Why the Constitution is now null and void

[Spacetime Inhabitant]

I'm kind of startled by how few Americans seem to actually know what USAID does, what the CIA is responsible for, what the Department of Education does, etc as revealed by these recent conversations. I guess that makes me an "ivory tower academic" but how can people have so little curiosity about how their own government works? We are (or were) a democracy, there aren't many well kept secrets at the federal level. If you're ever in DC you can just walk into most of those buildings and get a little tour... It's just a few hundred thousand employees across a few dozen departments that handle much of the bureaucratic infrastructure of the country, and our taxes pay all their salaries. I get having positive or negative views on this or that department and how it functions but how could someone have no opinion at all? Do y'all live in this country or not?

You are joking right? Just one department of the federal government alone, the IRS is so huge and vast not even the most educated certified lawyer accountant can possibly know and stay up to date on all of the countless tax code there is. And there are other departments even more vast such as the department of defense. The department of defense is orders of magnitude bigger than the largest US corporations. Look at the 574 page budget just provided in this thread for foreign affairs everyone is so proud to be paying for. Money that Americans had to earn that is freely given away to the rest of the world.

The federal government is big. Way too big IMO.

Why are you obsessed with the Federal government alone? There are fifty state governments, so fifty other sources for oversized governance. The wastefulness and corruption of many of these is well known, and they are Republican controlled states. Economic inefficiency and anti-human practices and beliefs are notable in many of those red states. It is why they have to be propped up and financially subsidized by blue states.

 

[barbos]

You do realize that YouTube videos are best to be taken as primitive sources of info which are starting points for investigation, not the ending point?

Now that's hardly fair.

YouTube videos are best taken as utterly valueless sources of info that are strictly for entertainment purposes only, and are pretty piss-poor at even that.

What would constitute an evidence for you?
Have you read Wikipedia and their sources?

 

[barbos]

USAid did provide some funding to independent media in Ukraine. There is also a charity fund based in Europe that provides funds for media in Ukraine.

90% is not "some" it is pretty much 100%, considering that remaining 10% are probably indirect funding from the same source.

Prove the 90%

No, you prove "some"
The fact that US government pays pretty much for the the whole ukro-government is well known and accepted, they pay fucking pensions in Ukraine, not to mention salaries to all government critters including police.
The same damn thing happened in Georgia.

 

[barbos]

Again, from recent leaks it was revealed that russian "oposition" troll elfs farms were scamming USAID by listing all "refugees" they got their hands on as trolls elfs on their USAID payroll.

And yes, that scum admitted being paid by USAID and running troll elfs farms.

Ask yourself a question, why so many governments are refusing to work with USAID? why would anyone refuse help?

 

[Elixir]

If you're ever in DC you can just walk into most of those buildings and get a little tour...

there are a few Trump supporters who totally agree with this.

Can I plug my flash drive into all those blinking boxes?

 

[Elixir]

This is exactly the same Russian propaganda talking point spread by barbos.

I wonder if RV, TS et al know that.

 

[Swammerdami]

What a petty shitbag

I think that when anyone is a petty shitbag, they should just be called a Trump. Make "Trump" a word used synonymous with petty shitbag. Maybe Websters will add it to the dictionary.

Okay, but accept multiple meanings. My dog Bogie takes a trump in the basement every time I forget to walk him.

Wiktionary shows 18 different definitions for English 'trump', divided into three Etymologies. Most relevant is Etymology 2:

Etymology 2
From Middle English trumpe, trompe (“trumpet”), from Old French trompe (“horn, trump, trumpet”), from Frankish *trumpa, *trumba (“trumpet”), from a common Germanic word of imitative origin. Doublet of tulumba and tromp.
...
Noun
trump (plural trumps)

1. (archaic) A trumpet.​

2. (UK, colloquial, euphemistic) A fart.​

3. The noise made by an elephant through its trunk.​

Verb
trump (third-person singular simple present trumps, present participle trumping, simple past and past participle trumped)

1. To blow a trumpet.​

2. (intransitive, UK, colloquial, euphemistic) To fart.​

And without warning me, as he lay there, he suddenly trumped next to me in bed.​

Who trumped?​

Like wikipedia, wiktionary lets one view the history of the 'trump' page. 'To flatulate' was present as a definition from before the rise of the Flatulater-in-Chief, but was erroneously shown under Etymology 1 until August 2013.

 

[Elixir]

But now MAGA suddenly loves the authoritarian hell holes and hates the spread of democracy so of course any agency or person that opposes the former and engages in the latter is evil.

Yes, MAGA has devolved into one big smelly pile of dog trump.
But it was always headed that way.

