evaluations will be implemented.
The Departments of Education and Labor are unconstitutional and must be eliminated, having no constitutional basis. Unions are unconstitutional criminal organizations that engage in criminal trespass, criminal assault, criminal intimidation, criminal vandalism, etc., as they incur property damage and bodily injury and retain only those acts of violence as their sole points of negotiation and their sole rationale. Public and private organizations certainly possess and retain their power to hire, fire, pay, and direct employees directly and without compulsion.
Unions grew from guilds. They may not work for you.
Threats, intimidation, vandalism, trespass, property damage, bodily injury, etc., are illegal…
and they are all that unions have.
Unions are illegal, unconstitutional criminal organizations.
Exactly right.
What I understand and see is that there is flood of Knee-Jerk Reactions to the call for Accountability.
Federal Employees are not “At-Will” Employees, unlike the States that have At-Will Employment statutes (Montana is the lone exception, All the rest have them in some form), which means there must be cause to Terminate them. Given how much the DEMs and DEM-Media love to stir up the Bee’s Nest, they had better get to espousing the truth of the matter soon. Voluntary acceptance of Trumps Flashing-Blue-Light-Special was an enticement to quit the job, that’s all. That offer may go off the table by: Judgment, Trump himself, and Expiration. Cuts are coming, it’s a matter of Employees deciding what end of them they want to be on. “Get It while you can”
# They’ve found approx 1 trillion in waste. It’s in the omnibus bills no one read.
The situation with Federal employees is more complex -and what is clear from Musk and Trump’s actions is that they understand this.
These are both brilliant Billionaires – as Van Jones just said – if you do not understand that Trump is FAR smarted than you(we) are your smoking whacky weed.
Trump has the civil service to deal with – as well as federal unions. Those preclude alot of actions.
But they do not appear to preclude closing entire departments and laying people off.
I would note that Reagan wiped PATCO off the face of the earth 40 years ago.
Is cutting the federal workforce really hard ? Absolutely.
Is it impossible ? No.
Are Trump and Musk the people who can do it if anyone can ? Absolutely.
I think it is called a RIF-Reduction in Force.
You don’t understand.
Comparing to Greece and the IMF is a non-starter because Trump/Musk can and will follow through.
Take the buyout. He’s being very generous offering this buyout.
When he eliminates their jobs with the stroke of a pen, there will be no buyout, only the unemployment line.
Economics is very much a strong point of this administration.
Yeah sure jan !. In my experience the bottom percentage of skilled anything are the ones that wind up in govt jobs. Its a fact kinda known by anyone that does any hiring.
“What Musk doesn’t understand is that buyouts don’t have the same effect in the public milieu as they do in the private. ”
Because magic ?
“Public servants volunteering for buyouts will overwhelmingly be the most-skilled, most employable workers in the bureaucracy.”
Both false and irrelevant. The public bureaucy – even the capable people are dead weight on the economy.
If you are correct – and the best and brightest leave – their joining the private workforce will be an economic boon.
If the result in government is nothing gets done – there will be an economic boon.
“What will remain and refuse to seek work elsewhere will be the dregs.”
I doubt that. Contra your claim – buyout incentives DO work exactly the same everywhere – people are people.
There are not people who by birth MUST be public employees and those who must be private.
There are some slight differences in that – risk averse people tend to work for government,
Inefficient people tend to work for govenrment.
Because govenrment tolerates that.
“Inefficiency will increase.”
Really can’t – Robert Barro – #4 IDEAS RESPEC ranked economist in the world found that Govenrment efficientcy is 25-35%.
“He should’ve began with firings, if a more efficient government was his actual goal. Now when he begins firing, it will be done from the worst employees, leaving a smaller group of incompetents to manage things along. This failed miserably in Greece when the IMF walked in with their reforms and it will fail here.”
The only positive thing that can be said for the IMF is that they are less economically incompetent than the governments they advise.
Greece is a mess, but it is less of a mess than it was.
But Musk and Trump are not the IMF, and the US is not greece. We are not facing debt at 200% of GDB and an upsidedown population demographic.
We have a president who nearly everything he has touched in his life has turned to gold. Who is being assisted by a self made billionare who is the richest man in the world. Who blows things up all over and then changes the world dramatically for the better.
Who would you bet on ? Democrats ? the IMF or Musk and Trump?
“Economics is not a strong point of this administration.”
ROFL
Trump has inherited a complete mess.
Inflation is a mess. You mentioned Greece – the US is very early into a Greek type failure – we are not there yet, but it will get harder with each year. Interest on the national debt is almost as much as the cost of DOD. And is rising.
deficits are out of control.
