Law Elon calls for impeachment of any judge who rules against him

[Contempt]

I don't see what that has to do with anything, considering you have not presented any facts or made an argument to speak of.

That's the funny thing that seems to have gone, completely unnoticed here... I have made no assertions, no judgements about anything, I am simply reacting to the statements of others.

The closest I have come is stating that Elon and Trump appear to believe what they are doing is right for their country. I just enjoy watching people go off on their little rants and then asking them how they came to those opinions.

I find it funny how many people have stated various different things as fact and then failed utterly to back them up with actual evidence to support it. That's how you tell the difference between someone who has come to a conclusion based on emotion rather than using evidence or logic.

 

[Contempt]

If you were American, it would be odd for you to know so little about what’s at stake to your future benefits. But seeing as how you don’t live there I can forgive you for having such a casual understanding of the situation.

I could say the same about you sherbro. Your emotions are telling you that's what Elon is planning as you hate him... the evidence is saying something entirely different however.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

Aah the usual response when you know that you can't argue a point. Embarrassing

Which part of anything that I said was incorrect?

You said it yourself, members of the Executive branch, who have been hand picked by Trump so it's a laugh for you to portray it as some type of oversight. If it's Congressionally approved expenditures then it's Congress that should approve any changes not anyone in the Executive.

 

[Ares Black]

You said it yourself, members of the Executive branch, who have been hand picked by Trump so it's a laugh for you to portray it as some type of oversight. If it's Congressionally approved expenditures then it's Congress that should approve any changes not anyone in the Executive.

(He doesn't actually understand how the US government works)

 

[Contempt]

You said it yourself, members of the Executive branch, who have been hand picked by Trump so it's a laugh for you to portray it as some type of oversight. If it's Congressionally approved expenditures then it's Congress that should approve any changes not anyone in the Executive.

Since when have congress been responsible for deciding how money is spent within a government department?

They are responsible for allocating budgets, how that money is then spent, is up to the department head and always has been.

 

[Contempt]

(He doesn't actually understand how the US government works)

Apparently I understand better than the people who post in this thread.

Budget allocations: Congress.
Spending allocations within the department: Department head.

...or are you honestly going to try to argue otherwise?

 

[Darkballs]

Since when have congress been responsible for deciding how money is spent within a government department?

They are responsible for allocating budgets, how that money is then spent, is up to the department head and always has been.

No.

The Constitution has long held that Congress controls the budget. While they can create departments and allow them oversight and various discretions, they don't magically lose the ability to control where the money goes.

If Congress allocates X for improving test scores in school to the Dept. of Education, that department can act within it's discretion to make that happen. But they can't just pocket the money or spend it on an entirely different purpose while Congress is helpless to stop them.

Are you just making this up as you go? You should probably pick a better user name. The one you've got doesn't fit.

 

[Contempt]

No.

The Constitution has long held that Congress controls the budget. While they can create departments and allow them oversight and various discretions, they don't magically lose the ability to control where the money goes.

If Congress allocates X for improving test scores in school to the Dept. of Education, that department can act within it's discretion to make that happen. But they can't just pocket the money or spend it on an entirely different purpose while Congress is helpless to stop them.

Are you just making this up as you go? You should probably pick a better user name. The one you've got doesn't fit.

OK sure, I'll play along... show me where congress dictates how much money is to be spent on say, capex for new equipment for classrooms within the Education department in next years budget. I'll wait...

"If Congress allocates X for improving test scores in school to the Dept. of Education, that department can act within it's discretion to make that happen."

As we covered much earlier, that's called an appropriations bill, in other words, specific money for a specific purpose, which is entirely different from a departments general budget, which is controlled by a the head of that government department.

You should really leave this to people like your cousin Big Balls... who actually know what they are doing.

 

[Fox by the Sea]

Elon is such a neurotic sperg, goddamn.

 

[Darkballs]

OK sure, I'll play along... show me where congress dictates how much money is to be spent on say, capex for new equipment for classrooms within the Education department in next years budget. I'll wait...

"If Congress allocates X for improving test scores in school to the Dept. of Education, that department can act within it's discretion to make that happen."

