Musk aides gain access to sensitive Treasury payment system(washingtonpost.com)
washingtonpost.com
Musk aides gain access to sensitive Treasury payment system
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/02/01/elon-musk-treasury-payments-system/
102 comments
It appears there are no checks and balances in place. Congress could impeach, or the Supreme Court could enjoin (is that the word?), but I see no prospect of either happening soon.
Remember that they are all controlled by one party, so everyone is willing to look the other way (and cynically, probably cheerleading it)
It would help if people could outline exactly what they are concerned about.
As far as I can tell, nothing that that Musk et al is doing is unusual when an organisation changes hands. This is normal for a change of government or a corporate aquisition.
Perhaps there should be certain, limited, aspects of executive decision making that require congressional oversight, but because left weren't decrying the lack of checks and balances previously, they now come across as sore losers, worse, dishonest sore losers who are cloaking their pettiness as concern.
Secondly, the left lost the public support so badly that the republicans control congress now, so even if such oversight existed, it would also be controlled by the republican party.
As far as I can tell, nothing that that Musk et al is doing is unusual when an organisation changes hands. This is normal for a change of government or a corporate aquisition.
Perhaps there should be certain, limited, aspects of executive decision making that require congressional oversight, but because left weren't decrying the lack of checks and balances previously, they now come across as sore losers, worse, dishonest sore losers who are cloaking their pettiness as concern.
Secondly, the left lost the public support so badly that the republicans control congress now, so even if such oversight existed, it would also be controlled by the republican party.
A person who has not gone through a confirmation process is running an agency not provided for by Congress and not vetted for security clearances which is taking actions that violate employment laws and union protections.
That is what we are concerned about. This violates all kinds of norms, regulations, and laws.
The left did not lose "so badly". They lost a handful of electoral college swing states by small margins. These people do not have a mandate, no matter how much they say they do.
https://federate.social/@mattblaze/113926311776131035
That is what we are concerned about. This violates all kinds of norms, regulations, and laws.
The left did not lose "so badly". They lost a handful of electoral college swing states by small margins. These people do not have a mandate, no matter how much they say they do.
https://federate.social/@mattblaze/113926311776131035
Trump won the election. The left need to accept that.
He has a mandate to significantly reduce the size of the federal government, and he has the authority to appoint Musk to act in this way.
You can complain about it violating norms all you like, but norms aren’t laws and taking into account the preferences of the left isn’t something Trump is required to do nor is it something the Democrats have done in the past for the right.
As for violating employment laws, there’s no evidence of this. It appears you just threw that in there hoping no one would challenge you on it.
He has a mandate to significantly reduce the size of the federal government, and he has the authority to appoint Musk to act in this way.
You can complain about it violating norms all you like, but norms aren’t laws and taking into account the preferences of the left isn’t something Trump is required to do nor is it something the Democrats have done in the past for the right.
As for violating employment laws, there’s no evidence of this. It appears you just threw that in there hoping no one would challenge you on it.
Federal employees are unionized. There are procedures to dismiss employees. They are not following those procedures.
So, no, I didn't just throw that on there.
Even if there weren't, are you so callous and heartless that you can't see how this blow-it-all-up approach is making chaos of people's lives? Is that what you're here for... to make things hard on people?
The Republicans won the election. That doesn't mean trample the entirety of the country to fit their vision. The Democrats have done nothing like this.
Stop defending fascists. It's not a good look.
So, no, I didn't just throw that on there.
Even if there weren't, are you so callous and heartless that you can't see how this blow-it-all-up approach is making chaos of people's lives? Is that what you're here for... to make things hard on people?
The Republicans won the election. That doesn't mean trample the entirety of the country to fit their vision. The Democrats have done nothing like this.
Stop defending fascists. It's not a good look.
> fascists
I'm sure calling them such names makes sense in your echo chambers, but to the overwhelming majority of people this is an inaccurate and inappropriate label.
Calling people things which they are not, does not hurt their reputation, it simply makes your fringe of the political spectrum look immature.
I'm sure calling them such names makes sense in your echo chambers, but to the overwhelming majority of people this is an inaccurate and inappropriate label.
Calling people things which they are not, does not hurt their reputation, it simply makes your fringe of the political spectrum look immature.
