Law be damned, Trump asserts unilateral control over executive branch, federal service (5 Viewers)

[superchuck500]

Following the Project 2025 playbook, in the last week, Trump and his newly installed loyalists have moved to (1) dismiss federal officials deemed unreliable to do his bidding (including 17 inspectors general) - many of which have protections from arbitrary dismissal, (2) freeze all science and public health activity until he can wrest full control, (3) freeze all federal assistance and grant activity deemed inconsistent with Trump's agenda, and (4) moved to terminate all federal employee telework and DEI programs.

The problem is much of this is controlled by federal law and not subject to sudden and complete change by the president through executive order. Most notably is the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 that simply codifies what is the constitutional allocation of resources where Congress appropriates money to the executive branch for a specific purpose, the executive branch must carry out that statutory purpose. This is indeed a constitutional crisis and even if Congress abdicates to Trump by acquiescing, the courts must still apply the law - or rule it unconstitutional.

And meanwhile the architect of much of this unlawful action is Russell Vought, Trump’s OMB nominee who the Senate appears ready to confirm.

120. The Impoundment Crisis of 2025

The Trump administration's Monday spending freeze is likely to provoke a crisis over the constitutionality of "impoundment"—one that the justices could well have to resolve *very* soon.

www.stevevladeck.com

 

[TampaJoe]

Let's put this way. I think @Sendai, @TampaJoe, @el caliente - would all agree that the President has a fair amount discretion on how he is to execute the laws that Congress sets right?

The last President was Joe Biden, right? Joe Biden had a value of diversity, equity and inclusion, as well as transgender rights as part of his administration correct? So, the programs listed were well within Biden's priorities, correct? And all grants had gone through a review process and documented. Therefore, what did USAID do wrong (well not only USAID, b/c some of the listed expenses were from other departments)?

I don’t know that USAID did anything “wrong”. Obviously the current administration believes there is a better use for those funds.

 

[TampaJoe]

It was a yes or no question.

Am I permitted to answer or respond as I choose? Yes or No

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

I don’t know that USAID did anything “wrong”. Obviously the current administration believes there is a better use for those funds.

Sure, but isn't the proper response to just tell the agencies to focus on his priorities? And not say, call them criminals? Also to honor contract commitments and pay your bills? Should the president follow the law?

There are plenty of ways to re-prioritize the governments spending without deliberately lying about said spending. You can also do it without appointing someone with clear and obvious conflicts of interest. you can also do it within the confines of the law, and standard processes.

 

[efil4]

You are just trolling at this point.

Glad to see many are starting to pay attention. Disingenuous at best, trolling at worst.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Why yes. Yes I did.

Lets hope that DOGE has the same positive impact that those two entity’s had.

So you understand that there is a very real difference between DOGE and the two entities you keep bringing up and when you ask stupid questions like, "What is the difference between the three other than “Elon is yucky, and Trump is a doodoo head", you are being incredibly dishonest.

 

[RobF]

So you understand that there is a very real difference between DOGE and the two entities you keep bringing up and when you ask stupid questions like, "What is the difference between the three other than “Elon is yucky, and Trump is a doodoo head", you are being incredibly dishonest.

Yes, I don't think this can be emphasised enough. I mean, essentially this is:

Musk: Attempts to feed USAID 'into the chipper' and kill the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within a couple of weeks of DOGE being created by executive order by Trump.

Someone who is definitely not trolling: This is just like the Truman Committee in the 1940s, which was formed by the Senate, conducted respectful public hearings and made considered recommendations with bipartisan support over a period of years, and the National Partnership for Reinventing Government in the 1990s, which started with a six-month efficiency review, involving months of consultation and consolidating 2,000 pages of proposals, before releasing a first report with 384 recommendations!

 

[DaveXA]

Yes, I don't think this can be emphasised enough. I mean, essentially this is:

Musk: Attempts to feed USAID 'into the chipper' and kill the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within a couple of weeks of DOGE being created by executive order by Trump.

Someone who is definitely not trolling: This is just like the Truman Committee in the 1940s, which was formed by the Senate, conducted respectful public hearings and made considered recommendations with bipartisan support over a period of years, and the National Partnership for Reinventing Government in the 1990s, which started with a six-month efficiency review, involving months of consultation and consolidating 2,000 pages of proposals, before releasing a first report with 384 recommendations!

Yeah, the fantasy land some people choose to live in is wild.

 

[MT15]

I don’t know how to respond to this. Weren’t you really big into the Russian collusion thang?

Also, no laughing emoji in response to my joke about the web developers of the DOGE website? That’s bipartisan comedy.

This DOGE story seems to be the red meat that MSNBC, WaPo, and Trustmebro.com (formerly trustmeaboutproject2025bro.com) know that their consumers can’t get enough of.

I know - or I thought I knew - you’re not a stupid person. What you are pushing here on this thread are well, stupid ideas. There’s a big difference between having a website that you are earnestly trying to get to work that crashes, and having a website that just essentially doesn’t have any information because you don’t give a shirt about transparency. From all evidence, Musk is actively avoiding transparency. Evidently you cannot discern the difference.

Going back to Russian collusion just makes you look really, really not bright. There were definitely elements of Russian collusion, Trump’s campaign took a meeting with someone who represented herself as a Russian government lawyer offering “dirt” on Clinton. They said they “loved it”. So if you want to parrot the propaganda that the Trump campaign didn’t have any improper Russian contacts, well you would look silly. Manafort had clandestine meetings with a Russian intelligence agent where he shared internal campaign documents with him. There was more but this is tiresome and boring to keep going over it.

It’s like you are a person who just wants to sneer and dunk on people with cartoonishly simple concepts of what actually happened, instead of being an actual grownup who can understand complex realities.

It’s completely ironic that you think we are being influenced by media, when we have been pointing out actual occurrences, direct quotes and the like. Nobody here has been relying on MSNBC, WaPo or any other single source.

What you are doing is believing in Musk, who has repeatedly shown by word and deed that he isn’t to be trusted. And then making reference to “trustme.bro” when that is exactly what you are advocating we should do with Musk.

The irony is very thick, and yes, from all evidence here you think you are smarter than the rest of us. Old and tired. Not funny.

 

[MT15]

You are just trolling at this point.

He’s been trolling from the minute he started participating in this thread. Blatantly.