Vesper 30,190 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 madness..................... Federal Financial Watchdog Ordered to Cease Activity In an email to staff of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the agency’s acting director ordered workers to cease “all supervision and examination activity.” https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/08/us/politics/cfpb-vought-staff-finance-watchdog.html Employees of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau were instructed to cease “all supervision and examination activity” and “all stakeholder engagement,” effectively stopping the agency’s operations, in an email from the director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russell Vought, on Saturday evening. Mr. Vought, who was confirmed this week to lead the Office of Management and Budget, was on Friday named acting director of the consumer protection bureau, the federal government’s financial industry watchdog. In his email to staff on Saturday, he reaffirmed earlier instructions from the previous acting director, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who ordered last week that staff should not issue any new rules or guidance and cease all investigations. “As acting director, I am committed to implementing the president’s policies, consistent with the law, and acting as a faithful steward of the bureau’s resources,” Mr. Vought wrote in the email, which was obtained by The New York Times. The agency, created by Congress in 2011 as a financial industry watchdog, cannot be closed without congressional action, but its director can freeze most of its actions by halting enforcement, weakening or repealing regulations and softening its supervision of banks and other lenders. The agency did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment on Saturday. The agency has issued a number of high-profile regulations and enforcement actions over the years, seeking to strengthen safeguards on mortgages, credit cards, loans and other consumer finance. Most recently, the bureau sued Capital One in mid-January, arguing that the bank misled customers in promoting a high-yield savings account that it then kept at a near-zero interest rate. In a Saturday evening post on X, Mr. Vought, an author of Project 2025, the conservative blueprint for radically remaking the federal government, wrote that he had notified the Federal Reserve that the finance bureau “will not be taking its next draw of unappropriated funding because it is not ‘reasonably necessary’ to carry out its duties.” (The agency is directly funded by the Federal Reserve, outside the usual congressional appropriations process.) “The Bureau’s current balance of $711.6 million is in fact excessive in the current fiscal environment,” he added in his post. “This spigot, long contributing to CFPB’s unaccountability, is now being turned off,” he said, using the agency’s initials. On Saturday, some members of the union representing the consumer protection bureau’s employees protested outside the agency’s Washington building with signs mocking Elon Musk, whose government efficiency effort has wreaked havoc across various federal agencies. Several members of Mr. Musk’s team arrived at the agency on Friday morning and gained access to its headquarters and computer systems. Later that day, Mr. Musk posted “CFPB RIP,” with an emoji of a gravestone, on X. Hours after Mr. Musk’s post, the home page of the bureau’s website was updated with a “404: Page not found” message. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vesper 30,190 Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 (edited) The New Authoritarianism https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/02/trump-competitive-authoritarian/681609/ With the leader of a failed coup back in the White House and pursuing an unprecedented assault on the constitutional order, many Americans are starting to wrap their mind around what authoritarianism could look like in America. If they have a hard time imagining something like the single-party or military regimes of the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany, or more modern regimes like those in China or Russia, that is with good reason. A full-scale dictatorship in which elections are meaningless and regime opponents are locked up, exiled, or killed remains highly unlikely in America. But that doesn’t mean the country won’t experience authoritarianism in some form. Rather than fascism or single-party dictatorship, the United States is sliding toward a more 21st-century model of autocracy: competitive authoritarianism—a system in which parties compete in elections but incumbent abuse of power systematically tilts the playing field against the opposition. In his first weeks back in office, Donald Trump has already moved strongly in this direction. He is attempting to purge the civil service and directing politicized investigations against rivals. He has pardoned violent paramilitary supporters and is seeking to unilaterally seize control over spending from Congress. This is a coordinated effort to dig in, cement power, and weaken rivals. Unlike in a full-scale dictatorship, in competitive-authoritarian regimes, opposition forces are legal and aboveground, and they often seriously vie for power. Elections may be fiercely