Not sure when he (James Lindsay) started getting funds...could be before he started in on the woke left, could be when he lately started going on a tangent about what he terms the 'woke right". But his reporting and breakdown of the background of all the Marxist left stuff is invaluable.

Time for a congress of the states and strip this federal scam of power.

USAID was established by Congress…but there are no spending bills specifically passed for each of their cash outlays…therein lies the rub, and it's also why, though DOGE can't abolish them, they can point out the trail of $ they spend that is not specifically granted, dollar for dollar, by Congress…

USAID has basically had carte blanche to spend money wherever they see fit…

DOGE is simply advising the new administration where the funds have been spent and/or are earmarked to be spent, and shutting down their authority to spend it carte blanche…

It's a technicality, per my understanding, but since there is no Congressional spending bills specifically passed that say $X must be spent on Iraqi Sesame Street and $Y must be spent on Venezuelan sex changes for minors, then the executive branch has the authority to cut off USAID's carte blanche spending power…

I think what DOGE and the Executive Branch are doing will pass any legal challenges because there is a clear loophole at USAID that basically never defined congressional control and oversight of where each dollar was spent…so DOGE/Trump are closing the loophole…

One nice impact of all of this coming out and significant funding being stripped will be a further marginalization of the 'main stream media' and greater folks going to/supporting/using/trusting 'new media' in it's various forms (hotair/redstate etc, but also podcasts, substacks, X account subscriptions etc).

I think most folks here already do that mostly, but in the greater public likely only around 40 percent (throwing out a number) really use 'new media' primarily for their news sources. I don't think the below is really 'correct' in absolute terms but it is sobering with the headlines this week:

There are:

1,500 Newspapers
1,100 Magazines
9,000 Radio Stations
1,500 TV Stations
2,400 Publishers

Owned by 5 corporations and 272 executives.

That control 90% of what 350 million Americans SEE, HEAR and READ.

— World Hall Of Fun (@WorldHallOfFun) January 26, 2025

Heartening:

🇺🇸 OVER 12,000 "NEW MEDIA" APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED TO THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS ROOM

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt announced that over 12,000 "New Media" credential applications have been submitted, with more expected.

She also announced a "new media" journalist… pic.twitter.com/u0WWbUrHjz

— Diligent Denizen 🇺🇸 (@DiligentDenizen) February 5, 2025

But still room for improvement over time:

Louisianians are informed.

My recent poll shows 70% check the news daily.

Over 60% get their news from TV.

27% from the internet (like Facebook).

7% from radio.

4% from newspapers. pic.twitter.com/RZ5ismSalq

— John Kennedy (@SenJohnKennedy) June 18, 2024

People who get their news from TV just 95% of the time get a very incomplete picture, imho. I watch about half an hour of news programming (mostly local) daily, but tend to watch about half of 'Fox News Sunday' (after it's recorded) and probably would be wholly ignorant of current events if that was it.

JamesPShelley said:

---

Aggie95 said:

---

This guy is big mad…sent to a friend of mine:

I'm astounded that as a lawyer you have no use for the rule of law. USAID was funded by the normal appropriations process. Many of the programs you don't care for were funded under Trump and Biden. And for the ones funded exclusively by Biden--tough ***** Elections have consequences and they were funded legally through. The executive branch doesn't have the authority to summarily end them. That's impoundment and it's unconstitutional.

If the scales have fallen from Trump's eyes as to the true nature of an agency he was in charge of for 4 years, then he can have Mike Johnson submit legislation and a budget that removes funding or bans certain programs. This should be easy to do since Trump's party controls both chambers. But allowing an unelected, unconfirmed campaign donor run roughshod through an independent enterprise and shutdown programs that are legally funded is illegal and frankly scary. Imagine if Biden let some billionaire donor shut out Department of Energy employees and start shutting down programs that benefitted oil and gas production. Is your opinion of that action only informed by your opinion of the program at risk, or do you think the rule of law should be abided regardless of the program? Because if it's the former, turn in your law license.

---

I'm not an attorney... so I say shut that **** down. **** all that hoops noise.

Chips fall, then rebuild.

---

I'm no attorney either, but a law license isn't required to recognize sanctimonious BS.

4% newspapers. My question has always been who's funding them? They don't care about ad space anymore.

Where's AggieHawg and other good lawyers who bring proper context to these matters.

96AgGrad said:

---

If you haven't done so, go watch the Joe Rogan interview of Mike Benz:

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3515375

Benz makes it clear that USAID has nothing to do with foreign aid. Collectively it's a tool for regime change in foreign countries using NGO's to influence elections.

When Trump and other right wingers came to power, the intelligence community turned all of these resources inward and redefined "threat to democracy" as anything that affected the status quo of government institutions, not the will of the people.

In fact, they treated populism as their biggest threat, and felt completely justified using the NGOs to censor and undermine it at every opportunity. Barely a month into Covid worldwide and they were already using USAID to control the allowable narrative of what Covid was, where it came from, and what effective treatments were allowed.

