🚨USAID & CIA behind 2019 Trump Impeachment🚨

[jerryskids 6,393]

15 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I believe it was Winston Churchill who said that democracy is the worst form of government…except for all the others. Mussolini got the trains to run on time. Be careful what you guys wish for…

I have a vision of a different end game here.

Congress has spent the past, I dunno, 100 years abdicating its authority and instead creating gigantic bureaucracies under the Executive Branch which have essentially no oversight, which are filled with career bureaucrats who manage to buy 3 vacation homes on a civil servant salary.

It's kinda funny that people are apoplectic about "the end of democracy$#@!" and yet Musk is in there trying to undo what never should have been done, which ultimately gets us back to our intended form of government.

Ben Shapiro said recently of this, "you broke it, you bought it."  It's a pretty good short description.

This has been a bipartisan issue.  We're hearing from the Left currently because anything this administration does is demon driven to them, but it's more of a bipartisan deep state issue in the end.

In the end I hope we fund the AIDS help in Ghana you are so worried about, end LGBTQ opera funding, get Treasury to actually fill in the cell in the database which says where the payment is going, etc.  You could argue that we should have a committee to form a committee to establish sub-committees to analyze waste in orgs like USAID, but we know how that turns out.  I'm intrigued to see how the Musk shock and awe approach pans out.  

I don't think democracy will end in the process.   

[The Real timschochet 5,926]

1 minute ago, nobody said:

Emphasis mine...

It definitely is not a good agency.  Try to get something right at least once if you insist on having opinions.

You and I may define the word differently. I think saving 25 million lives in Africa is a good thing. For that I can live with the waste and corruption. 

[Fnord 1,918]

9 minutes ago, HotRod said:

Did you see the results of the last election?

Do you see anyone stopping this?

I did. It was hardly Reagan in '84.

The second question is what scares me about Trump, and the answer is I don't know.

[Fnord 1,918]

3 minutes ago, HotRod said:

Your side tried to tell us democracy was at stake.  It was a loser.  People don't care about democracy anymore.  It's a different time.

So your interpretation of that being a loser is that people understood the message and are just over democracy, and embracing authoritarianism?

[The Real timschochet 5,926]

1 minute ago, jerryskids said:

I have a vision of a different end game here.

Congress has spent the past, I dunno, 100 years abdicating its authority and instead creating gigantic bureaucracies under the Executive Branch which have essentially no oversight, which are filled with career bureaucrats who manage to buy 3 vacation homes on a civil servant salary.

It's kinda funny that people are apoplectic about "the end of democracy$#@!" and yet Musk is in there trying to undo what never should have been done, which ultimately gets us back to our intended form of government.

Ben Shapiro said recently of this, "you broke it, you bought it."  It's a pretty good short description.

This has been a bipartisan issue.  We're hearing from the Left currently because anything this administration does is demon driven to them, but it's more of a bipartisan deep state issue in the end.

In the end I hope we fund the AIDS help in Ghana you are so worried about, end LGBTQ opera funding, get Treasury to actually fill in the cell in the database which says where the payment is going, etc.  You could argue that we should have a committee to form a committee to establish sub-committees to analyze waste in orgs like USAID, but we know how that turns out.  I'm intrigued to see how the Musk shock and awe approach pans out.  

I don't think democracy will end in the process.   

Neither do I. As I wrote I would prefer a chisel to a hammer. You seem to think we’ll get to the same result anyhow. I think you’re wrong about that but hope you’re right. Guess we’ll find out. 
 
They ARE trying to get rid of democracy. Plenty of folks out there like @HotRod. But I agree with you they won’t succeed. 

[HotRod 47]

2 minutes ago, Fnord said:

I did. It was hardly Reagan in '84.

The second question is what scares me about Trump, and the answer is I don't know.

Why are you so scared?  He's not sending people to gas chambers.  He's not putting us on shackles.

We will have a different form of government.  Elections have consequences.

[nobody 2,526]

On 2/8/2025 at 5:26 PM, thegeneral said:

You reevaluate these things. You don’t rip them out from the root. Why did Rubio and Lindsey praise them? Why did Elon take money from them?