contested. But incumbents deploy the machinery of government to punish, harass, co-opt, or sideline their opponents—disadvantaging them in every contest, and, in so doing, entrenching themselves in power. This is what happened in Venezuela under Hugo Chávez and in contemporary El Salvador, Hungary, India, Tunisia, and Turkey. Crucially, this abuse of the state’s power does not require upending the Constitution. Competitive autocracies usually begin by capturing the referees: replacing professional civil servants and policy specialists with loyalists in key public agencies, particularly those that investigate or prosecute wrongdoing, adjudicate disputes, or regulate economic life. Elected autocrats such as Chávez, Vladimir Putin, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Viktor Orbán, Narendra Modi, and Nayib Bukele all purged public prosecutors’ offices, intelligence agencies, tax authorities, electoral authorities, media regulatory bodies, courts, and other state institutions and packed them with loyalists. Trump is not hiding his efforts to do the same. He has thus far fired (or declared his intention to fire, leading to their resignation) the FBI director, the IRS commissioner, EEOC commissioners, the National Labor Relations Board chair, and other nominally independent officials; reissued a renamed Schedule F, which strips firing protections from huge swaths of the civil service; expanded hiring authorities that make it easier to fill public positions with allies; purged more than a dozen inspectors general in apparent violation of the law; and even ordered civil servants to inform on one another. Once state agencies are packed with loyalists, they may be deployed to investigate and prosecute rivals and critics, including politicians, media companies, editors, journalists, influential CEOs, and administrators of elite universities. In the United States, this may be done via the Justice Department and the FBI, the IRS, congressional investigations, and other public agencies responsible for regulatory oversight and compliance. It may also be done via defamation or other private lawsuits. The administration doesn’t have to jail its opponents to bully, harm, and ultimately intimidate them into submission. Indeed, because U.S. courts remain independent, few targets of selective prosecution are likely to be convicted and imprisoned. But mere investigations are a form of harassment. Targets of selective investigation or prosecution will be forced to devote considerable time, energy, and resources to defending themselves; they will spend their savings on lawyers; their lives will be disrupted; their professional careers will be sidetracked and their reputations damaged. At minimum, they and their families will suffer months and perhaps years of anxiety and sleepless nights. Plus, the administration need not target all critics. A few high-profile attacks, such as a case against Liz Cheney, a prominent media outlet, or selective regulatory retaliation against a major company, may serve as an effective deterrent against future opposition. Competitive-authoritarian governments further subvert democracy by shielding those who engage in criminal or antidemocratic behavior through captured referees and other impunity mechanisms. Trump’s decision to pardon violent January 6 insurrectionists and purge prosecutors who were involved in those cases, for example, sends a strong signal that violent or antidemocratic actors will be protected under the new administration (indeed, that’s how many pardon recipients are interpreting the pardons). Likewise, a loyalist Justice Department and FBI could disregard acts of political violence such as attacks on (or threats against) campaign workers, election officials, journalists, politicians, activists, protesters, or voters. They could also decline to investigate or prosecute officials who work to manipulate or even steal elections. This may appear far-fetched, but it is precisely what enabled the consolidation of authoritarian rule in the Jim Crow South. Protected by local (and often federal) authorities in the aftermath of Reconstruction, white-supremacist groups used violent terror and election fraud to consolidate power and disenfranchise African Americans across the region. Finally, state institutions may be used to co-opt business, media, and other influential societal actors. When regulatory bodies and other public agencies are politicized, government officials can use decisions regarding things such as mergers and acquisitions, licenses, waivers, government contracts, and tax-exempt status to reward or punish parties depending on their political alignment. Business leaders, media companies, universities, foundations, and other organizations have a lot at stake when government officials make decisions on tariff waivers, regulatory enforcement, tax-exempt status, and government contracts and concessions. If they believe that those decisions are made on political, rather than technical, grounds, many of them will modify their behavior accordingly. Thus, if business leaders come to the conclusion that funding opposition candidates or independent media is financially risky, or that remaining silent rather than criticizing the administration is more profitable, they will change their behavior. Several of the country’s