We are in an exponentially degrading situation – admitted the exponent is a small one, but it still compounds – without action now the problem will get worse each year.
We can not tax our way out of this – Current tax rates are likely above the revenue optimizing maximum – i.e. we are STILL at the point at which tax cuts can increase revenue. But more important we are well above the economically optimal tax rates. Higer taxes will make things WORSE not better.
Trump talked about cutting $2T/yr on the campaign trail and I thought that was nuts.
He and Musk have already shown that is not outside the realm of possible.
If you want to fix inflation without causing a recession the only way to do so is MASSIVE cuts to governmetn spending.
Musk has also revealed QUICKLY that enormous amounts of government spending are Fraud and waste – USAID was 90-95% waste and fraud.
In the brief time he was in Treasury he found an EASY $50B in fraud that could be stopped rapidly and possibly as much as $100B – I beleive he things $200B from Treasury is feasible. Get rid of DOE and there is another $250B.
If Trump gets 10% buyouts – that is another $200B. Musk has not started with DOD.
Meanwhile – forget Greece – Milei is returning Argentina to the first world. He has brought down inflation dramatically.
And how did he do it ? Massive cuts to the Federal Government.
Afuera! Afuera! Afuera!.
Congress does not have the courage to do this.
But they also are not going to stop Trump.
Breaking news. Off topic:
NATO ally, Danish petition wants to “buy California and annex it.” DJT has a smile on his face. Do a trade, California for Gaza Strip. 2 dumps, 1 winner. Let’s make a deal.
If we’re going to trade with Denmark it will be for Greenland not Gaza.
I do not want to pretend to know what Trump really is thinking about Gaza.
But he has upended thinking.
The first thin is that every gulf nation that has been funding HAMAS with aide now KNOWS that The gazans had a choice of peace and prospertity. With a few words Trump has in multiple ways made the wishes of Gazans irrelevant.
Now nearly every consequential nation in the mideast is thinking of Gaza as a place of potentially great wealth – but for the palestinians.
Trump is right about several things
It is going to be nearly impossible to rebuild Gaza with the palestinians there. What country will take on the task ? What Company would try to build anything with Palestinians threatening terror ?
The choice is to leave Gaza in rubble with the Gazons there – and that is a recipe for long term problems.
Or move them somewhere else while rebuilding. And the moment that the nations of the mideast – not the US or israel agree to remove the paletinians from Gaza, there is no good reason to ever bring them back.
The best solution is for ALL the mideast nations that have refused to take Palestinians to take a portion of them in return for a stake in the Rebuilding and rebuilt Gaza.
These are my thoughts – I have no idea what Trumps are.
But I do know he has with a few words changed the worlds thinking about the issue.
Get the palestinians out of Gaza and ALOT of the problems of the mideast go away.
Qatar, Egypt, SA, and other arab nations can agree to take them “temporarily” while rebuilding.
And temporary can turn into forever.
Do not under estimate the desire for all that other Arab nations to want real peace.
The can not appear to F#$K over the palestinians – because it would cause problems with their own people.
But that does not mean they can’t scatter them to the wind with a false promise they can return when Gaza is rebuilt.
Fascists SURE hate when their total power is challenged.
How can anyone defend any Democrat….it is a PARTY of FASCIST set on destroying the WEST and America
“How can anyone defend any Democrat….it is a PARTY of FASCIST set on destroying the WEST and America”
Now, be fair. Some of them are solely focused on enriching themselves by any and all means possible, regardless of any moral or ethical considerations, and just don’t give a damn if the rest of use are destroyed in the process :-/
Article 2, Section 1
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.
Professor Turley,
The Trump administration, including Musk, has ALREADY been defying court orders: https://www.yahoo.com/news/judge-says-trump-administration-violating-180146548.html
The order itself: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.rid.58912/gov.uscourts.rid.58912.96.0_2.pdf
“The States have presented evidence in this motion that the Defendants in some cases have continued to improperly freeze federal funds and refused to resume disbursement of appropriated federal funds.”
Thus, the basis for your entire blog post is undermined by what the Trump administration and Musk are actually doing.
This is the definition of a constitutional crisis. The language is therefore not hyperbolic.
Additionally, guards are blocking USAID employees from entering their offices, despite a court order halting the purge. https://apnews.com/live/donald-trump-news-2-10-2025#00000194-f01f-d399-a5f4-f3ff43b90000
More evidence of open defiance of our constitutional system.