Every time you find some waste in government you just shut the whole department down?

You trust this spaz without question, huh?

This guy has never run anything effectively.

[HotRod 47]

3 minutes ago, Fnord said:

So your interpretation of that being a loser is that people understood the message and are just over democracy, and embracing authoritarianism?

Yes.

[Dizkneelande 1,052]

9 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I have a vision of a different end game here.

Congress has spent the past, I dunno, 100 years abdicating its authority and instead creating gigantic bureaucracies under the Executive Branch which have essentially no oversight, which are filled with career bureaucrats who manage to buy 3 vacation homes on a civil servant salary.

It's kinda funny that people are apoplectic about "the end of democracy$#@!" and yet Musk is in there trying to undo what never should have been done, which ultimately gets us back to our intended form of government.

Ben Shapiro said recently of this, "you broke it, you bought it."  It's a pretty good short description.

This has been a bipartisan issue.  We're hearing from the Left currently because anything this administration does is demon driven to them, but it's more of a bipartisan deep state issue in the end.

In the end I hope we fund the AIDS help in Ghana you are so worried about, end LGBTQ opera funding, get Treasury to actually fill in the cell in the database which says where the payment is going, etc.  You could argue that we should have a committee to form a committee to establish sub-committees to analyze waste in orgs like USAID, but we know how that turns out.  I'm intrigued to see how the Musk shock and awe approach pans out.  

I don't think democracy will end in the process.   

“Kleptocracy, also referred to as thievocracy, is a government whose corrupt leaders use political power to expropriate the wealth of the people and land they govern, typically by embezzling or misappropriating government funds at the expense of the wider population.”

[Fnord 1,918]

Just now, HotRod said:

Why are you so scared?  He's not sending people to gas chambers.  He's not putting us on shackles.

We will have a different form of government.  Elections have consequences.

I don't think being concerned is out of line. Of course he isn't having opponents arrested and murdered. There is another thread (2 actually) on the home page now endorsing sending all liberals to the gas chambers. I have asked several people on this board about posts they've made advocating for violence against liberals, and they are supportive. You say "we have all the power now" and can't be stopped. You are fine with an authoritarian government, by which I assume you mean authoritarianism that is enacting your preferred policy choices. What about those for whom the authoritarian government is not making policy for? Rival politicians? Outspoken critics? People protesting in the streets? Voting against those policies? How do you handle the dissent in your mind?

[jerryskids 6,393]

5 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Neither do I. As I wrote I would prefer a chisel to a hammer. You seem to think we’ll get to the same result anyhow. I think you’re wrong about that but hope you’re right. Guess we’ll find out. 
 
They ARE trying to get rid of democracy. Plenty of folks out there like @HotRod. But I agree with you they won’t succeed. 

Your "chisel" is what I described of committees forming subcommittees.  That would only waste more money while everyone defends (and gets to keep) every boondoggle which somehow helps them within USAID.

My end game is not that democracy ends, but rather we peel back all of these bloated bureaucracies.

Do you think that actions like reducing investment, cutting workforce, and eliminating entire groups like the Department of Education are consistent with an attempt to increase power within the Executive Branch?  That seems... counterintuitive.   

[Fnord 1,918]

13 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I have a vision of a different end game here.

Congress has spent the past, I dunno, 100 years abdicating its authority and instead creating gigantic bureaucracies under the Executive Branch which have essentially no oversight, which are filled with career bureaucrats who manage to buy 3 vacation homes on a civil servant salary.

It's kinda funny that people are apoplectic about "the end of democracy$#@!" and yet Musk is in there trying to undo what never should have been done, which ultimately gets us back to our intended form of government.

Ben Shapiro said recently of this, "you broke it, you bought it."  It's a pretty good short description.

This has been a bipartisan issue.  We're hearing from the Left currently because anything this administration does is demon driven to them, but it's more of a bipartisan deep state issue in the end.