But you don't care about immaturity. You voted for Trump. The guy who said he can "grab them by the pussy, they let you do it".
It's just lockeroom talk. Right?
The entire Republican chorus backed up this juvenile locker room talk excuse. Trotted it out for the whole world to see. Not very mature. Did you love it?
It's just lockeroom talk. Right?
The entire Republican chorus backed up this juvenile locker room talk excuse. Trotted it out for the whole world to see. Not very mature. Did you love it?
mschoch(1)
Trump lost the 2020 election and Trump's kooks didn't accept that. Instead they engaged in violence at the request of Trump, while he was still president, on the basis of Trump's election denialism.
Peaceful transition also isn't the law. It was a norm. Until Trump pissed on it.
Trump ordered the vice president to overturn an election, and when Mike Pence refused that order, Trump sent a mob to have the VPOTUS assassinated.
And then, in possibly something like mass hysteria, they vote for Trump again. Or maybe it's an addiction to depravity, anger and drama. Like drug addiction.
Trump voters voted for a rapist, for president. This how low and desperate they've become. They kicked Mike Pence to the curb - all the boilerplate Republican policies they claim to want, but Pence wasn't good enough. It's pretty clear the right wanted an abusive personality.
Don't expect reasonable people to become docile about that.
Peaceful transition also isn't the law. It was a norm. Until Trump pissed on it.
Trump ordered the vice president to overturn an election, and when Mike Pence refused that order, Trump sent a mob to have the VPOTUS assassinated.
And then, in possibly something like mass hysteria, they vote for Trump again. Or maybe it's an addiction to depravity, anger and drama. Like drug addiction.
Trump voters voted for a rapist, for president. This how low and desperate they've become. They kicked Mike Pence to the curb - all the boilerplate Republican policies they claim to want, but Pence wasn't good enough. It's pretty clear the right wanted an abusive personality.
Don't expect reasonable people to become docile about that.
Musk has no authority. He operates only under the pleasure of the authority of the president and the officers of the USDS under which he is a federal employee.
You needn't be an officer to gain access to and analyze payment systems.
You needn't be an officer to gain access to and analyze payment systems.
Has no authority but is taking authoritorial actions. Right. He's not a federal employee afaik as he hasn't passed any of the requisite checks or been approved by the Senate.
I do not think you need a confirmation nor a commission to hold office to access payment systems.
Access payment systems is not the objective[0].
[0] https://www.ft.com/content/27ba0a6a-0d9b-4e08-8329-730b581c0...
[0] https://www.ft.com/content/27ba0a6a-0d9b-4e08-8329-730b581c0...
Didn’t Trump issue an EO to expedite security clearances for people who were in line 1 day after inauguration? Could they be those people?
No. The story I read was for "Interim Top Secret". If you have a clear National Agency Check (arrest and convictions), and do not flag as a drug user / mental case, then you can be given an "Interim Top Secret" while waiting for the clearance adjudication. Does not allow access to SCI, or NATO Cosmic, but does allow access to regular Top Secret. There is also an "Interim Secret". Over 90% of the people with interim clearances are positively adjudicated.
Normal thing. Provided they are using the same criteria for the Interim Clearances.
Normal thing. Provided they are using the same criteria for the Interim Clearances.
Top Secret is also a fairly common clearance, despite the name it is not a clearance level reserved for highest levels of intelligence or anything like that.
Huh? This isn't a corporation, nothing about corporate change of control applies.
Political, not civil, servants taking over these systems without any oversight is truly brazen. Sounds like you're saying that since there wasn't a prior act of Congress declaring this illegal, it's just whining. Please clarify.
You're right that oversight would be influenced by the party in power. Generally, the inspectors general would be relatively independent but guess what, they all got sacked just a few days ago. And Republican congresspeople behave as if they represent the president, not their constituents. The system functioned with some level of decorum before, but this looks like war.
Political, not civil, servants taking over these systems without any oversight is truly brazen. Sounds like you're saying that since there wasn't a prior act of Congress declaring this illegal, it's just whining. Please clarify.
You're right that oversight would be influenced by the party in power. Generally, the inspectors general would be relatively independent but guess what, they all got sacked just a few days ago. And Republican congresspeople behave as if they represent the president, not their constituents. The system functioned with some level of decorum before, but this looks like war.
