3 ms·

And a curious question: I was seeking the truth on the qualifier "obvious" and the legality of the EO in general, and I presented my case with references to the

And a curious question: I was seeking the truth on the qualifier "obvious" and the legality of the EO in general, and I presented my case with references to the actual EO. My reasoning could be very wrong but at least I tried to stick with the discussion of the actual legality of the EO. What's your reason to flag it and downvote it without counter arguments? Anything that does not agree with your rage is automatically morally bad bad bad?

unsnap_biceps 2y ago
I believe that the existence of DOGE and the EO is legal. I don't believe that what they are actually doing (according to reports) is legal. I believe they are doing illegal things based upon Musk's own tweets, however, I do actually hope he is just trolling and it's not actually happening as he says it is. That said, even if it's just trolling, trolling has no place in government. We all deserve better and we need to trust that what is said is the truth.
- gitaarik 2y ago
  So what "trolling" are you referring to?
  - plugger 2y ago
    $50 million for condoms in Gaza is a good example.
    - kurikuri 2y ago
      Has there been any proof to this claim outside of the White House press secretary?
      - andy12_ 2y ago
        This grant [1]. "SUPPORT SEXUAL AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH (SRH) CARE CLOSE TO THE DISPLACED POPULATIONS. [...] Place Of Performance //XGZ GAZA STRIP GAZA STRIP". Though I don't think that it will be used exclusively for condoms, the one paragraph description doesn't give much details about how exactly the 45 million dollars will be spent. [1] https://www.usaspending.gov/award/ASST_NON_SPRMCO24VC0339_1900/ https://www.usaspending.gov/award/ASST_NON_SPRMCO24VC0339_19...
        unsnap_biceps 2y ago
        It also shows that zero dollars has been outlaid for the grant over the last 5 months. It's entirely possible that none of the money would have been used by the expiration of the grant. That said, I wish these were required to be a lot more verbose. I can envision a program with that description I would totally approve of, and I can imagine programs with that description that I wouldn't think are useful. Being more transparent around the programs would help in cases where wild unsubstantiated claims are made.
        ethagknight 2y ago
        I dont think “but it hasn’t been outlayed yet” is an appropriate critique of something so fishy. Whether the funds were used for condom balloons or lifesaving hospital deliveries of babies, the complaint from the masses should be “give us more information for exactly what this money is obligated to accomplish.” Especially when the federal government is eager send me demands for additional backup and information on money I earned 3 years ago, after it had previously signed off on documentation presented.

unsnap_biceps 2y ago

I believe that the existence of DOGE and the EO is legal. I don't believe that what they are actually doing (according to reports) is legal. I believe they are doing illegal things based upon Musk's own tweets, however, I do actually hope he is just trolling and it's not actually happening as he says it is. That said, even if it's just trolling, trolling has no place in government. We all deserve better and we need to trust that what is said is the truth.

gitaarik 2y ago
So what "trolling" are you referring to?
- plugger 2y ago
  $50 million for condoms in Gaza is a good example.
  - kurikuri 2y ago
    Has there been any proof to this claim outside of the White House press secretary?
    - andy12_ 2y ago
      This grant [1]. "SUPPORT SEXUAL AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH (SRH) CARE CLOSE TO THE DISPLACED POPULATIONS. [...] Place Of Performance //XGZ GAZA STRIP GAZA STRIP". Though I don't think that it will be used exclusively for condoms, the one paragraph description doesn't give much details about how exactly the 45 million dollars will be spent. [1] https://www.usaspending.gov/award/ASST_NON_SPRMCO24VC0339_1900/ https://www.usaspending.gov/award/ASST_NON_SPRMCO24VC0339_19...
      - unsnap_biceps 2y ago
        It also shows that zero dollars has been outlaid for the grant over the last 5 months. It's entirely possible that none of the money would have been used by the expiration of the grant. That said, I wish these were required to be a lot more verbose. I can envision a program with that description I would totally approve of, and I can imagine programs with that description that I wouldn't think are useful. Being more transparent around the programs would help in cases where wild unsubstantiated claims are made.
        ethagknight 2y ago
        I dont think “but it hasn’t been outlayed yet” is an appropriate critique of something so fishy. Whether the funds were used for condom balloons or lifesaving hospital deliveries of babies, the complaint from the masses should be “give us more information for exactly what this money is obligated to accomplish.” Especially when the federal government is eager send me demands for additional backup and information on money I earned 3 years ago, after it had previously signed off on documentation presented.