wealthiest individuals and companies, including Jeff Bezos, Tim Cook, Sam Altman, Mark Zuckerberg, and Disney, already appear to be adjusting in that way. Democracy requires robust opposition. Opposition parties and civil-society groups cannot function without money and without a large and replenishable pool of talented politicians, lawyers, journalists, and entrepreneurs. But using the state’s power against critics will likely deter many of them, depleting that pool. Talented politicians may decide to retire early rather than face an unfounded investigation. Donors may decide that the risk of contributing to Democratic candidates or funding “controversial” civil-rights or pro-democracy organizations is not worth it. Media outlets may downsize their investigatory teams, let go of their most aggressive editors and reporters, and decline to renew their most outspoken columnists. Up-and-coming journalists may steer clear of politics, opting instead to write about sports or culture. And university leaders may crack down on campus protest, remove or isolate activist professors, and decline to speak out on issues of national importance. Civil society therefore faces a crucial collective-action problem. Individual politicians, CEOs, media owners, and university presidents act rationally and do what seems best for their organizations. They work to protect their shareholders’ interests and stave off debilitating investigations or lawsuits. But such isolated acts of self-preservation have collective costs; as individual players retreat to the sidelines, the opposition weakens. Some of these costs will be invisible. The public can observe when players sideline themselves: congressional retirements, university presidents’ resignations, the ceasing of campaign contributions, the softening of editorial lines. But we can’t see the opposition that never materializes—the potential critics, activists, and leaders who are deterred from getting in the game. How many young lawyers will decide to remain at a law firm instead of running for office? How many talented young writers will steer clear of journalism? How many potential whistleblowers will decide not to speak out? How many citizens will decide not to sign that public letter, join that protest, or make that campaign contribution? Democracy is not yet lost. The Trump administration will be politically vulnerable. Unlike successful elected authoritarians such as Nayib Bukele in El Salvador, Hugo Chávez in Venezuela, and Vladimir Putin in Russia, Trump lacks broad popular support. His approval rating has never surpassed 50 percent, and incompetence, overreach, and unpopular policies will almost certainly dampen public support for the new administration. An autocratic president with an approval rating below 50 percent is still dangerous, but far less so than one with 80 percent support. The new administration’s political weakness will open up opportunities for opposition in the courtroom, on the streets, and at the ballot box. Still, the opposition can win only if it stays in the game. Worn down by defeat, and fearing harassment and lost opportunities, many civic leaders and activists will be tempted to pull back into their private lives. It’s already happening. But a retreat to the sidelines could be fatal for democracy. When fear, exhaustion, or resignation eclipses our commitment to democracy, competitive authoritarianism succeeds. About the Author Steven Levitsky is the David Rockefeller Professor of Latin American Studies and Government at Harvard University. Edited February 10 by Vesper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fulham Broadway 17,319 Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 Vesper 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fernando 6,585 Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fernando 6,585 Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 Well that is good to find fraud and see why people made so much money in government positions. That is really good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fulham Broadway 17,319 Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 14 hours ago, Fernando said: Well that is good to find fraud and see why people made so much money in government positions. That is really good. Bit of a blind spot when it comes to 3.9bn of US taxpayers 'aid' every year to one country though. 🤣 AIPAC makes a lot of people very rich when they leave government positions, and Trumps 100m election money from israel is now demanding something for it. Is that being looked in to ? Rhetorical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fulham Broadway 17,319 Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 Trumps deal with Putin is similar to Ribbentrop and Stalin carving up Poland 80 years ago Putin gets to keep the land invaded, and more than half of Ukraines agricultural land is now owned by US corporations... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fernando 6,585 Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 (edited) 1 hour ago, Fulham Broadway said: Bit of a blind spot when it comes to 3.9bn of US taxpayers 'aid' every year to one country though. 