I think this is a case where it’s becoming clear that some US laws were vague and there always needed to be some specification. I mean, what does checks and balances mean? How do you execute it? By sheer force of will apparently.
The actions that are being taken by Trump, Musk and co is normal in both governmental and corporate organisations when a change of control occurs.
Oversight in these systems tends to be illusory, because for the executive branch to function it fundamnetally needs to have the authority to make the decisions that are currently being made.
The Democrats have, broadly speaking, not cared much for oversight when they were in power, so suddenly caring about it now that republicans are in power comes across as, and probably is, just them being sore losers.
Oversight in these systems tends to be illusory, because for the executive branch to function it fundamnetally needs to have the authority to make the decisions that are currently being made.
The Democrats have, broadly speaking, not cared much for oversight when they were in power, so suddenly caring about it now that republicans are in power comes across as, and probably is, just them being sore losers.
No, the US has been able to have a clean transfer of power without sending in random goons who won't identify themselves & who download key/secure OPM data onto random hard drives & leave with it.
This is all batshit insanity, an assault on democracy.
This is all batshit insanity, an assault on democracy.
They aren't random goons.
They are official government employees / advisors, peforming a task within their remit.
Clearly your framing is driven by ideological hatred, but there's nothing about this that isn't above board.
They are official government employees / advisors, peforming a task within their remit.
Clearly your framing is driven by ideological hatred, but there's nothing about this that isn't above board.
> Clearly your framing is driven by ideological hatred
Is that the current trope in American political discourse? If someone points out there are brazen acts which haven't happened before you just tack the label "ideological hatred" or "partisan" and think that covers all ground?
They are random goons, DOGE wasn't signed into existence by Congress, the "officer" in charge of DOGE has not been through the process of confirmation by Congress/Senate. Those people are getting access to the Treasury without any checks and balances process.
I cannot believe that Americans are falling for this, you were supposed to fight against the tyranny of highly-concentrated power in a single person's hand and yet now it's ok to do it because it's a team you support? This is all so stupid to watch from the outside, a bizarro-world of hot takes without any regards to civics, government function, nor democratic distribution of power across government branches.
What is infuriating is that any argument against it is then met by some twist of an ad hominem boiling down to "this is partisanship/ideological hatred". It's just all so, so stupid.
Edit: also forgot, I don't think anyone like you shouting "partisan" or "ideology" has ever heard about "The Network State", I recommend going through it to see the playbook you are all participating in.
Is that the current trope in American political discourse? If someone points out there are brazen acts which haven't happened before you just tack the label "ideological hatred" or "partisan" and think that covers all ground?
They are random goons, DOGE wasn't signed into existence by Congress, the "officer" in charge of DOGE has not been through the process of confirmation by Congress/Senate. Those people are getting access to the Treasury without any checks and balances process.
I cannot believe that Americans are falling for this, you were supposed to fight against the tyranny of highly-concentrated power in a single person's hand and yet now it's ok to do it because it's a team you support? This is all so stupid to watch from the outside, a bizarro-world of hot takes without any regards to civics, government function, nor democratic distribution of power across government branches.
What is infuriating is that any argument against it is then met by some twist of an ad hominem boiling down to "this is partisanship/ideological hatred". It's just all so, so stupid.
Edit: also forgot, I don't think anyone like you shouting "partisan" or "ideology" has ever heard about "The Network State", I recommend going through it to see the playbook you are all participating in.
The feds can screech all they want. The people have spoken. Their jobs won't be missed. That the feds that tyrannically oppress the people hate this so much is some of the strongest evidence DOGE might actually get something done.
It is time for their civics lesson, not ours. Hopefully they can learn to code.
It is time for their civics lesson, not ours. Hopefully they can learn to code.
This vitriol won't drive much forward, you are way too emotional to even consider the consequences of the "wreck everything policy".
It's more akin to Mao, if you like that then best of luck.
It's more akin to Mao, if you like that then best of luck.
Wreck everything in this case means a return to constitutional basis under which the feds have a narrow scope limited by the 10th amendment rather than the pretend one invented under FDR era and stamped under threat of packing the courts.
The screeching about Mao and Nazis doesn't work anymore. Accessing payment systems isn't the holocaust and you've cried wolf too many times for it to work anymore.