 

[ZiprHead]

USAid did provide some funding to independent media in Ukraine. There is also a charity fund based in Europe that provides funds for media in Ukraine.

90% is not "some" it is pretty much 100%, considering that remaining 10% are probably indirect funding from the same source.

Prove the 90%

No, you prove "some"
The fact that US government pays pretty much for the the whole ukro-government is well known and accepted, they pay fucking pensions in Ukraine, not to mention salaries to all government critters including police.
The same damn thing happened in Georgia.

You made the claim. It's your responsibility to back it up.

 

[RVonse]

I'm kind of startled by how few Americans seem to actually know what USAID does, what the CIA is responsible for, what the Department of Education does, etc as revealed by these recent conversations. I guess that makes me an "ivory tower academic" but how can people have so little curiosity about how their own government works? We are (or were) a democracy, there aren't many well kept secrets at the federal level. If you're ever in DC you can just walk into most of those buildings and get a little tour... It's just a few hundred thousand employees across a few dozen departments that handle much of the bureaucratic infrastructure of the country, and our taxes pay all their salaries. I get having positive or negative views on this or that department and how it functions but how could someone have no opinion at all? Do y'all live in this country or not?

You are joking right? Just one department of the federal government alone, the IRS is so huge and vast not even the most educated certified lawyer accountant can possibly know and stay up to date on all of the countless tax code there is. And there are other departments even more vast such as the department of defense. The department of defense is orders of magnitude bigger than the largest US corporations. Look at the 574 page budget just provided in this thread for foreign affairs everyone is so proud to be paying for. Money that Americans had to earn that is freely given away to the rest of the world.

The federal government is big. Way too big IMO.

Why are you obsessed with the Federal government alone? There are fifty state governments, so fifty other sources for oversized governance. The wastefulness and corruption of many of these is well known, and they are Republican controlled states. Economic inefficiency and anti-human practices and beliefs are notable in many of those red states. It is why they have to be propped up and financially subsidized by blue states.

I live in Missouri but work in Illinois so I file taxes with both states. Missouri for my investment/retirement income and Illinois for labor income done in that state. I end up earning about the same in both states but pay more to Illinois than Missouri. Missouri is a conservative state with lower taxes but Illinois a higher tax state but with better services so I see the difference first hand. Even with the better government services, I still prefer Missouri's conservative government by far. Yes, Illinois has better roads and always clears off their highway snow faster which is really nice in the winter trying to get to work. Illinois obviously has more money to work with.

But I still like to pay less in Missouri and get less public service service in Missouri. And yes, I might feel differently if I were Mark Zukerburg or some uber wealthy tech guy working in a super heavy tax state like California. Those guys have so much income blowing out their ears they need not ever worry about taxation or disposable income. But at my income level I know I would rather get less and pay less so I can enjoy a better life with my family. I just wish the federal government could act more like Missouri. Missouri might seem backwards to many but they always balance their budget and during the pandemic even send back money when their government collects more than it needs. Illinois is just the opposite spending more than they really have.

It will suit me just fine if Musk helps our federal government become more like Missouri and less like Illinois.

 

[barbos]

USAid did provide some funding to independent media in Ukraine. There is also a charity fund based in Europe that provides funds for media in Ukraine.

90% is not "some" it is pretty much 100%, considering that remaining 10% are probably indirect funding from the same source.

Prove the 90%

No, you prove "some"
The fact that US government pays pretty much for the the whole ukro-government is well known and accepted, they pay fucking pensions in Ukraine, not to mention salaries to all government critters including police.
The same damn thing happened in Georgia.

You made the claim. It's your responsibility to back it up.

No, you made it. You said "some" without any evidence that it is not 100%.
As for me, it was reported as 100%. Certainly in the case of the government.

 

[ZiprHead]

USAid did provide some funding to independent media in Ukraine. There is also a charity fund based in Europe that provides funds for media in Ukraine.

90% is not "some" it is pretty much 100%, considering that remaining 10% are probably indirect funding from the same source.

Prove the 90%

No, you prove "some"
The fact that US government pays pretty much for the the whole ukro-government is well known and accepted, they pay fucking pensions in Ukraine, not to mention salaries to all government critters including police.
The same damn thing happened in Georgia.

You made the claim. It's your responsibility to back it up.

No, you made it. You said "some" without any evidence that it is not 100%.
As for me, it was reported as 100%. Certainly in the case of the government.

100% is included in some,

 

[barbos]

USAID is a terrorist organization.