This column will be remembered for many years to come. Someday the battle of Musk against the Left will be seen as similar to Luther’s battle against the medieval Church or Socrates’ battle against the democratic mob. JT’s column will be viewed as a contribution to that battle.
Bravo Professor Turley!
This column is just another reason why you are the only Democrat I trust.
Sorry Denis McIntyre, I have no desire to provide free condoms to the Taliban and never even getting a kiss.
U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) exists under the policy guidance of the Secretary of State, who is the head of an executive department of the U.S. federal government.
President Donald J. Trump is vested by the Constitution with the executive power and is the head of the executive department.
No other elected or appointed official, or “civil officer,” of the United States holds any aspect, facet, degree, or amount of executive power.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
USAID – United States Agency for International Development
The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) is an independent agency of the United States government that is primarily responsible for administering civilian foreign aid and development assistance. USAID was established in 1961 by President John F. Kennedy to unite several existing foreign assistance organizations and programs under one agency. Statute law places USAID under “the direct authority and policy guidance of the Secretary of State”.[4]
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Article 2, Section 1
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
United States Department of State
The United States Department of State (DOS),[3] or simply the State Department,[4] is an executive department of the U.S. federal government responsible for the country’s foreign policy and relations.
________________
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
(b) Under the policy guidance of the Secretary of State, the agency primarily responsible for administering this part should have the responsibility for coordinating all United States develop-
ment-related activities.
“The difference between God and a federal judge is that God knows He’s not a judge.”
– Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN)
God knows he’s a judge, just not a federal judge.
What the heck Bible is he reading?
The Bible of Merriam-Webster:
judge
noun
a: a public official authorized to decide questions brought before a court
What was born of an executive order can be undone by an executive order. USAID may have had good intentions with JFK , but in a scant decade from its creation it was already under control by the likes of the CIA and those in government that learned how to use it as a piggy bank for their desires. Never was a payment declined by them in the last 22 years. Taxpayer monies went to about anything immoral , wasteful and just flat out wrong as you can conjure up. A veritable cesspool of corruption. Trump has hit the deep state and their D brand cultists in the wallet before they even knew what happened. Now they cry coup , sky is falling and “they are taking everything from us” crocodile tears kind of BS !.
Not true.
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.
ATS – thereis no such thing as an agency of congress – “its own agency”
Congress can create agencies – within the executive. And it can direct funds to them for specific purposes.
The more vague Congress is in Funding – the more power the president has.
Congress did NOT fund the specific payments that USAID engaged in. Therefore the president can terminate those.
and redirect the funds elsewhere consistent with Congresses purpose.
Nowhere in the statues covering USAID is the staffing levels of USAID addressed.
The president therefore can lower them as he sees fit.
As to your nonsense about the relationship betweenUSAID and the state department – it is irelevant.
There MAY be a fight with the president over whether the president must spend funds budgeted by congress.
Bujt unless the most recent budget explicitly provided USAID specific $ founding for specific purposes. that money need not go to USAID.
Congress controls the purse strings – they do not control the administration of funding – beyond generally broad terms in the law.
They do not control Staffing. The Head of USAID is not a position that required senate confirmation. That means that the president can turn it into a shell. He would still be obligated to carry out the tasks that UASID was budgeted to preform.
But those almost certainly did NOT include funding Al Queda in syria, or politico, or BBC or Chelsea Clinton,
in the event that Democrats actually controlled on chamber of congress – there likely would be a legal battle over this -which MOSTLY The president would win.
But absent the GOP house or Senate deciding to Sue the president – this is a faite accompli.
Third parties are attempting to sue – and in SOME lower courts they are having small success.
But ultimately they will lose – they do not have standing, only Congress does – not individual congressmen.
Congress will likely bless Trump’s re-organization efforts when they pass a budget.
Trump can easily do the same to the CFPB as to USAID. Department of education would be harder – but Trump’s directive to McMahon to prepare DOE to be shutdown will likely prevail in the long run – absent a revolt of GOP congressmen.
Democrats have further problems. Musk has promised to slash $2T from the federal budget – that is ambitious. But he has found about $40B/year at USAID that can be cut, in his brief reveiw at Treasury they found with certainty another $50B in likely fraud, and probably another 200B in wasteful spending. The budget of the DOE is $268B Probaly some of that must remain somewhere.
Cutting the federal workforce by 10% is another $200B.
And this is all with Musk barely started.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/XGV9gW19Gag
What are you going to do if Trump successfully cuts the federal budget by $1T or even only $500B and the world does not come to an end ?
The positive economic impact of that would be enormous.
Ends do not justify the means. Period.
Termination of appropriated funds to USAID is called impoundment. It is unconstitutional for the President to impound funds without congressional approval.
