Elon musk access to the treasury

[Red White and Blue 81]

3 minutes ago, jonmx said:

Lol....Apparently you are clueless to the fact that Soros organizations recieved $50 million from USAID so he could free violent criminals and defend those involved in the summer of love riots.  You see that would be an actual conflict of interest with this effort.  Musk's contract for Space X services is not a conflict of interest in anything he has done yet.  

Johnny Bootlicker over here has to ask why putting a billionaire government contractor and major party donor in charge of a guvernement audit is a conflict. 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,637]

Musk has recused himself from any audits that he has an interest in. Move along. 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,173]

14 minutes ago, Red White and Blue said:

Imagine the response if the Dems put George Soros in charge of a guvernement audit. The only difference is that Soros isn’t also a government contractor.  

if Kamala came out and said I am putting Soros in charge of auditing the govt, and then we voted for it as a nation, I wouldn't be in here crying every day

 

[Red White and Blue 81]

Just now, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

like? example?

Bill Gates?

 

You need me to give you an example of people who aren’t major political donors and government contractors?

[jonmx 2,368]

5 minutes ago, Red White and Blue said:

Johnny Bootlicker over here has to ask why putting a billionaire government contractor and major party donor in charge of a guvernement audit is a conflict. 

I have worked for the federal government.  I understand what is and what is not a conflict of interest.   Simply being a bulluonaire and/or government contractor in no way constitutes a conflict of interest unless he was auditing someone who was involved in funding his contract.  You on the other hand are an actual bootlicking whoar who is a clueless dumbfuk who parrots whatever MSNBC tells you.  Go fuk yourself. 

[Mufaletta 53]

44 minutes ago, purdygood said:

I'm done with Twitter/X.  Ever since Elon took over. My "For You" page is nothing but Pro Elon. Pro Trump. BS.  He bought it based on Free Speech but he is clearly pushing what he wants.  He can not be Trusted. 

have fun on bluesky.   May want to purchase good quality ear protection, as echo chambers can be harmful to your hearing (hearing, hearing, hearing)

[Red White and Blue 81]

1 minute ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

if Kamala came out and said I am putting Soros in charge of auditing the govt, and then we voted for it as a nation, I wouldn't be in here crying every day

 

Yes, you and many others absolutely would. And you’d be right.

[Mike Honcho 4,934]

3 minutes ago, Mufaletta said:

The oversight body you seek is in Congress, where oversight is vested per the Constitution.    Article I, Section 8, Clause 18

https://oversight.house.gov/release/comer-oversight-committee-is-working-with-doge-to-improve-government-efficiency-eliminate-rampant-washington-waste/

Now you and F-Nord can proceed with your screeching that everyone in congress in an oversight role is a knob licker.

I mentioned the link(which I appreciate, too few people provide them) was incorrect-didn't say anything else.  Would you like an edible, you seem to be a little tense?

[Red White and Blue 81]

Just now, jonmx said:

I have worked for the federal government.  I understand what I'd and what is not a conflict of interest.  Simply being a government contractor in no way constitutes a conflict of interest unless he was auditing someone who was involved in funding his contract. 

You obviously don’t. 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,637]

Why was the Soros kid at the White House so much?

[Mufaletta 53]

41 minutes ago, RLLD said:

The only reason there is consternation toward Musk is his movement away from the radical dogma of leftism.  When he was in their court, no problem.....if tomorrow Soros were to suddenly move away, he would be villainized as well.

Liberals have no policy....nothing that works....no actual outcomes to point to.....they only have one move.....turn their opponents into villains....thats it....

So True.

I recall so many discussions with libs who were praising Musk as recently as '18 because he was saving the planet by lapping the field with electric vehicles, willing to fire up a blunt on a podcast (he is so hip!), was dating Grimey or Grimes or whatever her name was and rambling about Roko's basiliks (he is so rad!), and singing his praises as he impregnated her and opted to name the poor kid X Æ A-12.

The hypocrisy is mind numbing.

[Mufaletta 53]

31 minutes ago, TrailGuy said:

Obviously I can't prove it and he's never going to say he does.  There are reports that say he does have information.

There are reports = Someone over at the dispensary told me this was true.

[Cdub100 3,768]

32 minutes ago, jonmx said:

Exactly.  So you have zero clue what constitutes a conflict of interest, nor can you articulate what Musks conflict is.   The left is the party of retards. 

buT bUt Muh pErSonaL dAtA!!! 

