3 ms·

Evidence? There is no evidence of that. Broad allegations that it is illegal doesn't cut it. Even Schumer is not making that claim. All he is doing is complaini

by sam345 2y ago

Evidence? There is no evidence of that. Broad allegations that it is illegal doesn't cut it. Even Schumer is not making that claim. All he is doing is complaining. The executive branch has the power to police themselves it's not that difficult to understand that you can audit your own agency. There's nothing illegal going on.

sgarland 2y ago
Schumer literally said what they’ve done to USAID is illegal. > …we know that unilaterally closing USAID is illegal. [0]: https://www.democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/leader-schumer-floor-remarks-condemning-doge-and-the-trump-administrations-illegal-seizure-of-usaid-putting-american-security-at-risk https://www.democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/lea...
- prvc 2y ago
  Which law, specifically?
  - sgarland 2y ago
    First, I was showing that the specific claim being made (that Chuck Schumer has not said any illegal activities have taken place) was false. Nothing more. Second, as I’m sure you know, and are being deliberately obtuse about, the separation of powers doctrine, which has been upheld by SCOTUS; one example [0] is Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer. USAID is codified by law, regardless of its genesis, and as such, only Congress is able to revoke the law. [0]: https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep343/usrep343579/usrep343579.pdf https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep...
  - UltraSane 2y ago
    The actual US constitution which gives Congress and ONLY congress the power to spend tax money. Musk has absolutely no legal authority to unilaterally stop payments approved by congress. What Musk is doing is a very intentional effort to usurp this authority illegally. Musk should really end up in prison or deported for what he is doing right now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_of_the_purse#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_of_the_purse#United_Stat... In the federal government of the United States, the power of the purse is vested in the Congress as laid down in the Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 (the Appropriations Clause) and Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 (the Taxing and Spending Clause). The power of the purse plays a critical role in the relationship of the United States Congress and the President of the United States, and has been the main historic tool by which Congress has limited executive power. https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/not-confident-trump-will-prevail-scholar-on-his-attempts-to-take-congress-power-of-the-purse-231043653639 https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/not-confident-trump-... Not confident Trump will prevail: Scholar on his attempts to take Congress' power of the purse Professor Deborah Pearlstein joins Morning Joe to discuss her column for the NYT outlining some of Trump’s actions implemented in his first few days in office and why she says Trump is hardly the first president to claim broad executive power, but the difference is not just the enormity of his claims, it's that the administration mostly doesn't try to craft legal justifications for its actions. https://www.marketplace.org/2025/02/04/congress-president-trump-spending/ https://www.marketplace.org/2025/02/04/congress-president-tr... How Congress — and not the president — controls how taxpayer money is spent https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/01/trump-executive-order-spending-congress/681484/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/01/trump-e... ‘It’s an Illegal Executive Order. And It’s Stealing.’
    - prvc 2y ago
      >the power to spend tax money But they're not spending; they're kind of doing the opposite of spending. And reducing waste is a previously known (for a long time) goal of theirs.
      - mftrhu 2y ago
        They are... not spending tax money? If so, that would still be the only entity given power by the US Constitution to decide what to do with it.
      - UltraSane 2y ago
        Which is a direct violation of the constitution. Only congress the authority to control spending and Musk has absolutely zero authority to stop any payments congress has authorized. It is a naked power grab and musk should spend the rest of his life in prison for it.
        prvc 2y ago
        >Only congress the authority to control spending You changed your wording to fit your argument. "To spend" became "to control spending", implicitly acknowledging that the two phrases have different meanings.
      - blactuary 2y ago
        The executive branch does not have the authority to cut off congressionally appropriated spending. Congress specifically passed a law (Impoundment Control Act) to make that as explicit as could be
- SmarsJerry 2y ago
  You must realize attacks made by political opponents are always exaggerated and many times false. First of all doge can’t close USAID. What “they” aka Trump did was pause payments for review.
  - UltraSane 2y ago
    That isn't what they are actually saying.
  - wussboy 2y ago
    I'm sure all of the people who depended on those payments and whose lives are now ruined will appreciate that subtle difference.
  - blactuary 2y ago
    Which is illegal
    - SmarsJerry 2y ago
      If you are finding the government is sending money to terrorists as they have indicated and need to stop it there are quite a few emergency powers. Pausing is the first step.
      - blactuary 2y ago
        If you believe they found that I have a bridge to sell you

by sam345 2y ago

sgarland 2y ago

Schumer literally said what they’ve done to USAID is illegal. > …we know that unilaterally closing USAID is illegal. [0]: https://www.democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/leader-schumer-floor-remarks-condemning-doge-and-the-trump-administrations-illegal-seizure-of-usaid-putting-american-security-at-risk https://www.democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/lea...