Yes, money was allocated specifically to USAID. Did you check the budget?
“Ends do not justify the means. Period.”
Correct – nor did I argue that they did.
The means here are perfectly legal. The executive power of the united states is vested in the president.
In the Treasury case the judge has idiotically ruled essentially that the audit can go forward BUT that only civil service employees can have access to the data – that is absurd – that litterally bars the president and the Sec. Treasury as well as most of the political appointments to Treasury from accessing Treasury data.
Do you honestly think that will be upheld ?
DOGE is a special department legally created by the President – there are provisions for that – but even if there were not – the WH can hire whoever they wish and task them with specific excercises of presidential power.
Do you doubt that the president himself has access to the financial data of the executive branch ?
All of these legal cases operate under the delusion that the very first line of Article II of the constitution does not exist
“The executive power of the united states is vested in the president”
Do you doubt that the president has the authority to audit federal spending ?
So what are we left with ?
Can the president hire, fire, layoff, transfer … federal employees ? Absolutely. There are some limited contractual restraints on that from civil service and employment contract law. But other than that the president is free to hire, fire, …
The SDNY case today degenerated into whether the President could offer a paid buyout package past March 14th as the federal spending authority currently ends then – until a budget is passed.
So any argument that the President does not have the authority to hire, fire, offer buyouts – went down in flames.
With respect to USAID – Congress gave UASID a budget – nowhere in that budget does it say – pay Politico, or the Clintons, or for Trans Operas in Columbia or for Al Queda to overthrow Assad.
There is an independent legal issue – what you are calling impoundment – the nixon decision is not nearly so broad as you claim.
Nixon tried to deliberately choose NOT to execute on congressional directives.
SCOTUS did NOT say that presidents MUST spend every dime congress budgets.
It said that Presidents can not impound the money to completely defeat the legistlative priorities that Congress wrote into law.
If Trump can deliver on the wishes of congress in the budget for USAID, then he is free to spend as little of that money as he wishes – so long as he delivers on the objectives.
Which AGAIN were NOT funding Al Queda or the Clintons or Trans Ballet. or the BBC.
Can Trump merge USAID into the state department – probably not without a vote of congress,
Can he put them under the supervision of the Sec State – absolutely. He can put them under anyones supervisions he wishes.
I do not think that the Head of USAID is a position that required Senate confirmation – though even if it did -Rubio was confirmed by the Senate.
But the final nail in the coffin of your argument is that Only congress has standing to sue regarding Trump’s actions regarding USAID.
You are claiming that Congresses directions are not being followed – Congress would be the injured party.
SCOTUS has long ago determined that congressmen as individuals or as members of the minority party do not have standing to sue the administration for alleged failure to perform in accordance with the laws passed by congress.
Do you really think that the GOP is going top sue Trump over USAID ?
Turley has an excellent post on the lack of political diversity at Harvard today.
That directly impacts on this.
For decades congress managed to lard up legislation with all this pork – because congressmen from both parties benefited.
When federal agencies are run by carreer civil servants who are 95% democrats, and where no matter what republicans wrote into the law – that spending is being done by democrats to the advantage of democrats, you have undermined the incentives for republicans to protect agencies like USAID – especially from Audits.
Does anyone expect to find that USAID was giving money to Eric Trump ? Are there even a handful of congressional republicans that need to fear what DOGE is finding ?
The more homogenous you make an institution – the less the incentives there are for those outside that homogenity to resist burning it down.
I am sure that Congressional republicans would prefer to do nothing right now – wrapping themselves in glory should this go well and not having any fingerprints on it should it end badly.
I do not think the courts can force congress to speak to this -and silence means consent.
But even if an adverse court ruling requires Congressional republicans to get involved they can do so at anytime,
they can authorize whatever the courts say Trump needs – like just obliterating USAID.
But my bet is this gets tossed on standing long before.
The courts including SCOTUS do not want to decide this issue unless forced – if they are forced – they are going to side with Trump.
While the president can not refuse to find a dictate of congress, the president is obligated to perform the task, not spend all the money, within the 4 corners of the statute – not the wishes of left wing nuts civil servants running USAID.
I would further note USAID’s usefullness is at an end. Its real purpose has always been to use foreign aid as a cover for spying.
While I would argue that was well known before – if it wasn’t it is now. There are signs that countries are rejecting USAID – because they are not interested in inviting spies into their midst. Even if they knew that in the past, today it is public – even their people know.
So what do you have ?