Almost 60% of Ukrainian media outlets face crisis due to suspension of US financial aid

Ukrainian Institute of Mass Information says almost 90% of national media outlets likely to experience difficulties because of US deicison - Anadolu Ajansı

www.aa.com.tr

 

[barbos]

В России USAID официально прекратило работу в 2012 году, но оно продолжило работать. На 2025/2026 гг. отделение агентства Russia USAID Moscow запланировало 11 программ общей стоимостью $60 млн. Среди них есть занимательные направления, вроде «усиления местного самоуправления на Северном Кавказе» ($2,8 млн) или «новые медиа» ($4 млн).

LOL, they literally fund terrorists.

 

[Patooka]

...I'm not necessarily 100% in the MAGA camp but I can at least see some benefit to the reduction of the federal government. It is painful today but may give this country life tomorrow so that we can compete with China again.

Everyone would like to see parts of the government that they don't like disappear and keep the parts that they do like. MAGAs want to keep the parts that impose their ideals on those who don't share them and defund projects that they feel they get no benefit from. Most aren't looking to reduce the Pentagon budget, and that is why Musk is trying to make deep cuts in social programs and almost none in the bloated military budget. He'll fire humanitarian aid workers but keep the huge budgets that fund the industries making himself wealthy. You are deluding yourself to think that they are really going to shrink the government. That is just a pretense to get rid of the parts that conservatives have long wanted to get rid of but could not convince others to agree to--primarily all of the social programs that have been put into place by Democrats since the FDR administration. It is not going over well with the public, but there is little anyone seems to be able to do about it in the short term. Trump and his gang of plutocrats are pulling off a coup in broad daylight.

I would be happy if they made large cuts to the military and closed down the useless bases too. And you are correct about pet projects for special interests....on either side But if people want something for nothing (say Lindsey Graham or Mitch McConnel) at least those kind of projects should be paid for by their own local or state governments so that the people nearest to the project are the same people who benefit from that project. We should be able to agree that the federal government should not be in the business for senator pet projects no matter who wants them. I pledge that when the Democrats get in next time they can and should get rid of all the Republican pet projects in next election cycle. And I for one will have no problem with that whatsoever even if George Soros does it.

Let the federal government get smaller so that it can be solvent and still carry out federal programs that are not pet projects. Let the federal government get smaller so that the middle class (not just the uber wealthy) can pay less federal tax. I want less from the federal government and to pay less too.

You should not be objecting to Musk getting rid of a charity pet program that gives away money to the rest of the world. A program that does not even directly benefit our own country. The federal government is nearly bankrupt and not in a position for a charity pet program right now. Let Bill Gates keep it going for now since he is able to afford it.

If you honestly believed in any of the shit you spewed you would have been one of the first of honourable citizens to demand Truemps tax returns the first t ime he was President.

 

[Swammerdami]

@RVonse -- I sincerely express again applause and thanks for answering questions in honest and straightforward fashion. Others on this board should emulate you. We have "bad faith" posters of various stripes, but not you.

I'd like to impose on you again with another question. My question is about your stance on USAID specifically, but I'm afraid that stance may be an example of a more general trend.

I'm sure you are an avid consumer of news; and have formed your opinion about USAID after using sources like Reuters, AP, Wikipedia, Google etc and perhaps even mediocre sources like CNN. Even ChatGPT will offer an opinion about USAID. Yet you link to a right-wing video by an "American stand-up comedian and conspiracy theorist." I'd be a hypocrite to condemn you for clicking on a Jimmy Dore show: I get some of my news headlines from Alternet.Org (though I usually reference the site they source when pursuing the headline for a post here).

"Majority of journalists rule" is often a bad idea when forming an opinion: Sometimes the "fringe" view is the correct one. But nobody wants to assume the fringiest view is correct by default!

Yet you seem eager to take the word of Trump (and/or Elon Musk?) over other respected experts. My question is: WHY? Does Trump's honest demeanor appeal to you, in sharp contrast to liars like Clinton or Biden? Or are Dore's conspiracy theory and Musk's action secondary here; you're just opposed to using bond-buyers' dollars to help foreigners? USAID has hundreds of millions of dollars worth of food queued up to deliver to hungry children around the world, which is now being held up. Should the hungry children have been fed for a few more weeks in hopes that other charities would step up? Or is the risk that the food has Soros' brainwashing nanobots too great?

With all the information available on the 'Net, and since you are an objective seeker of truth, I am truly baffled at the conclusions you form. I hope you can help us understand.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I'm kind of startled by how few Americans seem to actually know what USAID does, what the CIA is responsible for, what the Department of Education does, etc as revealed by these recent conversations. I guess that makes me an "ivory tower academic" but how can people have so little curiosity about how their own government works? We are (or were) a democracy, there aren't many well kept secrets at the federal level. If you're ever in DC you can just walk into most of those buildings and get a little tour... It's just a few hundred thousand employees across a few dozen departments that handle much of the bureaucratic infrastructure of the country, and our taxes pay all their salaries. I get having positive or negative views on this or that department and how it functions but how could someone have no opinion at all? Do y'all live in this country or not?