The screeching about Mao and Nazis doesn't work anymore. Accessing payment systems isn't the holocaust and you've cried wolf too many times for it to work anymore.
Who the fuck is "you"? I'm not American, I don't live in the USA, I'm just watching from the sidelines how fucking bonkers all of this is unfolding, and for some reason you don't even consider that maybe it is that fucking bonkers. Even if you support what's being done just the sheer pace of it won't drive it forward anywhere bright.
It's just some pent up rage and anger, now being used for retribution against something not even tangible, it's just wrecking for the sake of wrecking.
The only way to see through if it's "crying wolf" or heeding some warning calls is when you're way past a turning back point, it's speeding fast to that point and you are actively choosing to blind yourself because you feel there's an "other" (as your usage of "you" in there) that is only against what's happening because of some distorted notion of bucketing people into camps of ideology and only thinking through that lens.
I don't even know how to try anymore to shine a light on how absurd each step is growing to be on top of each other, if even the cohort of Americans who have absolute access to information, knowledge, are supposedly well-educated can just blindly follow through the master plan in motion and call anyone trying to warn you there's danger ahead as the opposite-you I simply have no respect left for the general American populace.
You do deserve the reckoning that is very likely to come, perhaps after that we can talk about who is crying wolf or not because this "no, you" rhetoric does work, it's fucking exhausting, it doesn't lead anywhere, and there's no room for talking to be done if you cannot ever reflect on your own position to admit that some stuff doesn't look nor feel right.
For all the fearmongering of a New World Order the conservatives in general have been stoking it does seem, yet again, that every accusation is an admission. Your government is rapidly getting taken under control of a few select people with a plan to fundamentally change how the fabric of your State works (and it's not under the 10th Ammendment or whatever the fuck else is in your fossilised Constitution). The plan has been talked out in the open, they've been talking about it on podcasts, on interviews, on articles, and yet it seems that any warning call is just "crying wolf".
It's just some pent up rage and anger, now being used for retribution against something not even tangible, it's just wrecking for the sake of wrecking.
The only way to see through if it's "crying wolf" or heeding some warning calls is when you're way past a turning back point, it's speeding fast to that point and you are actively choosing to blind yourself because you feel there's an "other" (as your usage of "you" in there) that is only against what's happening because of some distorted notion of bucketing people into camps of ideology and only thinking through that lens.
I don't even know how to try anymore to shine a light on how absurd each step is growing to be on top of each other, if even the cohort of Americans who have absolute access to information, knowledge, are supposedly well-educated can just blindly follow through the master plan in motion and call anyone trying to warn you there's danger ahead as the opposite-you I simply have no respect left for the general American populace.
You do deserve the reckoning that is very likely to come, perhaps after that we can talk about who is crying wolf or not because this "no, you" rhetoric does work, it's fucking exhausting, it doesn't lead anywhere, and there's no room for talking to be done if you cannot ever reflect on your own position to admit that some stuff doesn't look nor feel right.
For all the fearmongering of a New World Order the conservatives in general have been stoking it does seem, yet again, that every accusation is an admission. Your government is rapidly getting taken under control of a few select people with a plan to fundamentally change how the fabric of your State works (and it's not under the 10th Ammendment or whatever the fuck else is in your fossilised Constitution). The plan has been talked out in the open, they've been talking about it on podcasts, on interviews, on articles, and yet it seems that any warning call is just "crying wolf".
Didn’t Trump just remove those checks?
Or maybe this is something else: https://edition.cnn.com/2025/01/21/politics/trump-temporary-...
Or maybe this is something else: https://edition.cnn.com/2025/01/21/politics/trump-temporary-...
> Are there no checks and balances in place?
All it takes for bad people to win, is for good people to do nothing.
All it takes for bad people to win, is for good people to do nothing.
> is for good people to do nothing
Or for good people to run shitty candidates that can’t win the election
Or for good people to run shitty candidates that can’t win the election
A big purpose of primaries is a sanity check for election suitability. Unfortunately whatever elites shit-canned Biden forgot that they need primaries almost as much as the people do.
This system is squarely in the hands of the executive. The elected executive handed access to DOGE, as he advertised in his campaign. This is so squarely and fairly a democratic action it defies logic this is even worth taking note of. This is what the people, who the government is beholden to, explicitly asked for. Tyranny would be NOT handing it over.