Ends that are both good – the elimination of fraud and waste, That are within the legitimate powers of the president – i.e. there are no means issues. That have broad public support – so long as Trump/DOGE is careful with a few sacred cows.
And the worst issue you have with means is That congress MIGHT be able to object – but hasn’t.
In fact they are more likely to bless Trump’s actions.
So what is the courts legitimate role here ?
Until congress sue the executive – none.
As I said the most likely outcome is dismissla for lack of standing.
But the 2nd most likely outcome is Absolutely the president can end waste and fraud in federal spending.
You rant about impoundment – as if the issue was actually decided in Train v. City of New York was waste and fraud.
It was NOT, it was whether Nixon’s use of impoundment could be used to frustrate congressional legislation.
The odds of the supreme court going farther than that are near zero. There is even a 50:50 chance that SCOTUS will reverse Train v. City of New York .
“Termination of appropriated funds to USAID is called impoundment. It is unconstitutional for the President to impound funds without congressional approval.”
False, it isunconstitutional for the president to impound funds for the purpose of frustrating the intentions of congressional legislation. Waste and Fraud are NEVER legitimate legislative purposes.
“Yes, money was allocated specifically to USAID.”
“Did you check the budget?”
No I did not – and I highly doubt you did either.
You really do not seem to grasp the extent to which people no longer trust those of you on the left.
You have lied constantly. Very few here will beleive your claims without an actual link to the USAID funding in the budget.
Regardless – where in the budget that you claim funds USAID did congress say that USAID could spend money wastefully and fraudulently ?
Where in the budget did Congress say that the funding was for Al Queda or Trans Operas or Chelsea Clinton or BBC ?
Your BEST possible outcome is Trump must spend $44B in USAID allocated funds as HE sees fit consistent with whatever purposes Congress has set. I am sure if Trump started funding Breitbart or InfoWars that the left would be up in Arms.
What if Trump used it to depose Starmer in the UK ? or to support Farage ?
Ultimately you have a collection of independent issues.
The first is inarguably the president has the power to audit the executive.
The 2nd is that you do not have standing to challenge his actions – and congress which does is unlikely to.
The next is there is zero chance SCOTUS rules that the president can not stop waste and fraud.
Congress arguably can not even legitimately fund waste and fraud.
And your final problem is that if you win nearly everything – all that does is allow Trump to fire the upper leadership fo USAID and to appoint people who will waste 44B on his personal pet causes consistent with whatever congress put in the budget.
Further while you fight this – Democrats make themselves the party of Waste and Fraud.
Trump can lose this and many other fights democrats are starting – and still win.
While Democrats have successfully hurt Musks popularity – Trump’s is RISING – according to CBS – in fact his popularity is WORST in the over 65 age group that is worried that somehting may happen to their SS and HI.
In the 40-55 cohort he has a 20% net positive rating. Even in Gen Z he as a 10% net positive rating.
The only positive attribute that Trump did not see near or over 60% approval on was compassion.
Further though he has majority support in nearly every ethnicity – even in those like blaks where he is underwater – he is 20+ ponts above where he was in his first term.
And the democrat brand is in the crapper.
The party in power usually gets whacked during mid terms.
Trump is setting up a war with Democrats on the ground of HIS choosing over issues of HIS choosing.
While anything is possible in 2016 – peace a good economy and a record of democratic obstruction could have 2026 go the opposite of normal trends.
If so – you only have yourselves to blame.
Another crazed, obsessive, fact free post by the impaired John Say.
DOGE is not a department.
It is a figment of Trump’s imagination.
The appointments clause of the Constitution vests the power to create departments and agencies solely to Congress.
Stop listening to the voices in your head.
Get some help.
John Say, know this, nobody reads this stuff.
Sorry.
Power Trumps Impoundment…
but then, you knew that.
____________________________
Article 2, Section 1
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.
# some money unkn amount or to whom was funneled to terrorists, enemies of the US. The president must close it asap or be guilty of treason. Anyone knowing of treason, sabotage, espionage, sedition not reporting it is guilty of a crime by law.
Humphrey’s Ex’r v. United States, 295 U.S. 602, 629 (1935) (“The authority of Congress, in creating quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial agencies, to require them to act in discharge of their duties independently of executive control cannot well be doubted; and that authority includes, as an appropriate incident, power to fix the period during which they shall continue in office, and to forbid their removal except for cause in the meantime.”).
This is not a particularly close issue.
Thanks!
Jonathan: You’re right. Elon Musk is the “Monster”. An unelected private citizen who thinks he can lay waste to government agencies, firing thousands of government workers and slashing budgets. Never happened in the history of the country when the richest person in the world has been given so much power to try to reshape government in the image of X.