[Mike Honcho 4,934]

48 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Prove he has this information......

 

41 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Than you should avoid making such assertions.  I know the Democrats and the media will recklessly do this to motivate people to oppose the Republicans, but lets not buy into their manipulations. Time and again, they have done this and later it is revealed it was all a lie.

I trust Muck for now, I trust Trump for now.  I like what they are doing.

I just can't.  

[Tree of Knowledge 1,612]

33 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Why was the Soros kid at the White House so much?

That’s (D)ifferent 

[The Girlfriend 197]

2 hours ago, Mufaletta said:

CNN says that US AID was created by Congress.  Facts say otherwise. 

The Secretary of State established USAID as directed by Executive Order 10973, signed by President John F Kennedy on November 3, 1961.

You might want to visit the Foreign Assistance act of 1961, you dope.

[TrailGuy 552]

Elon Musk, the richest man in the world and head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), suggested that The Wall Street Journal reporter responsible for uncovering a DOGE employee’s racist tweets should be fired on Friday.

Yeah I really trust this guy with access to the treasury

[Tree of Knowledge 1,612]

This is so great

If that is your Representative that said “I know who I is,” please wear a bag over your head for the next 2 years.  

[lickin_starfish 1,843]

The best part of this scenario is that liberal lunatics are absolutely helpless to do anything about it, other than cry on internet forums.

[CaptainObvious1 258]

7 minutes ago, TrailGuy said:

Elon Musk, the richest man in the world and head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), suggested that The Wall Street Journal reporter responsible for uncovering a DOGE employee’s racist tweets should be fired on Friday.

Yeah I really trust this guy with access to the treasury

No one gives a fock what you trust.

[Tree of Knowledge 1,612]

Musk and Trump are first ballot HOF trollers.  This is a fantastic time to be alive.  

[Hardcore troubadour 14,637]

13 minutes ago, TrailGuy said:

Elon Musk, the richest man in the world and head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), suggested that The Wall Street Journal reporter responsible for uncovering a DOGE employee’s racist tweets should be fired on Friday.

Yeah I really trust this guy with access to the treasury

How did Maddow get Trumps tax returns? 

[Engorgeous George 1,977]

1 hour ago, Mike Honcho said:

I mentioned the link(which I appreciate, too few people provide them) was incorrect-didn't say anything else.  Would you like an edible, you seem to be a little tense?

Reminds me of the Native American psychiatrist who, after listening to his patient told his patient he is a Wigwan and a Teepee.  The patient asked what the psychiatrist meant and the psychiatrist said you're two tents.  Two tents (tense).   

[Engorgeous George 1,977]

51 minutes ago, Mufaletta said:

There are reports = Someone over at the dispensary told me this was true.

There are no reports, just partisan speculation to try to drum up opposition.  Still, I support auditing the auditors.  The computer systems i had passing familiarity with had auditing trails automatically archived whenever anybody accessed the systems.  It was easily possible to find out what information they were accessing, for how long, and whether or not they made downloads.  (Now there was no way, to my knowledge, of knowing whether screen shots were taken instead of downloads atempted.  for that one would want to prohibit accessing the system while in possession of such equipment)  I encourage the Congressional Oversight Committee and any other relevant Committees to obtain such audit trails and to thoroughly examine them.  Only if they find any irregularities do I then support subpooening Musk to answer questions. 

I suspect there will not be such irregularities, yet I know that some folks cannot resist exceeding their authority and abusing their access and working around and exceeding their access so I fully support and strongly encourage auditing these Doge auditors.

[RLLD 4,100]

49 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

 

I just can't.  

Unfortunately, you may never be able to.  Luckily, progress is possible through others, who can.  

[Fnord 1,920]

3 hours ago, Fnord said:

So you are okay with this even though potentially:

-Those doing it do not have the legal right.

-Only agencies not "aligned" with POTUS' agenda being hamstrung or shut down.

-It's being done by unelected, unappointed, unvetted employees of an unelected, unappointed billionaire running an unofficial agency, granted powers by fiat from POTUS that he ultimately has not been granted constitutionally.

-there are extreme unintended consequences including screwing nonpartisan people in healthcare, disease treatment research and development, humanitarian aid and outreach, etc.

-Only targets "small players" in gov't expenditures, not the "big" ones, like DOD.

-Is a thinly veiled way to save money only to support a giant tax break for the richest Americans.

Nobody has a problem with identifying and ending fraud and abuse. The people doing it do not have the legal authority. This is vigilante politics. Are you also claiming that if Biden had George Soros do the same thing you would be fine with it?