In the end I hope we fund the AIDS help in Ghana you are so worried about, end LGBTQ opera funding, get Treasury to actually fill in the cell in the database which says where the payment is going, etc.  You could argue that we should have a committee to form a committee to establish sub-committees to analyze waste in orgs like USAID, but we know how that turns out.  I'm intrigued to see how the Musk shock and awe approach pans out.  

I don't think democracy will end in the process.   

Thank you, this makes sense.

Obviously you do not share the concerns of those that are not MAGA, but what are your thoughts on @Hot Rod's assertion that Trump voters truly are over democratic governance?

[Hardcore troubadour 14,636]

2 minutes ago, Fnord said:

I don't think being concerned is out of line. Of course he isn't having opponents arrested and murdered. There is another thread (2 actually) on the home page now endorsing sending all liberals to the gas chambers. I have asked several people on this board about posts they've made advocating for violence against liberals, and they are supportive. You say "we have all the power now" and can't be stopped. You are fine with an authoritarian government, by which I assume you mean authoritarianism that is enacting your preferred policy choices. What about those for whom the authoritarian government is not making policy for? Rival politicians? Outspoken critics? People protesting in the streets? Voting against those policies? How do you handle the dissent in your mind?

Protests? Sick the FBI on them and have the DOJ overcharge them. Easy peasy. 

[Fnord 1,918]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Protests? Sick the FBI on them and have the DOJ overcharge them. Easy peasy. 

So you are also on board the authoritarian train, given that peaceful protest is a constitutional right?

[HotRod 47]

6 minutes ago, Fnord said:

I don't think being concerned is out of line. Of course he isn't having opponents arrested and murdered. There is another thread (2 actually) on the home page now endorsing sending all liberals to the gas chambers. I have asked several people on this board about posts they've made advocating for violence against liberals, and they are supportive. You say "we have all the power now" and can't be stopped. You are fine with an authoritarian government, by which I assume you mean authoritarianism that is enacting your preferred policy choices. What about those for whom the authoritarian government is not making policy for? Rival politicians? Outspoken critics? People protesting in the streets? Voting against those policies? How do you handle the dissent in your mind?

Your chance for dissent was election day.

You'll probably get another chance in 4 years but it will be too late then.  We're not going back.  Remember that?

[Hardcore troubadour 14,636]

Just now, Fnord said:

So you are also on board the authoritarian train, given that peaceful protest is a constitutional right?

You can protest. Heck, have the local cops open the doors for them.  Just later on round them up. 

[Fnord 1,918]

Just now, Hardcore troubadour said:

You can protest. Heck, have the local cops open the doors for them.  Just later on round them up. 

Cool. Thanks for your drivel and reminding me that it's always a mistake to attempt to ask you anything serious.

[Engorgeous George 1,977]

I believe power corrupts. It makes those who hold it contemptuous of those who do not.  The Democrats were very corrupt.  The Republicans are undoing that corruption so that they can replace it with corruption of their own.  We can see even in this forum those who are cheering on that shift.

 

 

 

Though I could not caution all

I still might warn a few...

[Hardcore troubadour 14,636]

3 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Cool. Thanks for your drivel and reminding me that it's always a mistake to attempt to ask you anything serious.

Yeah. Those convos you’re having with these new handles are some real sophisticated stuff. 

[Fnord 1,918]

Just now, Hardcore troubadour said:

Yeah. Those convos you’re having with these new handles are some real sophisticated stuff. 

Well, it's obviously gone over your head. I am attempting to have a convo with someone that seemingly is honestly giving me their opinions without being a fuckknuckle. So clearly way outside your realm of understanding.

I think what you're really doing is telling us that you are also okay with authoritarianism, but too chickenshit to say it out loud. You've got a large cohort here, congrats.

[jbycho 403]

Just now, Fnord said:

 fuckknuckle. 

Yeah. You sound smart. 

[nobody 2,526]

3 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

I believe power corrupts. It makes those who hold it contemptuous of those who do not.  The Democrats were very corrupt.  The Republicans are undoing that corruption so that they can replace it with corruption of their own.  We can see even in this forum those who are cheering on that shift.