You are joking right? Just one department of the federal government alone, the IRS is so huge and vast not even the most educated certified lawyer accountant can possibly know and stay up to date on all of the countless tax code there is. And there are other departments even more vast such as the department of defense. The department of defense is orders of magnitude bigger than the largest US corporations. Look at the 574 page budget just provided in this thread for foreign affairs everyone is so proud to be paying for. Money that Americans had to earn that is freely given away to the rest of the world.

The federal government is big. Way too big IMO.

So I take it that you will refuse to look at USAID budgetting and choose willful ignornace.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Just to take a step back and look at the big picture of where this thread has gone... The title of the thread is "Why the Constitution is now null and void." It is about how Trump lacks constitutional authority to do the things he is doing, at least in part...and how his unconstitutional dictates are being enabled by having a majority of govt in his party. It is Republican strategy 101 to ALWAYS GO ON THE OFFENSE. This means that if a conservative encounters issues of Constitutionality of Trump's dictates, then they will immediately attack Democrats, like do whataboutisms, OR they will attack the things that Trump is destroying. This keeps the heat off Trump, allows them never to address issues of Constitutionality, and gets opposition to forget what their original objections were. The crazier and wilder claims that are said--the more hyperbolic--the more it distracts from the original core issue.

Example:

Person 1: What Trump is doing is unconstitutional.
Distraction: USAID is a terrorist organization!

 

[RVonse]

Yet you seem eager to take the word of Trump (and/or Elon Musk?) over other respected experts. My question is: WHY? Does Trump's honest demeanor appeal to you, in sharp contrast to liars like Clinton or Biden? Or are Dore's conspiracy theory and Musk's action secondary here; you're just opposed to using bond-buyers' dollars to help foreigners? USAID has hundreds of millions of dollars worth of food queued up to deliver to hungry children around the world, which is now being held up. Should the hungry children have been fed for a few more weeks in hopes that other charities would step up? Or is the risk that the food has Soros' brainwashing nanobots too great?

You are correct about finding truth in most all media and sources, it is a difficult job today. But my present thoughts about USAID (subject to change) Also in order of importance:

1) This first and most immediate red flag is US tax money going directly to another part of the world. We have a broke treasury sending out money to everyone but our own country! Nothing for our own hungry. Nothing for our own infrastructure. Nothing to protect our own citizens. This might be a good practice for ultra rich people who don't know where to spend their money. But not for our broke US treasury borrowing just to stay in solvent.

2) It's not that I want to see anyone go hungry. But now we learn charity is not even the stated mission of this program. Agency for International Development tells us this is a program for nation building. And the last nation building fiasco for the US was the Iraq War. I see no benefit to any of the nation building the US has ever done. Haven't we learned our lesson yet? Nation building is just good money after bad.

3) Then there is no need for nation building unless your ultimate goal is to have a 1 world government. And I am definitely against globalism for tyranny reasons and agree with MAGA on that stance. Because if you believe Trump is the dictator, just wait and see how shitty your life becomes when the entire world is under the rule of 1 government and 1 dictator. Our world needs more sovereign nations and not fewer ruled by 1 empire.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Yet you seem eager to take the word of Trump (and/or Elon Musk?) over other respected experts. My question is: WHY? Does Trump's honest demeanor appeal to you, in sharp contrast to liars like Clinton or Biden? Or are Dore's conspiracy theory and Musk's action secondary here; you're just opposed to using bond-buyers' dollars to help foreigners? USAID has hundreds of millions of dollars worth of food queued up to deliver to hungry children around the world, which is now being held up. Should the hungry children have been fed for a few more weeks in hopes that other charities would step up? Or is the risk that the food has Soros' brainwashing nanobots too great?

You are correct about finding truth in most all media and sources, it is a difficult job today. But my present thoughts about USAID (subject to change) Also in order of importance:

1) This first and most immediate red flag is US tax money going directly to another part of the world. We have a broke treasury sending out money to everyone but our own country! Nothing for our own hungry. Nothing for our own infrastructure. Nothing to protect our own citizens. This might be a good practice for ultra rich people who don't know where to spend their money. But not for our broke US treasury borrowing just to stay in solvent.

this sounds like a strawman. Can you show evidence to support your contention that the government spends nothing on our own infrastructure and our own hungry?