 

 

2 hours ago, shadrap said:

yes & regarding "-Is a thinly veiled way to save money only to support a giant tax break for the richest Americans".  Are you privy to this information or just making it up?

I am not "privy" to this information beyond speculation, which is why I headed my post with "potentially." I did not make it up, it is being discussed. It isn't exactly far-fetched.

I will posit that you are not a constitutionalist but a partisan that will support whatever happens as long as it is executed by those sharing your ideology. And that is fine, as long as you're being honest about it. 

[Fnord 1,920]

1 hour ago, Mufaletta said:

The oversight body you seek is in Congress, where oversight is vested per the Constitution.    Article I, Section 8, Clause 18

https://oversight.house.gov/release/comer-oversight-committee-is-working-with-doge-to-improve-government-efficiency-eliminate-rampant-washington-waste/

Now you and F-Nord can proceed with your screeching that everyone in congress in an oversight role is a knob licker.

LOL. Gomer and MTG are most certainly knob lickers. No screeching necessary.

[nobody 2,526]

3 hours ago, jonmx said:

What you said is "they’re going to uncover a lot of grift, ignore the grift they personally benefit..."    Musk would have to have some grift to be able to ignore it.  

And please explain how having contracts to help the government with space communication is in anyway a conflict of interest in exposing waste, fraud and abuse in agencies like USAID who have nothing to do with anything Musk is involved with.   Do you really understand what a conflict of interest is?  

It's a COI because if he has access to payments, he can see what his potential competitors costs are and what they're paying vendors.

But at this point, I don't really care.  I hope he keeps doing what he's doing.

[Mufaletta 53]

58 minutes ago, The Girlfriend said:

You might want to visit the Foreign Assistance act of 1961, you dope.

Trump has set his sights on USAID because he knows it has no legal foundation to stand on. The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (FAA) merely granted the President broad discretion to structure foreign aid programs as he saw fit. President John F. Kennedy exercised this discretion through Executive Order 10973, formally establishing USAID as an administrative agency under the State Department.

The legal distinction here is crucial: Congress authorized the President to create an agency, but it did not mandate its creation by statute. USAID was established solely through an executive directive, making it purely an executive entity, subject to modification—or termination—at the discretion of the sitting President

 

If you can read more than a paragraph before your attention span wanes, continue here

[Engorgeous George 1,977]

2 minutes ago, nobody said:

It's a COI because if he has access to payments, he can see what his potential competitors costs are and what they're paying vendors.

But at this point, I don't really care.  I hope he keeps doing what he's doing.

Once sealed bids are opened and awarded the bids are subject to FOIA demands.  All smart contractors go to school on the last round of bids.  All of them.  

[Mufaletta 53]

12 minutes ago, Fnord said:

LOL. Gomer and MTG are most certainly knob lickers. No screeching necessary.

right on queue

[nobody 2,526]

2 minutes ago, Mufaletta said:

Trump has set his sights on USAID because he knows it has no legal foundation to stand on. The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (FAA) merely granted the President broad discretion to structure foreign aid programs as he saw fit. President John F. Kennedy exercised this discretion through Executive Order 10973, formally establishing USAID as an administrative agency under the State Department.

The legal distinction here is crucial: Congress authorized the President to create an agency, but it did not mandate its creation by statute. USAID was established solely through an executive directive, making it purely an executive entity, subject to modification—or termination—at the discretion of the sitting President

 

If you can read more than a paragraph before your attention span wanes, continue here

You can go have this discussion with chatgpt and it will be the exact same thing as talking to gutter.   All he is going to do is ask chatgpt to respond to you.  

The guy has no thoughts that he doesn't look up.  You're essentially just arguing with a bot.

[nobody 2,526]

5 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

Once sealed bids are opened and awarded the bids are subject to FOIA demands.  All smart contractors go to school on the last round of bids.  All of them.  

Damn.  We must be dumb.  

Is that really true?  Like for real, for real?  If so, my business unit is dropping the ball.

[HellToupee 1,453]

1 hour ago, Tree of Knowledge said:

This is so great

If that is your Representative that said “I know who I is,” please wear a bag over your head for the next 2 years.  

This reply kills me

https://x.com/theonlydsc/status/1887898504741163020?s=61&t=oX9G006TUZ9alBtC5c4uMQ

[nobody 2,526]

1 minute ago, nobody said:

Damn.  We must be dumb.  