The problem for Elon is that government is not a profit center. And despite your claims X is not doing well these days. It has yet to become profitable–losing money every year since 2022. That’s because most advertisers won’t touch X because Musk has turned his platform into a cesspool of racist and neo-Nazi propaganda. Any other company would probably have gone bankrupt by now. In fact, four days ago Musk said he wants to turn X into a payments super app because as a social media platform X is not viable.
As Musk and DJT try to take a wrecking ball to government agencies that Americans depend upon for essential services the Republicans in Congress are strangely silent. They have given in to Musk’s power grab. That’s an abdication of their power of the purse. Fortunately, there is one immutable force that is standing in Musk’s way. It’s the courts. In over 30 lawsuits federal judges are standing up to Musk and DJT. Musk is livid that his unlawful acts are being halted by judges. He wants judges removed from office. Of course, that’s what fascists always do. They eliminate the judiciary. Some of Musk and DJT’s supporters are calling for them to just ignore court orders. That means an end of the rule of law and our constitutional Republic!
What we now have is a bunch of billionaires against average working class Americans. Musk, DJT and their allies in the billionaire class think government should only protect them. The interests of the vast majority of Americans don’t count. Who will defend our Democracy against a fascist dictatorship? It’s going to be the people who rise up in large numbers to oppose the rush to establish a dictatorship!
You stupid dork! You guys always have to create a Straw Man Frankenstein to have something to rail against. A focus for your hatred. Guess what, idiot??? It isn’t going to work this time. People don’t want their money going to tranny operas in Columbia, or to Politico.
The economy will probably get worse before it gets better, and stuff like DEI crap in a fairly homogenous country like Serbia isn’t going to play well to somebody in this country who can’t pay their rent, or their student loan bill.
Squeeky,
In case you did not see it, financial analyst Ed Dowd penned a article titled Danger of Deep Worldwide Recession in 2025. It talks about how the Biden economy set up for a recession in 2025. So, yes, your assessment of the economy will get worse before it gets better. I have stated this here on the good professor’s blog previously.
You can read a good summary of the report here, https://usawatchdog.com/danger-of-deep-worldwide-recession-in-2025-ed-dowd/
DM: YOU SEEM TO BE COMPLETELY IGNORING THE THE OUTRAGEOUS AMOUNT OF THEFT ELON/DOGE WAS HIRED TO UNCOVER AND DID A FANTASTIC JOB AT THIS HUGE UNCOVERING.
YOUR DEMOCRATNESS IS SO OBVIOUS. YOU WASTED EVERY ONE’S TIME. DAMN.
you are clueless.
Sounds like you are inviting an insurrection. And no, there is no dictatorship being established.
Dennis, you are so misinformed. Musk is merely an advisor to the president. Musk can’t fire anyone or close down any department. It is Trump alone (you know, the president) who makes all the final decisions. You do realize that all president’s have advisors? Trump will either follow the advice of his advisors or not. Your screed against Musk is nothing more than sheer partisan nonsense.
Chuck Schumer was not elected by the american people – he was elected by the people of new your.
Altogether 538 poeple are elected in the entire federal government – and only TWO – the president and the Vice president are elected by the people of the united states rather than a congressional district. or state.
Not a single staffer in congress is elected. Not a single person in the entire federal judiciary is elected.
In the whole executive branch of govenrment only two people are elected – the president an vice president.
Not a single cabinet member is elected. Not a single Air Traffic Controller is elected.
No one working at USAID or CFPB or Treasury or DOD is elected.
There is no difference between Musk and the millions of other unelected federal employees.
Musk serves at the pelasure of the president and acts with the delegated power of the president which the president can expand or rescind as he wishes.
We can only hope that Musk is reshaping the federal Government as he did X – 90% cut in staff and
Despite your ranting – X is actually Growing.
Regardless there is nothing Musk can do without the direction of the president.
and even that must comply with the powers of the president given by the constitution.
“The problem for Elon is that government is not a profit center.”
Correct – it is a COST center. And Musk like most successfull businesses knows how to CUT COSTS.
“And despite your claims X is not doing well these days.”
So you say. Even Disney has returned to advertising on X.
“That’s because most advertisers won’t touch X because Musk has turned his platform into a cesspool of racist and neo-Nazi propaganda.”
ROFL.
“four days ago Musk said he wants to turn X into a payments super app”
Correct – he is working to duplicate the Chinese APP that is all things to all people.
If you do not like X – go elsewhere.
Earlier you said you were getting ready to Watch the SuperBowl.
While the game left a bit to desire – routs are not that exiting.
