5 ms·

First, I would not trust the current USAID disbursement personnel not to piss the money into the wind. I want them gone. And it's not a question of being offen

First, I would not trust the current USAID disbursement personnel not to piss the money into the wind. I want them gone. And it's not a question of being offended personally - these are just ridiculous expenses that cannot possibly be justified. But I am indeed offended that the amount 4x of my real estate taxes that I can barely scrape off the bottom of a barrel is being wasted on some opera abroad. If you are wondering why people vote for Trump, this is one of those reasons. Regarding legality of funding being stopped by the President, I am not a lawyer (and I am guessing neither are you), so I am not going to take your legal opinion on this and will wait for the courts to issue the final ruling.

mikeyouse 2y ago
The fact that there’s a specific law called the Impoundment Control Act where the specific actions Trump is trying were made illegal should give you a hint to which way the court cases are going to go.. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Budget_and_Impoundment_Control_Act_of_1974 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Budget_and_Imp...
- pseudalopex 2y ago
  Why are you confident the Supreme Court will not declare the Impoundment Control Act an unconstitutional restriction of executive power? Or declare the only recourse is impeachment? Who do you expect would enforce the ruling you predicted?
  - mikeyouse 2y ago
    That is surely the elephant in the room.. every time it’s been litigated before the court in the past, the Act has been found constitutional but who knows with this specific set of justices and their obsequiousness to Trump and his executive branch.
hobs 2y ago
That they are senseless enough to their their personal opinions on budgeting should run the entire government, and that their little agendas are the reason everything should burn to the ground? Yes, that is why people voted for trump (they are stupid and vindictive).
- braincat31415 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - Sabinus 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - braincat31415 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - Sabinus 2y ago
        [flagged]
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]

mikeyouse 2y ago

The fact that there’s a specific law called the Impoundment Control Act where the specific actions Trump is trying were made illegal should give you a hint to which way the court cases are going to go.. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Budget_and_Impoundment_Control_Act_of_1974 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Budget_and_Imp...

pseudalopex 2y ago
Why are you confident the Supreme Court will not declare the Impoundment Control Act an unconstitutional restriction of executive power? Or declare the only recourse is impeachment? Who do you expect would enforce the ruling you predicted?
- mikeyouse 2y ago
  That is surely the elephant in the room.. every time it’s been litigated before the court in the past, the Act has been found constitutional but who knows with this specific set of justices and their obsequiousness to Trump and his executive branch.

hobs 2y ago

That they are senseless enough to their their personal opinions on budgeting should run the entire government, and that their little agendas are the reason everything should burn to the ground? Yes, that is why people voted for trump (they are stupid and vindictive).

braincat31415 2y ago
[flagged]
- Sabinus 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - braincat31415 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - Sabinus 2y ago
      [flagged]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]