prvc 2y ago
Which law, specifically?
- sgarland 2y ago
  First, I was showing that the specific claim being made (that Chuck Schumer has not said any illegal activities have taken place) was false. Nothing more. Second, as I’m sure you know, and are being deliberately obtuse about, the separation of powers doctrine, which has been upheld by SCOTUS; one example [0] is Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer. USAID is codified by law, regardless of its genesis, and as such, only Congress is able to revoke the law. [0]: https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep343/usrep343579/usrep343579.pdf https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep...
- UltraSane 2y ago
  The actual US constitution which gives Congress and ONLY congress the power to spend tax money. Musk has absolutely no legal authority to unilaterally stop payments approved by congress. What Musk is doing is a very intentional effort to usurp this authority illegally. Musk should really end up in prison or deported for what he is doing right now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_of_the_purse#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_of_the_purse#United_Stat... In the federal government of the United States, the power of the purse is vested in the Congress as laid down in the Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 (the Appropriations Clause) and Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 (the Taxing and Spending Clause). The power of the purse plays a critical role in the relationship of the United States Congress and the President of the United States, and has been the main historic tool by which Congress has limited executive power. https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/not-confident-trump-will-prevail-scholar-on-his-attempts-to-take-congress-power-of-the-purse-231043653639 https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/not-confident-trump-... Not confident Trump will prevail: Scholar on his attempts to take Congress' power of the purse Professor Deborah Pearlstein joins Morning Joe to discuss her column for the NYT outlining some of Trump’s actions implemented in his first few days in office and why she says Trump is hardly the first president to claim broad executive power, but the difference is not just the enormity of his claims, it's that the administration mostly doesn't try to craft legal justifications for its actions. https://www.marketplace.org/2025/02/04/congress-president-trump-spending/ https://www.marketplace.org/2025/02/04/congress-president-tr... How Congress — and not the president — controls how taxpayer money is spent https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/01/trump-executive-order-spending-congress/681484/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/01/trump-e... ‘It’s an Illegal Executive Order. And It’s Stealing.’
  - prvc 2y ago
    >the power to spend tax money But they're not spending; they're kind of doing the opposite of spending. And reducing waste is a previously known (for a long time) goal of theirs.
    - mftrhu 2y ago
      They are... not spending tax money? If so, that would still be the only entity given power by the US Constitution to decide what to do with it.
    - UltraSane 2y ago
      Which is a direct violation of the constitution. Only congress the authority to control spending and Musk has absolutely zero authority to stop any payments congress has authorized. It is a naked power grab and musk should spend the rest of his life in prison for it.
      - prvc 2y ago
        >Only congress the authority to control spending You changed your wording to fit your argument. "To spend" became "to control spending", implicitly acknowledging that the two phrases have different meanings.
    - blactuary 2y ago
      The executive branch does not have the authority to cut off congressionally appropriated spending. Congress specifically passed a law (Impoundment Control Act) to make that as explicit as could be
SmarsJerry 2y ago
You must realize attacks made by political opponents are always exaggerated and many times false. First of all doge can’t close USAID. What “they” aka Trump did was pause payments for review.
- UltraSane 2y ago
  That isn't what they are actually saying.
- wussboy 2y ago
  I'm sure all of the people who depended on those payments and whose lives are now ruined will appreciate that subtle difference.
- blactuary 2y ago
  Which is illegal
  - SmarsJerry 2y ago
    If you are finding the government is sending money to terrorists as they have indicated and need to stop it there are quite a few emergency powers. Pausing is the first step.
    - blactuary 2y ago
      If you believe they found that I have a bridge to sell you