The Constitution provides for checks&balances. This violates the Appointments Clause (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2). It is unconstitutional like so many of these executive orders that violate the 1st and 4th Amendments.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appointments_Clause
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appointments_Clause
I find it hard to believe every employee accessing the system without a congressional appointment is violating the constitution. Perhaps that is the case but I haven't heard a peep from constitutional watchdogs until now. Can you explain why it's suddenly unconstitutional when the US digital service employees access it?
locopati(2)
Interesting - I genuinely want to understand your perspective here.
Are you saying following the laws to protect sensitive information is not worth it in this case, because it has been authorized by the party of the day?
Are you saying following the laws to protect sensitive information is not worth it in this case, because it has been authorized by the party of the day?
That sounds like a 'why did you beat your wife' kind of question. No comment here has established law was broken, nor did you even cite any specific crime. Genuinely have no idea what red herring you are going on here.
Over the last decade or so I've ceased to believe that laws even really exist or that anything matters.
Someone's been reading the dictator's handbook. First step when you gain power is to ensure control of the treasury
I thought the first step was to gain control of the media.
That's during the power grab to prevent the opposition from rallying resistance during the transition. When you have power, you need to establish control of the money to ensure you keep the power
The media, largely already kissed the ring. Even Putin didn't have it so easy.
Read? They wrote one.
I was under the impression from a lot of comments from smart HNers when DOGE was first announced that Musk would simply be in a advisory position, or would simply report to someone else and wouldn't have any real access or power.
What ever happened to those commenters?
What ever happened to those commenters?
I'm surprised. I question the legality of all this. Without congressional authorization, DOGE is just an advisory board. Advisory boards (I presume) don't have the legal authority to do these kinds of things without congressional approval.
I presume there's an emergency lawsuit or 20 to stop this; it will be interesting to see how it gets ruled on. Then we'll know just how much trouble we're in.
I presume there's an emergency lawsuit or 20 to stop this; it will be interesting to see how it gets ruled on. Then we'll know just how much trouble we're in.
Granted, it’s one step at a time — but what’s to stop them for disobeying the legal order if it’s against them?
yes, here's one example: https://bsky.app/profile/benjaminwittes.bsky.social/post/3lh...
That was the announced plan. Then they renamed United States Digital Service to United States Doge Service and put Musk in charge. I'm not sure how the legality works, but they're doing something different than what they had first stated.
Why is this flagged?
There is a subset of HN users who don’t want us to discuss this matter on this platform.
Subset of HN who are foes of open society working to enable these looters of open society.
The moderation system here is doing incredible damage beyond belief right now, is being exploited by the very worst to suppress exchange of ideas at a key time.
The moderation system here is doing incredible damage beyond belief right now, is being exploited by the very worst to suppress exchange of ideas at a key time.
Dang included. He could unflag these topics, but has chosen not to.
Dang may be in a vulnerable position. My understanding is they serve at the pleasure of paulg. If dang unflags too many of these, their job could be in danger.
YCombinator is complicit in creating this coup. Many high ranking involved members are part of the neo-reactionary movement, or 'dark enlightenment'
[deleted]
Because "running America like a business" is never wrong.
Not to mention that this can have GRAVE consequences. If these assholes tank the system and bond payments and such do not go out, it's game over.
Not to mention that this can have GRAVE consequences. If these assholes tank the system and bond payments and such do not go out, it's game over.
Combined with recent reports of large short positions in the market, it makes you wonder... These articles claim full access. Does that imply the ability to stop certain payments? How much goes to private companies?
Is there any overlap between these companies and recent short positions?
All interesting questions. If your goal is to cut expenses, presumably your goal would be to have access to turn off the money tap. Because otherwise, what can DOGE really accomplish?
All interesting questions. If your goal is to cut expenses, presumably your goal would be to have access to turn off the money tap. Because otherwise, what can DOGE really accomplish?
I understand that legally their access privileges are for non-confidential IT upgrades. However they appear to not be operating under rules-based order and rather "might makes right".
Going broke shorting Tesla is pretty much a meme at this point.
