quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
Yup. Two different cases. Two different judges. One is Manhattan-based U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer on the Treasury case. The Labor case is U.S. District Judge John Bates in Washington, D.C.

Musk responded to the controversy Saturday, saying in a post to X:

To be clear, what the @DOGE team and @USTreasury have jointly agreed makes sense is the following:

- Require that all outgoing government payments have a payment categorization code, which is necessary in order to pass financial audits. This is frequently left blank, making audits almost impossible.

- All payments must also include a rationale for the payment in the comment field, which is currently left blank. Importantly, we are not yet applying ANY judgment to this rationale, but simply requiring that SOME attempt be made to explain the payment more than NOTHING!

- The DO-NOT-PAY list of entities known to be fraudulent or people who are dead or are probable fronts for terrorist organizations or do not match Congressional appropriations must actually be implemented and not ignored. Also, it can currently take up to a year to get on this list, which is far too long. This list should be updated at least weekly, if not daily.

The above super obvious and necessary changes are being implemented by existing, long-time career government employees, not anyone from @DOGE
. It is ridiculous that these changes didn’t exist already!

Yesterday, I was told that there are currently over $100B/year of entitlements payments to individuals with no SSN or even a temporary ID number. If accurate, this is extremely suspicious.

When I asked if anyone at Treasury had a rough guess for what percentage of that number is unequivocal and obvious fraud, the consensus in the room was about half, so $50B/year or $1B/week!!

This is utterly insane and must be addressed immediately.

Engelmayer agreed with the state’s argument that they “will face irreparable harm in the absence of injunctive relief.”

“That is both because of the risk that the new policy presents of the disclosure of sensitive and confidential information and the heightened risk that the systems in question will be more vulnerable than before to hacking,” Engelmayer wrote.

There was no immediate comment from the White House or Musk.

The decision is the latest in a series of judicial interventions blocking the Trump administration’s rapidly unfolding actions to overhaul the federal bureaucracy. Just hours before Engelmayer’s order, another federal judge in Washington halted a Musk-led initiative to dismantle USAID, the agency responsible for administering foreign aid programs.

In recent weeks, judges have also intervened to block Trump’s early executive actions ending automatic citizenship for children born on U.S. soil, pausing federal grants and loans, offering buyout to federal workers, and sending male inmates who identify as transgender women back to men’s prisons.

As Charlie Kirk of TPUSA notes;

New York Judge Paul Engelmayer just forbade all political appointees — including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent — from accessing Dept. of Treasury data, all based on Blueanon conspiracy theories!!

Those theories couldn't be challenged because the order was EX PARTE — meaning Trump's lawyers weren't warned, and couldn't weigh in. Only Democrat Attorneys General were allowed to argue.

The judge cites no law or logic to support this unprecedented order, because it defies both. The judge’s ruling is, in essence, that Scott Bessent simply occupies a ceremonial position without real power, like the King of England.

This is a grenade thrown into the functioning of the Treasury Department.

It forbids the elected government from accessing information about budget and finances. Instead, only the permanent, deep-state government can know what's being spent.

It means Scott Bessent's subordinates have far more power than Scott Bessent does.

Democrat pundits who whine about the Constitution are liars, and will shred it the first chance they get.

For now, the order is only for the next week, but if a court tries to make it permanent the Trump Administration should absolutely consider defying it.

Better yet, SCOTUS should bar this judge from ever hearing similar cases again, and every Democrat lawyer involved should be sanctioned.

As always, the Deep State is the enemy of democracy.

https://www.zerohedge.com/poli...ive-treasury-records

If proven to be authentic, the heads of anyone and everyone that enabled this thievery and fuckery against WTP needs to roll -

https://x.com/joma_gc/status/1888600739926192512

Another lefty saw the light. Pretty sure there are many many more like her, and this bodes well down the road for the GOP.

https://x.com/ImMeme0/status/1...d-trump-won-after%2F



“All right, you all. Listen, let me be one of the first Black women that was a part of the 92 or the 93 % that voted for Kamala to come out and just say it. I regret voting for Kamala. I really do.”

“I regret voting for her already into Trump’s presidency, not even a full month.”

“And this man has already secured borders. He’s already signing bills that are taking place that are uplifting this country.”

“Me not doing my history and really being investigative and seeing all the things that Trump has done and now having an eye opener and really looking at this man and seeing exactly how this man works has really put something on my heart.”

“I don’t know what I was thinking going in there voting for Kamala in the first place. I’m glad. I’m glad of the results.”

“Don’t get me wrong. I’m glad that I’m saying that I’m glad that Trump is in there, but me being so lost and participating into the whole Kamala run and now taking a step back, looking at how this President here is really running things, and it hasn’t even been a whole month, is something that I do think about.”

“I advise people that are in the Democratic Party myself to do your research, really do your research, okay?”

“Because I can definitely say that as a Black woman, a part of the 93%, I made an error. I can admit that. I can take accountability and admit that.”

The effect of too much winning!