The problem with the disenfranchised MAGAs is they think Trump can or will make their lives better. 

He won't (and can't).  Even if the entire government is overhauled; even if the country is reduced to ash and rebuilt in Trump's image, they'll still die losers.  

[Fnord 1,918]

10 minutes ago, HotRod said:

Your chance for dissent was election day.

You'll probably get another chance in 4 years but it will be too late then.  We're not going back.  Remember that?

Noted. So dissent should no longer be a part of the American toolbox to effect change? Help me understand.

[Fnord 1,918]

1 minute ago, jbycho said:

Yeah. You sound smart. 

And you don't. Jealous? Or just being your typical useless self?

[nobody 2,526]

2 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Well, it's obviously gone over your head. I am attempting to have a convo with someone that seemingly is honestly giving me their opinions without being a fuckknuckle. So clearly way outside your realm of understanding.

I think what you're really doing is telling us that you are also okay with authoritarianism, but too chickenshit to say it out loud. You've got a large cohort here, congrats.

Jesus dude.  Do you really not see that he's calling the blue team hypocrites for crying about authoritarianism after railroading the J6 protestors?

[jbycho 403]

3 minutes ago, Fnord said:

And you don't. Jealous? Or just being your typical useless self?

That doesn't make any sense. Great job trying to cover up your base liberal mindset.

[Fnord 1,918]

Just now, nobody said:

Jesus dude.  Do you really not see that he's calling the blue team hypocrites for crying about authoritarianism after railroading the J6 protestors?

Of course I do, but it's just another of his endless non sequiturs. I'm calling him out for it again to see if he'll give a real response and not just his typical drive-by deflections. Vain hope, but that's my issue, not yours.

[Engorgeous George 1,977]

5 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Well, it's obviously gone over your head. I am attempting to have a convo with someone that seemingly is honestly giving me their opinions without being a fuckknuckle. So clearly way outside your realm of understanding.

I think what you're really doing is telling us that you are also okay with authoritarianism, but too chickenshit to say it out loud. You've got a large cohort here, congrats.

Gave me a smile.  I have not heard that one before.  I am fairly sure it will slide into my lexicon

[HotRod 47]

12 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Noted. So dissent should no longer be a part of the American toolbox to effect change? Help me understand.

You can vote again in 4 years.  Otherwise you can cry online about it.  You can protest.  Hell you can even get enough of you to storm the white house if you really want.

My point is it's all useless.

Should Trump listen to dissent and consider your feelings while making decisions?  Not if we want to make some real changes.

[Fnord 1,918]

1 minute ago, Engorgeous George said:

Gave me a smile.  I have not heard that one before.  I am fairly sure it will slide into my lexicon

Glad you enjoyed it. I have found that one must be diverse in their approach if they are inclined toward artful use of profanity, which is my medium of choice.

[jerryskids 6,393]

34 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Thank you, this makes sense.

Obviously you do not share the concerns of those that are not MAGA, but what are your thoughts on @Hot Rod's assertion that Trump voters truly are over democratic governance?

I was not aware of it, and it seems like an odd take.  Like I said earlier, defunding, firing, and dismantling entire agencies in the Executive Branch seems inconsistent with increasing power in that branch.

Also, were you the one who mentioned Peter Thiel on this subject?  If so, if you have any links on that, I'd appreciate it.  I generally like Thiel.   

[HellToupee 1,452]

I’m really not surprised by anything I read about usaid 

 

From Shawn Ryan

Wait till you hear about Jake Sullivan and Hillary Clintons emails and how USAID was funding ISIS. 

…I hope the funds have stopped.

[The Real timschochet 5,926]

USAID cuts already seriously hurting American farmers: 

https://www.newsnationnow.com/politics/usaid-cuts-farmers/amp/

And the damage is only beginning…

[The Real timschochet 5,926]

More specifics on this: Kansas’ sorghum crop has no export market without USAID: 

https://www.cjonline.com/story/news/politics/government/2025/02/09/what-does-usaid-food-for-peace-shutdown-mean-for-kansas-sorghum-crop/78300587007/

[HotRod 47]

Kansas voted for this. Maybe next time do your homework.

