Quote (babun1024 @ 17 Feb 2025 04:09)

Musk isn't trying to get richer, that's not how you do it. At some point, getting richer is just a benchmark without influence and legacy. He is an outsider who wants to get influence in the US. A president has got 2 terms and he is not a citizen. He'll try everything to be interwebed with the future Republicans.
Why? Leftist / dem judges were persecuting Tesla and their products unfairly in the past. He had to fight with tooth and nails to stay in the market. Also, the woke took away his son (trans). This is where his fight against wokism went gull throttle. And yeah, he has probably got aspergers or something simmilar.
Doge will still do more good than harm. Every 20y or so, every government needs a downsizing.

Quote (InsaneBobb @ Feb 17 2025 12:14pm)

You may wish to edit the bolded part. Elon Musk IS a US Citizen. He is not a Natural Born Citizen. Meaning he cannot run for President. He could serve in nearly every other role in government, be it State, Local, or Federal. Not the Presidency, however.

Aka: I know what you're trying to say and you're correct in spirit. But Musk IS a US Citizen, and has been since 2002.

Quote (excellence @ Feb 17 2025 12:24pm)

rando judge oversteps authority, way too common sadly. probably on the usaid massive friends and family take

Quote (InsaneBobb @ 17 Feb 2025 10:51)

Funds being appropriated to a thing means that the Executive now has the right to execute the thing, or not, as it sees fit, using whatever method the Executive sees fit to use. It does not mean the Executive MUST execute that thing.

Perfect example was Biden stopping work on the Wall day 1 when he took office. He didn't spend the money elsewhere. He just cut off the payouts. The monies were still sat there. Though it appears that the money was later redirected to "resettlement programs" without authorization from Congress, which is fun.

So, if Congress appropiates $60 Billion for The United States Agency for International Development, for instance, that doesn't mean that any employee of that department can simply take that money for whatever project. It means the Executive, aka the PRESIDENT, still chooses where and how those monies are distributed. And should that President choose that those monies NOT be distributed, then the money can be sat. And sat monies from prior appropriations bills? Get redirected, by Congress, all the time.

The spender is not Congress. And Congress cannot dictate how the Executive executes the spending. They can only broadly approve funds to be used by the Executive.

Now, for a member of the Judiciary to try to claim that THEY have a right to dictate how the Executive executes their mission is an outright violation of the separation of powers. The Executive is not REQUIRED to spend a single penny of the money Congress has appropriated for them.. They can simply leave it sat, fire everyone in the Agency who is not mandated to be there by currently existing law, and call it good.