Unconfirmed by other sources as of yet, but this Twitter I SAID TWITTER member has proven to be a reliable reporter.

https://x.com/OcrazioCornPop/s.../1888636816825233830

^^^^ More leftist heads will be exploding.

RE: Social Security Grants to Ukraine referenced n the post above.

Here are the facts. Social Security has never sent "grants" to Ukraine. That is bullshit. However, is is absolutely true that US citizens who qualify for Social Security benefits (age 65, blind, disabled etc AND has worked in the US under covered SS long enough) can continue to receive their benefits if they move to Ukraine. So yes, SS does send money to Ukraine, but only to US citizens who qualify and worked and formerly resided in the U.S. Also, to be clear, the benefits are sent to US citizens as individuals, not as "grants" to the Ukrainian government.

Sending SS benefits to US citizens residing in Ukraine is not some special deal that was done for Ukraine. SS benefits are sent to US citizens (who qualify) and reside in countries all over the world. Canada and Mexico have the largest number of US citizens who are beneficiaries and live overseas. That's been the case for as long as I can remember. Yes, there are countries where SS (through Treasury who is responsible for issuing the checks) does NOT send benefits. Russia, Iran, Cuba, China and some others. But as I said, this is not some special deal for Ukraine.

I'll offer a personal opinion on this general topic. What's always bugged me about this whole general issue is this. There are some countries whose citizens move here who continue to get their retirement benefits from their own home country. For example, if you come from the UK, and you move to the US, you can continue to collect your English pension here in the US. Same with us. You move to the UK, we'll send your check over there. But some countries whose citizens move here do cut off the checks to their citizens. Yet we don't stop the SS checks to US citizens who move to their country. This would require legislation, but I would love to see a reciprocity law. If your citizens can collect their pensions here, we'll do the same for our citizens moving there. If not, no SS checks to your country.

quote:

Originally posted by Fed161:
RE: Social Security Grants to Ukraine referenced n the post above.

Ah: Facts.

quote:

Originally posted by Fed161:
RE: Social Security Grants to Ukraine referenced n the post above.

Here are the facts. Social Security has never sent "grants" to Ukraine. That is bullshit. However, is is absolutely true that US citizens who qualify for Social Security benefits (age 65, blind, disabled etc AND has worked in the US under covered SS long enough) can continue to receive their benefits if they move to Ukraine. ...

Then why are these aggregates of disbursements rather than a listing by individual who receives the payment from Social inSecurity and the amount of that monthly disbursement?

That would be transparent, not rolling numbers up into aggregates that cannot be easily audited.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...734408&lctg=26773771

FCC Considers Revoking CBS License Over Kamala Harris' '60 Minutes' Interview Controversy

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is reportedly considering revoking CBS's broadcast license after the network aired a controversial interview with former Vice President Kamala Harris on "60 Minutes.” The interview sparked widespread outrage and calls for accountability after the network aired a misleading version, including highly distorted answers from Harris’ responses. According to a lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump, CBS violated state law by demonstrating deceptive acts in business conduct and “doctored” a "word salad" response from the failed Democrat presidential candidate about the Biden administration's involvement in the Israel-Hamas war. The FCC’s review stems from concerns that the interview may have violated broadcasting standards, prompting scrutiny over whether CBS acted in the public interest.

In the past two weeks, FCC Chair Brendan Carr launched investigations into three news outlets and reinstated complaints against three others, including NBC and ABC. The complaint against ABC received a “news distortion” complaint over its fact-checking by the moderators in the presidential debate between Harris and Trump that heavily favored Harris. Meanwhile, the complaint against NBC claimed that Harris’s appearance on “Saturday Night Live,” which aired just weeks before the election, violated “equal time” rules governing political programming.

Former FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel, a Democrat, dismissed any probe into the interview, saying the complaints “seek to weaponize the licensing authority of the FCC in a way that is fundamentally at odds with the First Amendment.”

However, Carr said he doesn’t “see how the FCC can reasonably adjudicate this claim of news distortion without seeing what was actually said.”

Carr's investigation could pave the way for potential revocation of broadcasting licenses for the networks. If the FCC probe uncovers any violations, the agency can impose fines or revoke a station's broadcast license entirely.

He defended his investigation into the networks during an interview with “Fox & Friends.”

“There’s a lot of people in this country right now on the radical left that are upset about this investigation into CBS and the work that I’m doing on broadcasters. And to sort of paraphrase Thomas Sowell, when the government has been weaponized in your favor, it feels like discrimination when all of a sudden there’s even-handed treatment. There’s a lot of people that have been on sort of that upper road of the two-tiered system of government,” he said.

“And what I’m here to do is apply the law evenly. This is a rare situation where we have extrinsic evidence that CBS had played one answer or one set of words and then swapped in another set. And CBS’ conduct through this, frankly, has been concerning.” Carr continued.

After releasing the full, unedited version of Harris’ “60 Minutes” interview, Trump also called for CBS to lose its broadcast license.

It won't happen, of course, but the fact that the threat of revocation is issued at all is remarkable. The heads of CBS consider the network to be untouchable. They see the network as a cornerstone of our society. In decades past, this was true, with CBS representing one of only three broadcast networks in the nation. These days, though, CBS could get lost in a sea of choices, and over-the-air broadcasts are the minority in terms of transmission.