🤣 AIPAC makes a lot of people very rich when they leave government positions, and Trumps 100m election money from israel is now demanding something for it. Is that being looked in to ? Rhetorical. Why would that being looked at? They are not terrorist. Money going to terrorist organization is what will be stop. But not amuse at your bias, your hate for Israel always get a punt in every post you make. Edited February 13 by Fernando Fulham Broadway 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fulham Broadway 17,319 Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 8 minutes ago, Fernando said: Why would that being looked at? They are not terrorist. Money going to terrorist organization is what will be stop. But not amuse at your bias, your hate for Israel always get a punt in every post you make. Wrong what was the last post I made ? The next step is to be accused of anti semitism 🤣 There are millions of jews against the zionist expansion. Thousands demonstrating every week Its an apartheid state, a terrorist state, occupying land committing genocide. We disagree on this, but I am consistent with any bastard country, Nazi Germany, Apartheid South Africa. I dont like bias that is founded by idiot millionaire fundamental Christians duping people. Fernando 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fulham Broadway 17,319 Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 Awful in Munich. Couple of Afghanis in a Mini Cooper driving in to people -28 injured, many seriously. 🤬 Vesper 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vesper 30,190 Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 22 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said: a Mini Cooper driving in to people good thing it was not a lorry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fulham Broadway 17,319 Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 58 minutes ago, Vesper said: good thing it was not a lorry True. Afd will benefit in the elections coming up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fulham Broadway 17,319 Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 Trump announced on Truth Social that he wants to work hand-in-hand with Russian strongman Vladimir Putin.- in the presser some reporter asked him if Zelensky and Ukraine are equal partners in any deal ? he looked completely fucking stumped. Scratched his chin, he genuinely hadnt thought about it, Pretty certain you could show him a map and he wouldnt have a fucking scooby where Ukraine or Gaza are Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KEVINAA 129 Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 (edited) All of you in Eastern Europe by Ukraine. Get your survival kits and prepper kits and first aid. Edited February 14 by KEVINAA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vesper 30,190 Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 ‘Ejaculating without intent’ draft bill slammed as ‘mockery of basic biological concepts’ https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/fine-law-abortion-ejaculation-ban-ohio-b2698443.html An Ohio draft bill planning to fine men who ejaculate ‘without the intent of conception’ up to $10,000 has been labelled a 'mockery of basic biological concepts'. Bill authors, Ohio State Representatives Anita Somani and Tristan Rader said in an interview on February 13 that it highlights the hypocrisy of laws regulating women’s bodies. “Men have the same rights no matter where they go in the country. Women’s rights depend on where they live,” said Somani. Rader added, “The point of this bill isn’t to get it passed; it’s to call out the hypocrisy.” However, Republican Representative Austin Beigel slammed the bill as “a mockery of the most basic biological concepts,” and introduced his own bill claiming human life begins at conception, and seeking increased legal protections for embryos, under state law. Currently, 10 states have made it illegal for women to have an abortion, even in cases of rape. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vesper 30,190 Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 (edited) On 12/02/2025 at 20:57, Fernando said: Well that is good to find fraud and see why people made so much money in government positions. That is really good. lol the fraud is going to come from Trump, Musk, et al the largest heist in human history just one example: trillions of dollars sucked out by the oligarchs (trillions is tax cuts for the ultra rich) whilst vital support programmes trashed for everyone else and then there is this: Elon Musk Mocks Federal Aid Recipients As 'Parasite Class' While His Companies Rake In $18 Billion from U.S. Taxpayers ‘Beyond Disgusting’: Elon Musk Faces Backlash After Mocking Federal Aid Recipients As ‘Parasite Class’ While His Companies Rake In $18 Billion from U.S. Taxpayers and “Elon Musk Is a Walking Conflict of Interest” Federal law forbids any Executive Branch employee from “participating personally and substantially” in matters “that will affect his own financial interests.” https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2025/02/elon-musk-doge-federal-contracts-conflict-interest/ Elon Musk is serving as President Donald Trump’s hatchetman, slashing government spending as part of the administration’s efforts to end federal support for everything from dying babies in warzones and Americans displaced by disasters to US schools and startups working to slash energy bills for rural farmers