If they cry enough trump will give them subsidies and look like a hero.  Just watch.

You gotta crack a few eggs to make an omelette 

[CaptainObvious1 257]

4 hours ago, Fnord said:

Cool. Thanks for your drivel and reminding me that it's always a mistake to attempt to ask you anything serious.

You seem to have trouble engaging a lot of people.  Maybe it's you?

[Tree of Knowledge 1,610]

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

USAID cuts already seriously hurting American farmers: 

https://www.newsnationnow.com/politics/usaid-cuts-farmers/amp/

And the damage is only beginning…

USAID controlled media.  

[jerryskids 6,393]

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

More specifics on this: Kansas’ sorghum crop has no export market without USAID: 

https://www.cjonline.com/story/news/politics/government/2025/02/09/what-does-usaid-food-for-peace-shutdown-mean-for-kansas-sorghum-crop/78300587007/

Jeez, what a boondoggle:

Quote

Kansas farmers and grain elevators could be left without a market for last year's sorghum crop after President Donald Trump dismantled a federal foreign aid program.

Trump and billionaire Elon Musk have shut down the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID. It housed Food for Peace, which used America's agricultural surpluses to fight world hunger, expand international trade and advance foreign diplomacy.

Shutting down the food aid program could adversely affect the Kansas agriculture industry, which has an overabundance of sorghum, also known as milo.

"Right now, there's no export market for it, and there's no domestic market," said Kim Barnes, the chief financial officer of the Pawnee County co-op in Larned.

Part of his job is purchasing and selling grain, like the sorghum taking up much of the space in the co-op's grain elevators. Sometimes, that has meant selling to Food for Peace when there are calls for contracts.

"We were hoping there'd be another one with as much milo as we have," Barnes said.

Parsing through the bolded:

- "Billionaire," because this impartial newspaper needs to continue the MSDNC message that Musk is an evil rich person out to steal all your data and destroy all your sorghum.

- "Agricultural surpluses," which implies we sell sorghum but sometimes have extra.

- Oops, there is no domestic or foreign market for it.  It's only market is to be subsidized through USAID laundered money.

Now, you can argue that there is a strategic reason for us to keep farmers going, so that we aren't dependent on foreign countries for our food supply.  And that's a valid discussion.  But let's at least acknowledge what it is, and maybe discuss if such subsidies should be laundered through an international aid money laundering agency.   

[nobody 2,526]

2 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

More specifics on this: Kansas’ sorghum crop has no export market without USAID: 

https://www.cjonline.com/story/news/politics/government/2025/02/09/what-does-usaid-food-for-peace-shutdown-mean-for-kansas-sorghum-crop/78300587007/

So the US is buying sorghum and giving it to other countries or something?  First question wtf is sorghum?

[The Real timschochet 5,926]

6 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Jeez, what a boondoggle:

Parsing through the bolded:

- "Billionaire," because this impartial newspaper needs to continue the MSDNC message that Musk is an evil rich person out to steal all your data and destroy all your sorghum.

- "Agricultural surpluses," which implies we sell sorghum but sometimes have extra.

- Oops, there is no domestic or foreign market for it.  It's only market is to be subsidized through USAID laundered money.

Now, you can argue that there is a strategic reason for us to keep farmers going, so that we aren't dependent on foreign countries for our food supply.  And that's a valid discussion.  But let's at least acknowledge what it is, and maybe discuss if such subsidies should be laundered through an international aid money laundering agency.   

“Discuss” being the operative word? How about we discuss it, and decide whether this should be done, and if not, how to wean off of it instead of abruptly shutting things down and hurting a lot of industry and people? 
 

Again I am not opposed at all to many of things that Trump and Musk are doing here. I’m opposed to the way they’re doing them. I think it’s being done too quickly, without thought or planning, and the results will be chaotic and create much unnecessary pain IMO.