This attention from the FCC, coupled with Donald Trump's lawsuit, would give reasonable, rational network executives much food for thought, and would be impetus for them to rein in their news division fanatics, but we're talking about leftists, and leftists are neither reasonable nor rational.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by Fed161:
RE: Social Security Grants to Ukraine referenced n the post above.

Ah: Facts.

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/...nistration-day-21%2F

quote:

Over the past two weeks Elon Musk and his cadre of young computer geniuses have cracked the code. Like Toto pulling the curtain on the Wizard of Oz, they’ve pulled back the cover on government secrecy. They've shown how oceans of tax revenue have flowed through Non-Government Organizations (NGOs), charitable-sounding foundations, the UN, and others to fund terrorists, disrupters like BLM, and reporters to promote Democrats and censor the opposition, most often to enrich Democrat politicians and their friends, families, and allies. The news you thought was news wasn’t independently and honestly generated. The charities you thought were genuine, weren’t. It’s one big gaslighting grift and you paid for it...

...The Musk-eteers are beginning a dive into other agencies. Musk Says His DOGE Team Uncovered $100 billion in Medicare and Medicaid waste after gaining access to the system. They’ve begun swimming through mountains of Social Security fraud.

https://www.americanthinker.co...mulated_reality.html

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:
...

Jesus Christ.

What fucking imbecile didn't see a need to do this?

Find'em and fire'em.

Great point sig2340.

Perhaps Fed161 can explain to us what “MULTIPLE RECIPIENTS” are, to put our minds at ease that WTP’s hard-earned contributions to Soc. Sec. are being responsibly looked after.

Then why are these aggregates of disbursements rather than a listing by individual who receives the payment from Social inSecurity and the amount of that monthly disbursement?

That would be transparent, not rolling numbers up into aggregates that cannot be easily audited.
----------------------------------------------

What you are looking at in the original post is a US Treasury database that shows aggregate total foreign disbursements by Federal Agency and receiving country. The database is for Treasury purposes and was never intended to list individual beneficiaries. Note this includes the Veterans Administration (and others) as well. The information about individual beneficiaries would be easily available at Social Security, or the Veteran's Administration. So the transparency you seek is available. You just need to look in the right place. The "multiple recipients" are exactly what it says - multiple (more than one) recipients.
--------------------------------

What fucking imbecile didn't see a need to do this?

Find'em and fire'em.
--------------------------------

We could find 'em and fire 'em. Or we could just go to SSA and get what's needed. That's an option too. Plus it avoids duplicative federal records.

quote:

Originally posted by Sig2340:

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:
...

Jesus Christ.

What fucking imbecile didn't see a need to do this?

Find'em and fire'em.

Beyond that, how the fuck did the database table not have the PaymentCategory column with a required restraint on it. I don't see how that could be anything but intentional. When I go to bed tonight I am going to thank my Maker for the election of Donald Trump. Stand by, there is a bunch more of this shit coming our way. Thank you President Trump.

^^^ @ Fed161: Great to have member with real knowledge of the inner workings of these agencies.

My wife sent me this a couple of hours ago, and it is getting some attention elsewhere, including Conservative Treehouse, etc.



Please, do yourself a favor and read this piece by one of the kids doing the work. One of the best things I have read regarding Musk and his people going after corruption. I won't copy and paste, here is the X link to the author's post.

https://x.com/EkoLovesYou/status/1887301698814988567

quote:

Originally posted by Fed161:
Then why are these aggregates of disbursements rather than a listing by individual who receives the payment from Social inSecurity and the amount of that monthly disbursement?

That would be transparent, not rolling numbers up into aggregates that cannot be easily audited.
----------------------------------------------

What you are looking at in the original post is a US Treasury database that shows aggregate total foreign disbursements by Federal Agency and receiving country. The database is for Treasury purposes and was never intended to list individual beneficiaries. Note this includes the Veterans Administration (and others) as well. The information about individual beneficiaries would be easily available at Social Security, or the Veteran's Administration. So the transparency you seek is available. You just need to look in the right place. The "multiple recipients" are exactly what it says - multiple (more than one) recipients.
--------------------------------

What fucking imbecile didn't see a need to do this?

Find'em and fire'em.
--------------------------------

We could find 'em and fire 'em. Or we could just go to SSA and get what's needed. That's an option too. Plus it avoids duplicative federal records.

That's literally bureaucratic bullshit.

"We don't have those records here. Do see someone else." What utter bureaucratic bullshit. This is why Judicial Watch lawyers damned near live in court.

If a digital or physical check from the USG arrives in any bank account any where for any reason whatsoever the Federal Disbursement Services (FDS) should have a fucking record.

That is what is expected of EVERY FINANCIAL SERVICES provider, like banks and investment houses.

How else can the TREASURY DEPARTMENT be certain the funds, in the correct amount arrived in the correct account and were deduced from the appropriate federal appropriation in the correct amount and from the correct account?