and grocers. As the world’s richest man pitches himself as the savior of the American taxpayer, the companies he runs are raking in more federal dollars. This past Sunday, Tesla finalized a deal to sell 430 megawatts of batteries to Genera, the private company that now operates Puerto Rico’s power plants, for $767 million. The contract, first brokered in October before the election, will be “fully financed with federal funds,” according to a press release. On Monday, SpaceX netted another $7.5 million supplemental contract with NASA, bringing the total value of that particular deal with Musk’s private rocket firm to $38 million. That’s on top of the more than $4 billion NASA is already paying SpaceX. “Over and over again, he’s just involved in governmental actions that directly and substantially impact his own financial wellbeing.” Appearing on television alongside the president in the Oval Office on Tuesday, a defiant Musk dismissed concerns over any conflicts of interest, insisting he had little to do with contracts brokered by the companies where he serves as chief executive. “You have to look at the individual contract,” Musk told reporters. “First of all, I’m not filing the contract. It’s people at SpaceX…and I like to say if you see any contract where it was awarded to SpaceX and it wasn’t by far the best value for the taxpayer, let me know—because every one of them was.” On Thursday, the State Department backed away from plans to spend $400 million on armored Tesla vehicles, after the proposal was revealed on social media and reported by the New York Times. The procurement forecast did not specify which Tesla model would be purchased, but the Times speculated the stainless-steel Cybertruck “would be the most suitable vehicle,” despite questions about its safety. All seven of Musk’s companies—which include X (formerly Twitter), xAI (a rival to OpenAI), Neuralink (a brain implant startup), Starlink (satellite internet service) and the Boring Company (a tunnel drilling firm), in addition to Tesla and SpaceX—have netted a combined $20 billion in US government contracts and subsidies, according to the Financial Times. “Elon Musk is a walking conflict of interest,” Craig Holman, the government affairs lobbyist at the consumer watchdog Public Citizen, told me by phone on Thursday. “Over and over again, he’s just involved in governmental actions that directly and substantially impact his own financial wellbeing.” The federal code known as 18 USC 208 “prohibits an executive branch employee from participating personally and substantially in a particular Government matter that will affect his own financial interests, as well as the financial interests of certain individuals with whom he has ties outside the Government,” according to the US Office of Government Ethics. In theory, that “should” apply to Musk, Holman said. But Trump can easily issue a waiver exempting Musk from complying with the rules as a so-called special government employee. Lawmakers have considered tightening federal ethics rules on special government employees in the past, but those were “not serious efforts,” Holman said. “We haven’t seen this type of abuse until now,” he said. Edited February 14 by Vesper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vesper 30,190 Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 plague state inbound...................... hello polio, measles, rubella, etc running riot Louisiana health department says it will stop promoting mass vaccination. Here's what that could mean The announcement came on the heels of RFK Jr.'s confirmation to lead HHS. https://abcnews.go.com/Health/louisiana-health-department-stop-promoting-mass-vaccination/story?id=118819674 In a surprising announcement, Louisiana's surgeon general announced late Thursday that the state health department "will no longer promote mass vaccination." In a memo to staff members, Dr. Ralph Abraham described vaccines as "one tool in a toolbox" to combat severe illness and that conversations about specific vaccines are best held between an individual and their health care provider. It comes on the heels of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s confirmation to lead the Department of Health & Human Services under President Donald Trump. Kennedy has spread unfounded claims about vaccines, including that they cause autism and that certain vaccines are "dangerous." Dr. Gregory Poland, a vaccinologist and co-director of The Atria Research Institute -- which focuses on disease prevention -- described the policy change as "anti-science" and said there is good public health research data to support mass vaccination. "I've grown up in an era where other than smallpox, DPT and flu vaccine, we didn't have any of the vaccines we had today, and so we, or friends of ours, got infected, got sick, missed school, some developing polio," he told ABC News. "I mean, it's just shocking to think we would take such a critical public health tool and deconstruct it or invalidate it. I can't believe it." Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center and an attending physician in the division of infectious diseases at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, said not promoting vaccinations could lead to increased hospitalizations and deaths, especially if an outbreak of an incredibly contagious disease, such as measles, emerges. "On its surface, it makes no sense," Offit told ABC News. "If there was an outbreak of measles, for example, and it started to sweep through the state ... Would you then say, 'No, you can do what you want. If you want to get a vaccine, fine. If you don't, that's fine,' knowing that there are people in the state of Louisiana who can't be vaccinated, knowing that they depend on those around them to protect them?" Offit said that the change in vaccine promotion in Louisiana appears to be endorsing the idea of medical freedom and individual freedom over collective responsibility, which is "dangerous." He explained that vaccines don't just protect the individual, they protect the community by creating herd immunity, in which enough of a community is vaccinated, making it harder for a disease to spread. This also protects those who can't get vaccinated due to health reasons. "This sort of medical freedom notion that you do what you want, the rest of society doesn't count, your neighbor doesn't count, is at best short-sighted, and at worst sort of absents you from any sort of societal responsibility," Offit said. "Do you have any responsibility for the person you sit next to on the bus, or you stand next to on the elevator? You do and you benefit, and they benefit" from vaccines. Poland said not promoting mass vaccination could lead to a resurgence of preventable diseases that overwhelm the health care system. He explained there is currently a shortage of health care professionals, and the current health care system may not be ready to handle an increase in the number of patients with complications from vaccine-preventable diseases. Poland added that many younger health care professionals may be unfamiliar with what symptoms of these diseases look like because they are so rare. "Our current crop of physicians, they've never seen measles, they've never seen rubella, they've never seen polio, they've never seen diphtheria," he said. "I mean, this is going to overload the health care system and lead to inadequate and poor quality of care." In a separate, publicly posted press release, Abraham said there is a need to rebuild trust from COVID-19 "missteps" and that people have less trust in institutions like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention over COVID vaccination requirements. Offit agrees that trust is low in public health institutions, but says not promoting mass vaccinations is not going to help people regain their trust and may make people lose trust even further. "There are anti-vaccine doctors, who are perfectly willing to say things that are not supported by the science; that's not surprising," he said. "But what's surprising here is that now you've stepped it up a level. You've stepped it up to someone who does represent the state's public health who is now making an anti-public health statement." "And if the purpose of that is to gain more credibility, that's not going to happen," Offit continued. "All that's going to do is play into the notion that when we push for vaccinating all to protect the few who can't be vaccinated, that that was wrong, and it wasn't wrong. It was right." Fulham Broadway 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vesper 30,190 Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 now you have MAGA types impersonating authorities expect to see this repeated hundreds, maybe thousands of times DOGE impersonators demand sensitive information at S.F. City Hall, flee before deputies arrive, authorities say https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-02-14/doge-impersonators-demanded-sensitive-information-fled-after-being-turned-away Authorities believe three unidentified men posing as DOGE agents attempted to seize sensitive information from San Francisco City Hall before they were rebuffed and fled on Friday afternoon. The incident took place at noon as the suspects approached City Hall wearing DOGE shirts and MAGA hats, according to the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department. Authorities believe three unidentified men posing as federal officials attempted to seize sensitive information from San Francisco City Hall before they were rebuffed and fled on Friday afternoon. At around noon, the suspects approached City Hall wearing Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, shirts and MAGA hats, according to the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department. The men entered several offices, demanding that local employees turn over digital information tied to “alleged wasteful government spending and fraud,” the sheriff’s department said. City Hall workers refused their request and called the sheriff’s department. While deputies responded within the minutes, the men fled the building. “We do not believe they were DOGE representatives,” said Tara Moriarty, the sheriff’s Director of Communications. “As soon as the sheriffs were called, they walked out of the building. They knew that their jig was up.” The sheriff’s department said it was reviewing surveillance footage as part of its investigation. Actual DOGE employees, led by tech titan Elon Musk, have allegedly attempted to access private data, including bank account information and Social Security numbers, through Treasury Department records. A