Gone was most of the woke idiocy of the past.
Anheiser Bush was their with the Clydsdales trying to earn back the market they had lost.
While I found the “why don;t we just get along” adds tedious – it is only the left that seeks to silence people who disagree.
I personally did not like much of the entertainment – it was just not mu cup of tea.
But that does not matter – it was just not what I would prefer.
That is how things work. You can watch or not.
You can like Jazz or prefer Rock.
Gone was most of the divisive nonsense of he left.
We passed peak woke.
We are busy DISMANTLING the nonsense that the left has put into place and returning to a meritocracy.
The Eagles beat the cheifs because on Sunday they were the better team. Not because they were more diverse or because they had more Trans players.
This superbowl was a reflection that the country was back in the business of what we do best – excel on our merits in a system that amplifies freedom.
“The Eagles beat the cheifs because on Sunday they were the better team. Not because they were more diverse or because they had more Trans players. ”
Yes, and the Chiefs managed to get to the SB in spite of the fact that they are in the midst of rebuilding their offensive line, so the Eagles defense prospered. With a couple of minor differences, the game could have gone the other way. I sense some current complacency among many proponents of the left’s demise. We need to make damned certain that your analogy becomes less valid by seeing to it that the Democrat Wokists are not granted that kind of opportunity: we need to remain focused and win on determination, and that fickle luck is not allowed to play any larger part than is absolutely unavoidable.
“As Musk and DJT try to take a wrecking ball to government agencies that Americans depend upon for essential services”
Who is it that depends on USAID for “essential services” ?
Who will notice if $100B in fraudulent Social Security and Medicare payments – mostly going to fraudsters – many of which are not even int he country or illegal aliens ?
Who will notice if CFPB is shuttered ?
Who will notice if we have fewer Trans operas in Columbia ?
Will even 1/1000th of a percent of americans notice if Kennedy center funding was stopped or PBS or NPR ?
What terrifies you is that Trump may well succeed in cutting $2T in federal spending and few would notice.
Except left wing nut work causes.
“the Republicans in Congress are strangely silent.”
Not strange at all – Agenda 47 is the GOP 2024 platform. Why should they oppose implimenting it ?
” Fortunately, there is one immutable force that is standing in Musk’s way. It’s the courts. In over 30 lawsuits federal judges are standing up to Musk and DJT.”
And just as in 2017 nearly all those cases will be lost. Probably more so.
You note that Congress is doing nothing – on much of this ONLY congress has standing.
Regardless, you are being rope-a-doped.
Cutting wastefull and fraudulent spending is exceedingly popular.
The courts interfering undercuts the confidence in the courts.
In the unlikely event this goes all the way to the supreme court and loses – congress can just vote to authorize the DOGE audit and or terminate USAID, CFPB, …. Musk is just building the case to prove the spending is wasteful and fraudulent.
Do you honestly beleive a GOP congress is going to vote FOR Trans opera’s in Columbia or funding Al Queda to overthrow Assad ?
Republican lawyers are being paid to fight this lawfare by the government – they have infinite resources, and this time no Sally Yates or Rosenburg to save you. People like Bondi, Blanche and Bove are very good, and they will have an army behind them.
Democrat lawyers can engage in massive wastefull spending to thwart all of this – and no matter what they LOSE anyway.
31 lawsuits – 96 indictments – it is all just lawfare.
You wanted to try to make a case that Trump was persuting political enemies – but you just lost any semblance of the high ground for going after Trump for trying to cut spending.
How are you so stupid that you do not understand this is a lose lose for democrats ?
I think it is likely that Trump WANTS these lawsuits – so that SCOTUS can decide them.
I think there is a very very good chance that SCOTUS finds that the president has broad constitutional powers to fight waste and fraud in government spending. That he can cut most anything that is not specifically authorized by congress and that he is NOT obligated to spend the money Congress allocates so long as he delivers on the purpose for which the allocations were made.
This court has already said that Federal Regulatory agencies have vastly exceeded their statutory authority.
The biggest threat to a really good SCOTUS ruling is that these challenges can nearly all be dismissed easily for lack of standing.
That is an easy way to duck the issue. Though even that grants the president broad power to cut spending – so long as Congress does not challenge the cuts.
Next While the GOP is busy confirming appointments right now – that will end. When it does the budget will be first and foremost.
Trump is building the basis to eliminate USAID, eliminate CFPB, Vastly Shrink or eliminate DOE,
as well as much mush more in the way of spending cuts.
Trump does NOT have universal MAGA support in either the house or the senate.