This is greatly oversimplified. However convoluted you thought it was, it's worse than you think. Make the time to listen to the podcast if you can.

---

For 25 years AID and CIA and the White House have been trying to get rid of Bibi Netanyahu in Israel.

Under Clinton, under Obama, under Biden.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

So many social justice warriors getting paid to take sanctimonious ego feeding vacations overseas will have to find productive employment.

---

it can not be true that SIMPLE JACK from Tropic Thunder

was paid $4 million to visit our friend Zelensky in Kyiv!!

Hopefully most of them are the swamp career creatures in DC that have fleeced working Americans pout of their tax money.

Krombopulos Michael said:

---

BREAKING: DOGE has discovered that USAID delved too greedily and too deep in the mines of Moria, awakening in the darkness of Khazad-dûm shadow and flame.

— Aelfred The Great (@aelfred_D) February 5, 2025

---

I CANNOT STAR THIS POST ENOUGH!!!!

He's strongly denied it, fwiw. I dunno, my suspicion is the transportation/security was paid for by a grant. I doubt the CIA would be stupid enough not to have the celebrities pay for some portion of the trip.

The one I have a more difficult time accepting is that Angelina Jolie got "$20 million" though. C'mon, no matter the accounting estimate, that didn't happen. Her trip wasn't 'worth' that to the war press, even if it's proverbially Monopoly money being used.

Aggie95 said:

---

This guy is big mad…sent to a friend of mine:

I'm astounded that as a lawyer you have no use for the rule of law. USAID was funded by the normal appropriations process. Many of the programs you don't care for were funded under Trump and Biden. And for the ones funded exclusively by Biden--tough ***** Elections have consequences and they were funded legally through. The executive branch doesn't have the authority to summarily end them. That's impoundment and it's unconstitutional.

If the scales have fallen from Trump's eyes as to the true nature of an agency he was in charge of for 4 years, then he can have Mike Johnson submit legislation and a budget that removes funding or bans certain programs. This should be easy to do since Trump's party controls both chambers. But allowing an unelected, unconfirmed campaign donor run roughshod through an independent enterprise and shutdown programs that are legally funded is illegal and frankly scary. Imagine if Biden let some billionaire donor shut out Department of Energy employees and start shutting down programs that benefitted oil and gas production. Is your opinion of that action only informed by your opinion of the program at risk, or do you think the rule of law should be abided regardless of the program? Because if it's the former, turn in your law license.

---

All this is BS if the aid is fraudulent or criminal (or both). They have every right to shut it down, and shame on all the career civil servants, who sat on their asses doing nothing while they watched the government literally waste and piss away billions of dollars.

"Shame"...

lol

Ted Cruz’s biggest takeaway from the USAID scandal was… *checks notes*… how it hurt Israel.

A nice reminder that GOP U.S. Senators are, at best, completely retarded. https://t.co/ZtqBxBj9cC

— BowTiedRanger (@BowTiedRanger) February 6, 2025

The absolute state of Washington politicians.

Jbob04 said:

---

BigFred said:

---

Lets shut down WHO, shut down USAID. But????

Instead, lets turn our mission to some imperialistic, conquest...... (Alexander the Great type shh) by taking over Greenland, the Gaza Strip, Making Canada the 51st state, & renaming the Gulf, etc. etc.

---

Gonna be a long 4 years for you. Dry those tears

---

Remember when he posted the end of Trump after the debate?

Barnyard96 said:

---

Jbob04 said:

---

BigFred said:

---

Lets shut down WHO, shut down USAID. But????

Instead, lets turn our mission to some imperialistic, conquest...... (Alexander the Great type shh) by taking over Greenland, the Gaza Strip, Making Canada the 51st state, & renaming the Gulf, etc. etc.

---

Gonna be a long 4 years for you. Dry those tears

---

Remember when he posted the end of Trump after the debate?

---

Couldn't have been more wrong

When businesses are grossly mismanaged, they either go under or they experience massive cuts and layoffs. Trump is treating this like a business. (I am too familiar with the phenomenon.)

The federal government and vast majority of local and state governments have never gone through these kinds of cuts before. They think they are immune from the real pain that many (most?) people in the private sector have experienced at some point in their careers.

Unfortunately, in the real world, it's not done with a scalpel but with an axe and very quickly. Notice that most critics aren't trying to defend the what. They can only criticize the who and the how.

And meat will be cut with the fat. This is understood from the beginning. That's why it's so shocking and frankly, "I don't really care, Margaret."

FireAg said:

---

USAID was established by Congress…but there are no spending bills specifically passed for each of their cash outlays…therein lies the rub, and it's also why, though DOGE can't abolish them, they can point out the trail of $ they spend that is not specifically granted, dollar for dollar, by Congress…

USAID has basically had carte blanche to spend money wherever they see fit…

DOGE is simply advising the new administration where the funds have been spent and/or are earmarked to be spent, and shutting down their authority to spend it carte blanche…

It's a technicality, per my understanding, but since there is no Congressional spending bills specifically passed that say $X must be spent on Iraqi Sesame Street and $Y must be spent on Venezuelan sex changes for minors, then the executive branch has the authority to cut off USAID's carte blanche spending power…

I think what DOGE and the Executive Branch are doing will pass any legal challenges because there is a clear loophole at USAID that basically never defined congressional control and oversight of where each dollar was spent…so DOGE/Trump are closing the loophole…

---

Doesn't that apply to almost every federal government department?