federal judge blocked Musk’s team from doing so last week and the judge extended the order on Friday. Musk’s DOGE group was tasked by the Trump administration to eliminate wasteful government spending. Musk was also temporarily blocked earlier this week from accessing student loan and financial aid information from the Department of Education. Fulham Broadway 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fulham Broadway 17,319 Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 John Bolton - Trump asked on AF1 if Ukraine was part of Russia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fernando 6,585 Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 11 hours ago, Vesper said: lol the fraud is going to come from Trump, Musk, et al the largest heist in human history just one example: trillions of dollars sucked out by the oligarchs (trillions is tax cuts for the ultra rich) whilst vital support programmes trashed for everyone else and then there is this: Elon Musk Mocks Federal Aid Recipients As 'Parasite Class' While His Companies Rake In $18 Billion from U.S. Taxpayers ‘Beyond Disgusting’: Elon Musk Faces Backlash After Mocking Federal Aid Recipients As ‘Parasite Class’ While His Companies Rake In $18 Billion from U.S. Taxpayers and “Elon Musk Is a Walking Conflict of Interest” Federal law forbids any Executive Branch employee from “participating personally and substantially” in matters “that will affect his own financial interests.” https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2025/02/elon-musk-doge-federal-contracts-conflict-interest/ Elon Musk is serving as President Donald Trump’s hatchetman, slashing government spending as part of the administration’s efforts to end federal support for everything from dying babies in warzones and Americans displaced by disasters to US schools and startups working to slash energy bills for rural farmers and grocers. As the world’s richest man pitches himself as the savior of the American taxpayer, the companies he runs are raking in more federal dollars. This past Sunday, Tesla finalized a deal to sell 430 megawatts of batteries to Genera, the private company that now operates Puerto Rico’s power plants, for $767 million. The contract, first brokered in October before the election, will be “fully financed with federal funds,” according to a press release. On Monday, SpaceX netted another $7.5 million supplemental contract with NASA, bringing the total value of that particular deal with Musk’s private rocket firm to $38 million. That’s on top of the more than $4 billion NASA is already paying SpaceX. “Over and over again, he’s just involved in governmental actions that directly and substantially impact his own financial wellbeing.” Appearing on television alongside the president in the Oval Office on Tuesday, a defiant Musk dismissed concerns over any conflicts of interest, insisting he had little to do with contracts brokered by the companies where he serves as chief executive. “You have to look at the individual contract,” Musk told reporters. “First of all, I’m not filing the contract. It’s people at SpaceX…and I like to say if you see any contract where it was awarded to SpaceX and it wasn’t by far the best value for the taxpayer, let me know—because every one of them was.” On Thursday, the State Department backed away from plans to spend $400 million on armored Tesla vehicles, after the proposal was revealed on social media and reported by the New York Times. The procurement forecast did not specify which Tesla model would be purchased, but the Times speculated the stainless-steel Cybertruck “would be the most suitable vehicle,” despite questions about its safety. All seven of Musk’s companies—which include X (formerly Twitter), xAI (a rival to OpenAI), Neuralink (a brain implant startup), Starlink (satellite internet service) and the Boring Company (a tunnel drilling firm), in addition to Tesla and SpaceX—have netted a combined $20 billion in US government contracts and subsidies, according to the Financial Times. “Elon Musk is a walking conflict of interest,” Craig Holman, the government affairs lobbyist at the consumer watchdog Public Citizen, told me by phone on Thursday. “Over and over again, he’s just involved in governmental actions that directly and substantially impact his own financial wellbeing.” The federal code known as 18 USC 208 “prohibits an executive branch employee from participating personally and substantially in a particular Government matter that will affect his own financial interests, as well as the financial interests of certain individuals with whom he has ties outside the Government,” according to the US Office of Government Ethics. In theory, that “should” apply to Musk, Holman said. But Trump can easily issue a waiver exempting Musk from complying with the rules as a so-called special government employee. Lawmakers have considered tightening federal ethics rules on special government employees in the past, but those were “not serious efforts,” Holman said. “We haven’t seen this type of abuse until now,” he said. There is nothing really, just hating. The guys is doing a good job with finding fraud waste and abuse. He explain all in the video. That article is just a cheap shot taken at his company doing good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.