They can make a full backup of the payment history. Congress controls the actual tap but the executive has the power to monitor payments administered through the executive branch. Once the corruption, waste, and redistribution payments are traced we can find out how to ensure voters know what needs done to shit-can those programs and jobs.
It's all public data. There's even free apis to get live data. What are they hunting for that needs more access than that? Do you believe the data feeds are fraudulent in some way that the balance sheets are not?
When looking for fraud and abuse you want access to the single source of truth, not secondary derived sources.
People need to accept that Trump won and is now directly in charge of the executive branch.
Imagine holding the belief that a company's CEO should wait until the CFO publishes financial statements to the market to understand how the company is performing. That's what people sound like when they complain about Musk et al querying government databases.
People need to accept that Trump won and is now directly in charge of the executive branch.
Imagine holding the belief that a company's CEO should wait until the CFO publishes financial statements to the market to understand how the company is performing. That's what people sound like when they complain about Musk et al querying government databases.
The single source of truth is what's exposed, unless you are claiming that the treasury is manipulating their data feeds to filter out things?
I'm not sure what fraud or abuse you are expecting them to find? There's external auditors that audit the books daily, so you're talking about a conspiracy that would be massive to hide a single cent.
The treasury doesn't choose how to spend the money. Congress tells them to release x amount for program y, and the general concern is about how program y spends its money once it's released from the treasury. This won't show that at all.
I'm not sure what fraud or abuse you are expecting them to find? There's external auditors that audit the books daily, so you're talking about a conspiracy that would be massive to hide a single cent.
The treasury doesn't choose how to spend the money. Congress tells them to release x amount for program y, and the general concern is about how program y spends its money once it's released from the treasury. This won't show that at all.
Ah yes. I'm sure someone who has been convicted of fraud and someone who gleefully breaks laws running his companies will definitely track down all that corruption and help the country's finances for the good of the people.
How can you seriously believe the words you write?
How can you seriously believe the words you write?
Surely, the oligarch robber-baron will use his unelected position for the greater good and not for personal gains.
It's funny how people are concerned about things that haven't happened yet, but the same people for 5 years overlooked the Biden/Ukraine bribery scandal which actually happened, along with a bunch of abuses surrounding that. Not least of which is Biden pardoning his whole family for any unspecified crimes they did since 2014.
Your account was created 2 weeks ago. Who are you, and why are you spreading falsehoods on Hacker News?
My account definitely wasn't created 2 weeks ago, it's over a year old. You are the one spreading falsehoods. By the way, why are people so political on "Hacker" News? I wouldn't bring it up except for the stunning amount of political garbage I see on here that I happen to disagree with.
If not for all the fucking downvotes from people like you I would probably have a thousand karma now. That's the kind of groupthink I'm dealing with here. To add insult to injury I can't downvote anyone myself.
If not for all the fucking downvotes from people like you I would probably have a thousand karma now. That's the kind of groupthink I'm dealing with here. To add insult to injury I can't downvote anyone myself.
Downvotes are capped at -4 per comment.
I have your account tagged as a political troll-adjacent. That's because most of your comments since Jan 2 2024 are political and are barely on the line wrt to the guidelines. Sometimes clearly against them.
I'm surprised you're still not banned, that must be dang being overly kind (maybe because paulg)
I'm surprised you're still not banned, that must be dang being overly kind (maybe because paulg)
As far as I'm concerned, almost every person who has argued with me about politics has been politically brainwashed and antagonistic in the first comment I replied to, and I have often been brigaded by obvious political operatives or trolls with multiple accounts.
If other people can make antagonistic political comments with impunity, why does disagreeing with them put me in the "troll" category? I think you just don't like people who disagree with you by default. This is how the left operates today, and why I get so pissed off nearly every time I have to talk to a left-leaning person.
I'm surprised you care enough to bother replying to me. By the way, where are these tags you speak of? I would like to know if I'm arguing with known trolls, or to catalog them for myself.
If other people can make antagonistic political comments with impunity, why does disagreeing with them put me in the "troll" category? I think you just don't like people who disagree with you by default. This is how the left operates today, and why I get so pissed off nearly every time I have to talk to a left-leaning person.
I'm surprised you care enough to bother replying to me. By the way, where are these tags you speak of? I would like to know if I'm arguing with known trolls, or to catalog them for myself.
Because that hasn't happened unlike Trumps actual crimes.