He can not pass a pure MAGA agenda – though it would be close.
But absolutely positively he can get a majority of votes in both houses for cuts in spending that he has already proved cause no harm.
Trump is building the case for a back door spending Veto of sorts. The impact of that goes WAY beyond Trump’s term.
If Congress and/or the courts recognize broad powers of the president to cutr federal spending – so long as that president can still deliver on the specific legislative function that Congress allocated the spending for. That creates a small but real force trying to bring into check the rampant incentives for governemtn spending to grow.
What happens when Trump asks congress to split all the fraud and wastefull spending that he is finding 50:50 between deficit reduction and eliminating taxes on tips and reducing taxes on those earning under 75K/year, as well as capitol gains cuts, corporate tax cuts for businesses that produce in the US ?
Do you honestly think that is going to be unpopular ?
Congress could litterally pas legislation that authorized Trump to cut federal federal waste and fraud as much as he can find and direct all the savings to deficit reduction and tax cuts for the working class.
This is a lose-lose for democrats.
You have been rope-a-doped.
“Musk is livid that his unlawful acts are being halted by judges. ”
No he is having fun – so is Trump. These cases are losers.
And they make the judges and the left look bad in the meantime.
You seem to think that Federal employees are a wildly popular group – they are not.
Worse YOU have set them up to look bad. Dragging on the work from home policies forever – signing contracts that restricted Trump from bringing some back to work.
Do you think blue Collar Joe he plumber cares about whether some 6 figure DC bureacrat has to come into the office ?
Do you think that ordinary people care about DC commutes ?
Trump is doing an excellent job of making federal workers who are still working from home look like todays Welfare queens .
There are plenty of studies that most of them are not working – not much. And they are collecting 6 figure salaries.
No one is crying tears.
Trump is picking issues with 80% public support – and you are stupid enough to go to war with him defending the unpopular position ?
“He wants judges removed from office.”
Lots of people want these crazy left wing judges removed – keep acting stupidly and Trump/Musk will get their way.
“Of course, that’s what fascists always do. They eliminate the judiciary.”
Nope they take over the judiciary – like the left has.
“Some of Musk and DJT’s supporters are calling for them to just ignore court orders.”
Unnecescary – in most instances the courts do not have jurisdiction, and the plentiffs do not have standing.
Nor am I sure it is not in Trump’s interests to have the left thwart this for the next two years.
The 2026 campaign season will be upon us soon. Trump is giving MAGA republicans popular issues to run on.
The courts are interfering with the will of the people, and Trump needs and even more GOP congress to reign them in.
There are a few sacred cows that Trump must be careful with – he has promised no changes to SS and HI.
But most people do not think that precludes him from ending fraud and waste.
The rest of what Trump is finding – people want to see cut. Most people correctly beleive that government is wasteful.
They have been voting for presidents that promised to cut costs for decades.
Now they have one.
Trump has infinite ways to win this fight. Better still this is like the birth right citizenship fight – he wins with the people even if he loses.
Trump has Democrats where he wants them – on the ropes – reacting rather than acting. Trump is chosing the ground and issues he wants to fight on – and he is fighting on popular ground. and he is in control of the fight – Democrats are not.
“That means an end of the rule of law and our constitutional Republic!”
No cutting spending is the salvation of this country.
“What we now have is a bunch of billionaires against average working class Americans.”
ROFL! The working class is fine with this – it is left wing nuts that do not want waste and fraud to be cut.
Besides Democrats are the billionaire party.
“Musk, DJT and their allies in the billionaire class think government should only protect them.”
Sorros ? Bloomberg ? The vast pantheon of Democrat Billionaire donors ?
“The interests of the vast majority of Americans don’t count.”
Of course they do – the people want spending cut and frade and waste eliminated.
No matter where they are on culture war issues – they do not see trans opears in Columbia as legitimate federal spending.
They do not see why the US is funding Politico, the Clintons and BBC.
What plumber or electrician benefits from USAID funding Al Queda to topple Assad ?
Trump has got you left wing nuts defending stupid spending that even when it is not waste and fraud looks really bad to working class americans.
“Who will defend our Democracy against a fascist dictatorship?”
Trump is.
He is firing and laying off the fascists who have been controlling our lives ever more each decade.
” It’s going to be the people who rise up in large numbers to oppose the rush to establish a dictatorship!”
Cutting wastefull and fraudulent govenrment speding is about as far from a fascist dictatorship as you can get”
Watching this is FUN.
You don’t matter anymore.
Only left wing nuts see cutting waste and fraud as dictatorship.
Your way out over your skis.
You have been rope-a-doped