CRs don't state how funds should be spent for the most part. They only state how much is apportioned to each department and allows those departments to spend "as needed".


Note: As needed is in quotations because many laws on the book do specify funding.

Nanomachines son said:

---

Ted Cruz’s biggest takeaway from the USAID scandal was… *checks notes*… how it hurt Israel.

A nice reminder that GOP U.S. Senators are, at best, completely retarded. https://t.co/ZtqBxBj9cC

— BowTiedRanger (@BowTiedRanger) February 6, 2025

The absolute state of Washington politicians.

---

He's stating Cruz is "mentally challenged" for making a factual statement?

How many of those 14,000 are campaign ops people being warehoused in off election years?

Matt Hooper said:

---

That's one of many great examples of the cancer that is/was USAID. Good riddance.

Ted Cruz is spot on. And making a factual statement is not dispositive of other reasons to detest the cancer within USAID. To say this is "his biggest take away" is illogical and sophomoric.

Thanks for posting.

---

We give more than $500 million to Israel through USAID that is mostly used to pay for social services there, but it's Hamas that is the problem. Both of these are an issue and neither should happen.

My point is that he chose this one specific topic instead of the myriad of other nations or special interests that we waste money on. All these people care about is what affects Israel and not what affects our nation.

rynning said:

---

When businesses are grossly mismanaged, they either go under or they experience massive cuts and layoffs. Trump is treating this like a business. (I am too familiar with the phenomenon.)

The federal government and vast majority of local and state governments have never gone through these kinds of cuts before. They think they are immune from the real pain that many (most?) people in the private sector have experienced at some point in their careers.

Unfortunately, in the real world, it's not done with a scalpel but with an axe and very quickly. Notice that most critics aren't trying to defend the what. They can only criticize the who and the how.

And meat will be cut with the fat. This is understood from the beginning. That's why it's so shocking and frankly, "I don't really care, Margaret."

---

This is exactly right and I have explained this to my friend that works in government for the faa. He is a trump supporter but now he doesn't like him and doesn't understand why they want to move him to an office - he stated that some people he knows have kids and both mom and dad work in the same office so they both go in two days a week and the remaining day they put the child in daycare. He exclaimed that that this is an expense for daycare they are going to incur and it's not nessesary
I said in the corporate world or in small business world it is choices like these that are made constantly . He didn't like my answer too much.

BTKAG97 said:

---

Nanomachines son said:

---

Ted Cruz’s biggest takeaway from the USAID scandal was… *checks notes*… how it hurt Israel.

A nice reminder that GOP U.S. Senators are, at best, completely retarded. https://t.co/ZtqBxBj9cC

— BowTiedRanger (@BowTiedRanger) February 6, 2025

The absolute state of Washington politicians.

---

He's stating Cruz is "mentally challenged" for making a factual statement?

---

I imagine this poster as one of those silly tiki torch carrying false flag guys that tried to paint Kaine as a racist. Every post has some layer of bigotry.

Man this is such great news. Im Guatemalan and USAID has always been used to pay off politicians to pass laws that they want pushed. It's a massive laundering scheme in which they give money to groups and mobilize them in order to pass the liberals agenda. not only on DEI laws but literally everything. More unions, more liberal laws and just plain stupid things that push the people out of the country and migrate north. I work in agriculture and there is literally no people left for crop picking and field work. This is not even hyperbole or exaggeration, there is really no people left for work. Just to give you an idea, we used to employ around 2500 people for sugar cane cutting. This year we are lucky to get to 1000. The people that would bring us the workers changed business and bought busses to take them to the Mexican and Guatemalan border. I wish I was kidding.

Here4Wins said:

---

Man this is such great news. Im Guatemalan and USAID has always been used to pay off politicians to pass laws that they want pushed. It's a massive laundering scheme in which they give money to groups and mobilize them in order to pass the liberals agenda. not only on DEI laws but literally everything. More unions, more liberal laws and just plain stupid things that push the people out of the country and migrate north. I work in agriculture and there is literally no people left for crop picking and field work. This is not even hyperbole or exaggeration, there is really no people left for work. Just to give you an idea, we used to empale around 2500 people for sugar cane cutting. This year we are lucky to get to 1000. The people that would bring us the workers changed business and bought busses to take them to the Mexican and Guatemalan border. I wish I was kidding.

---

Man I got stuck on empale and had to re read it a lot times before it clicked in my head employ

My bad just edited it

Here4Wins said:

---

My bad just edited it

---

No worries I am a little slow today - I am glad this move by trump and musk might save your venture though - great news!

USAID
No more empal!
Chingal!

I like it.