Using fiction to justify Trumps real corruption is ridiculous.
Using fiction to justify Trumps real corruption is ridiculous.
Corruption is corruption. Trump fought every attack against him like a champ. Biden pardoned his whole family to avoid a fight he knew he would lose due to the facts. He can't hide the money trail. He mishandled classified documents as well but he was deemed unfit for prosecution, yet he remained in office quite a while after that.
If Trump can be found to be corrupt for real, then let's see. But everything brought against him up to now, from the Clinton-sponsored Russiagate hoax, the insurrection hoax, the cat lady rape hoax, the stealing nuclear documents hoax, and everything else, has been COMPLETE and OBVIOUS bullshit. It pains me to say that it was obvious because I too was fooled by the media on some of these things at one time.
If Trump can be found to be corrupt for real, then let's see. But everything brought against him up to now, from the Clinton-sponsored Russiagate hoax, the insurrection hoax, the cat lady rape hoax, the stealing nuclear documents hoax, and everything else, has been COMPLETE and OBVIOUS bullshit. It pains me to say that it was obvious because I too was fooled by the media on some of these things at one time.
Some people cannot and would not accept any evidence, because they already know in their hearts Trump is "a champ".
I didn't even particularly like him until I realized how rabid the Democrats are, how they falsify everything and bend the law to attack their opposition, and call everyone who questions even 1% of their agenda a Nazi. If Trump is actually proven to be corrupt then I'll change my opinion of course. But I'm not convinced by the Democrats' anti-democratic and often illegal attempts to smear him and anyone who doesn't think Trump is a Nazi.
If you had spent any time reading up on that topic you would know that there never was a coherent argument made about the alleged bribery. There even was a republican lead inquiry at that time which cleared Biden of any wrongdoing.
Biden was sent to Ukraine with the clear instruction to get the corrupt AG Shokin removed. That decision was made by the WH and bipartisan senate foreign affairs committee after coordinating with the EU and other parties.
And that is what Biden did.
It is bizarre to blatantly mischaracterize something that is so well documented.
Biden was sent to Ukraine with the clear instruction to get the corrupt AG Shokin removed. That decision was made by the WH and bipartisan senate foreign affairs committee after coordinating with the EU and other parties.
And that is what Biden did.
It is bizarre to blatantly mischaracterize something that is so well documented.
All of you are arguing in bad faith. The media and Biden's own justice department covered for him, even to the point of violating the first amendment and possibly committing treason. Don't give me any crap about "bipartisan" groups clearing Biden which is like 95% dems and 5% RINOs.
If Biden was innocent he could have fought the case in court and won just like Trump did when dealing with countless legal attacks over the last 8 years. Instead, he pardoned practically his whole family for everything since 2014, crimes in which he was likely complicit. If that doesn't make you suspicious, then you need your head checked.
If Biden was innocent he could have fought the case in court and won just like Trump did when dealing with countless legal attacks over the last 8 years. Instead, he pardoned practically his whole family for everything since 2014, crimes in which he was likely complicit. If that doesn't make you suspicious, then you need your head checked.
I dont care about Biden and think that it is a disgrace that he pardoned his family. But I did follow the Ukraine story when it broke in 2016 (I think) and it soon became clear that there was nothing to it.
Again, Biden was sent with the clear directive to Ukraine to achieve the dismissal of Shokin. Which he did. There is ZERO doubt about that. He did not make any decisions that could have been corrupted.
Again, Biden was sent with the clear directive to Ukraine to achieve the dismissal of Shokin. Which he did. There is ZERO doubt about that. He did not make any decisions that could have been corrupted.
> it is a disgrace that he pardoned his family ... it soon became clear that there was nothing to it.
I'm curious why you feel this way? To me, because there was nothing to the allegations surrounding Ukraine, the prosecution of Hunter Biden seems entirely political. If he were he any other person, he would not have received the treatment he did for the crimes he committed, which seem like very minor infractions (tax evasion, lying about being on drugs) compared to what was alleged (selling bribes and leveraging US foreign policy with Joe). The Republicans who encouraged that prosecution abused their power, and so I don't see why it should be disgraceful for Biden to similarly abuse his in defense.
In normal times POTUS shouldn't pardon his family, but when his political opponents abuse a government committee to come after his family, then it's fair.