Is that really true?  Like for real, for real?  If so, my business unit is dropping the ball.

The reason I ask is that the tech volumes in those bids essentially tell you how they plan to do the job.  Every DoD customer I've ever had has been super strict on not disclosing anyone else's plans.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,637]

1 hour ago, The Girlfriend said:

You might want to visit the Foreign Assistance act of 1961, you dope.

lol. Son, you got knocked the Fock out!

[The Girlfriend 197]

18 minutes ago, Mufaletta said:

Trump has set his sights on USAID because he knows it has no legal foundation to stand on. The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (FAA) merely granted the President broad discretion to structure foreign aid programs as he saw fit. President John F. Kennedy exercised this discretion through Executive Order 10973, formally establishing USAID as an administrative agency under the State Department.

The legal distinction here is crucial: Congress authorized the President to create an agency, but it did not mandate its creation by statute. USAID was established solely through an executive directive, making it purely an executive entity, subject to modification—or termination—at the discretion of the sitting President

 

If you can read more than a paragraph before your attention span wanes, continue here

By creating USAID through the Act, Congress set it up as an independent agency with its own statutory authority. This independence meant that USAID was not merely an arm of the State Department but a separate entity tasked with planning and executing U.S. development and foreign assistance programs around the world. This structure was intended to ensure that development policies could be managed with a degree of flexibility and specialization distinct from traditional diplomatic efforts.

While USAID operates independently, it still works closely with other parts of the government, especially the State Department, to align its programs with overall U.S. foreign policy goals. However, the statutory foundation provided by the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 ensures that any significant changes to its structure or mission would require legislative action, thereby protecting its independent operational framework.

 

[Engorgeous George 1,977]

4 hours ago, nobody said:

Damn.  We must be dumb.  

Is that really true?  Like for real, for real?  If so, my business unit is dropping the ball.

I had collateral duties to my main duties as a Prosecutor.  Amoung them were advising on open records matters, and for a two year operiod I had to re-write and update a purchasing code so I am fairly familiar with governmental contracting.  To answer your question, yes, sophisticated bidders make certain they are aware of their competitors past bids.  We routinely got demands for details on past bids.  Actually we routinely got demands for currently submited bids but obviously we did not disclose those details as there are open records exceptions for extant bids up until the bid closure deadline.

 

I occassionally would take calls from new businesses, particularly Minority and Women owned ones who would get referred to me by our legislators who knew me.  They would want to know how they could bid on government contracts.  (Dirty little secret here.  Many folks have heard horror stories about such bids, and for major projects the bids can requirte hundreds of documents to support the bid, but there are many lucrative contracts with little or no competition and so bidders on those contracts do not bid with a sharp pencil.  They make great profit.  They are easily underbid and the contracts are still profitable.  It just takes a bit of effort to learn the system.  It is not really all that complex.) I would provide them with some standard treatises I had drafted for new or inexperienced bidders, and  I would then encourage them to do open record demands for the last round of bidding on any contract to go to school on those bids.  I also cautioned them to follow the bid requirements to a tee.  Many wanted to change the parameters just slightly as they saw better ways of providing a good or service and were trying to help us save money. They would bid not on the current contract, but by changing the terms actually be proposing a different contract.  That meant their bid was not acceptable as properly submitted.  Purchasing Departments do not like to be told during the bid period there is a better way to do a contract.  They want to be told that prior to then, in the Request for Proposal term prior to the Requests for Bids term.

[Engorgeous George 1,977]

1 minute ago, The Girlfriend said:

By creating USAID through the Act, Congress set it up as an independent agency with its own statutory authority. This independence meant that USAID was not merely an arm of the State Department but a separate entity tasked with planning and executing U.S. development and foreign assistance programs around the world. This structure was intended to ensure that development policies could be managed with a degree of flexibility and specialization distinct from traditional diplomatic efforts.

While USAID operates independently, it still works closely with other parts of the government, especially the State Department, to align its programs with overall U.S. foreign policy goals. However, the statutory foundation provided by the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 ensures that any significant changes to its structure or mission would require legislative action, thereby protecting its independent operational framework.

 

Who has Constitutional authority to conduct foriegn relations and to conclude treatises?  

[The Girlfriend 197]

4 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

Who has Constitutional authority to conduct foriegn relations and to conclude treatises?  

Not the gotcha you think. USAID functions solely as a tool of U.S. foreign policy created by statute, and it does not possess those constitutional powers.