I'm curious why you feel this way? To me, because there was nothing to the allegations surrounding Ukraine, the prosecution of Hunter Biden seems entirely political. If he were he any other person, he would not have received the treatment he did for the crimes he committed, which seem like very minor infractions (tax evasion, lying about being on drugs) compared to what was alleged (selling bribes and leveraging US foreign policy with Joe). The Republicans who encouraged that prosecution abused their power, and so I don't see why it should be disgraceful for Biden to similarly abuse his in defense.
In normal times POTUS shouldn't pardon his family, but when his political opponents abuse a government committee to come after his family, then it's fair.
Hunter Biden lived his whole live on the Biden name and now it came back to bite him in the ass.
Tough luck.
Joe Biden ran on his integrity and promised not to interfere with the prosecution. Now he did.
Nobody expects Trump to have the intellectual or ethical capacity to act with integrity. Biden showed that he is the same and hurt his political cause for years to come.
Nobody expects Trump to have the intellectual or ethical capacity to act with integrity. Biden showed that he is the same and hurt his political cause for years to come.
I see. I think at the end of the day, Biden's political cause was democracy, which is now ablaze in the dumpster.
The way I see it, Biden's whole message was "This thing is okay, we shouldn't burn it down". Then we held and election and the result was people voted to burn it all down. On the way out the door and at the end of his life, as people arrived with gasoline and matches, Biden chose his family over his political cause. Because why should he chose democracy if we won't?
The way I see it, Biden's whole message was "This thing is okay, we shouldn't burn it down". Then we held and election and the result was people voted to burn it all down. On the way out the door and at the end of his life, as people arrived with gasoline and matches, Biden chose his family over his political cause. Because why should he chose democracy if we won't?
The Democrats don't truly care about democracy. The fact that they fabricated a narrative that their opposition was infiltrated by Russians, and then fabricated a ridiculous comparison to Nazis, proves that they don't respect the process. When they say "our democracy" they really mean "our bureaucracy" and that means "Democrat-controlled bureaucracy that does what we want." I've seen some leading liberal rags questioning the value of the constitution and the establishment of democracy, as well. As we speak they are openly calling for violence against Republicans on Reddit and elsewhere, which is anti-democracy. It's also common knowledge at this point that a loud minority of Democrats are actually communists.
You don't need a pardon if you're not guilty, for one thing. These are not crimes that would be a matter of opinion. There would be finances that could be linked back to Hunter and Joe. By the way, did you know Hunter is selling "art" made with his own feces? Do you think that is in any way legit? Or is it another channel of illicit payments?
>To me, because there was nothing to the allegations surrounding Ukraine, the prosecution of Hunter Biden seems entirely political.
All the prosecution conducted against Trump was political so it is understandable that Biden could have this fear of retaliation. But the entire establishment worked to suppress the Hunter Biden story and all lines of inquiry about Biden's mental health. If you aren't suspicious about these people after all the antics they've pulled, you're just not paying attention.
>To me, because there was nothing to the allegations surrounding Ukraine, the prosecution of Hunter Biden seems entirely political.
All the prosecution conducted against Trump was political so it is understandable that Biden could have this fear of retaliation. But the entire establishment worked to suppress the Hunter Biden story and all lines of inquiry about Biden's mental health. If you aren't suspicious about these people after all the antics they've pulled, you're just not paying attention.
What's the motive?
The accumulation of money and power. Same as it ever was.
Leverage, stopping payments for Medicare, Social Security and all other transactions until Congress does what Musk wants, probably running government like he did X.
Make everyone unemployed and drop the revenue by 80%? Sounds about right.
stopping payments like these, apparently: https://bsky.app/profile/bubbaprog.lol/post/3lh77ekgdas2h
[deleted]
Well this surely shows how overpowered the Executive branch is when there is a Fascist at the wheel. Dems wont do shit because thats what they do. They'll tweet though.
I really hate this narrative, because Democrats have been fighting against this for a decade at this point. We warned about this at the first impeachment and the second one. Short of armed rebellion, we did everything. Which action would you have liked to have seen happen, which didn't?
Are there no checks and balances in place? Seems like one side that won the popular vote has taken the entire spectrum of action, regardless if they need to govern for an entire nation.