As we covered much earlier, that's called an appropriations bill, in other words, specific money for a specific purpose, which is entirely different from a departments general budget, which is controlled by a the head of that government department.

This is still stupid.

If Congress passes a budget provisions that are vague, then there would be no issue because the department heads would still be spending the money in line with congressional law.

Your argument, that department heads can just spend any money they get as they wish, is bullshit. They have to spend within the parameters of the law. So in Congress was to specify, this money to the Department of Education is for reading materials, the head the Department of Education would not spend that money on say, new school gyms.

 

[Contempt]

This is still stupid.

If Congress passes a budget provisions that are vague, then there would be no issue because the department heads would still be spending the money in line with congressional law.

Your argument, that department heads can just spend any money they get as they wish, is bullshit. They have to spend within the parameters of the law. So in Congress was to specify, this money to the Department of Education is for reading materials, the head the Department of Education would not spend that money on say, new school gyms.

IF it's an appropriations bill, which is a specific pool of money for a specific purpose, that is true.

I will come out and directly ask you this question so you don't try and deflect like people have done repeatedly so far: After congress assigns a budget to a government department (NOT an appropriations bill) Who then decides how that money is spent WITHIN that government department?

 

[Darkballs]

IF it's an appropriations bill, which is a specific pool of money for a specific purpose, that is true.

I will come out and directly ask you this question so you don't try and deflect like people have done repeatedly so far: After congress assigns a budget to a government department (NOT an appropriations bill) Who then decides how that money is spent WITHIN that government department?

Whomever it is would be obligated to spend it in line with Congressional law.

 

[Deaths Head]

Nobody thinks that's good, not even you.

I’m actually on a certain watch list for other reasons and I don’t even think it’s good to rid ppl to try and get rid of ppl that’s going to t ot let you just do what you want that’s more dangerous for the actual democracy , what I find funny is the Trumpers think it’s an us vs them thing and they dont even know their own cult is trying or even weakened their own rights already and trying to take away even more then an already corrupt government . Lol

 

[Contempt]

Whomever it is would be obligated to spend it in line with Congressional law.

What the fuck are you even talking about? Answer the damn question.

Edit: Yeah, that's what I figured. God you people are so embarrassingly dishonest, you won't answer a simple question.

As I said earlier: You should really leave this to people like your cousin Big Balls... who actually know what they are doing.

 

[Darkballs]

What the fuck are you even talking about? Answer the damn question.

Edit: Yeah, that's what I figured. God you people are so embarrassingly dishonest, you won't answer a simple question.

As I said earlier: You should really leave this to people like your cousin Big Balls... who actually know what they are doing.

I understand the concept of asking leading questions in order to make a stupid point. Crying about it won't have anyone bite.

The bottom line is that any department head cannot just decide on their own initiative where they spend the money. If Congress has apportion funds vaguely in any bill (appropriations or not) then there is some room to maneuver. This is not to suggest that the department head has the authority to act on their own.

You're just plain wrong here.

 

[Hdfi]

Interesting interview with a retired judge.

 

[Contempt]

I understand the concept of asking leading questions in order to make a stupid point. Crying about it won't have anyone bite.

The bottom line is that any department head cannot just decide on their own initiative where they spend the money. If Congress has apportion funds vaguely in any bill (appropriations or not) then there is some room to maneuver. This is not to suggest that the department head has the authority to act on their own.

You're just plain wrong here.

I'M wrong huh? Is that why you refuse to answer the question?

No, it is a very basic question that answers whether you understand how funding decisions are made within government departments. The TRUTH is that you do understand but refuse to answer the question because you know that the answer destroys your stupid argument.

 

[Crazy Source]

Another foreigner that has no fucking clue how my gov't works. @Contempt is not a serious person. The cool "Animal" AV aside, he's just a bogan living vicariously through MAGA. He believes that DOGE self-policing is cool because he "trusts" them. It's patently absurd and not worthy of a reply, much less a conversation that has gone on this long.

 

[LeonardoBjj]

Sup cunts?

/bows

Have a good night sherbro.

- Didnt Trump creonte Australia, bro?

 

[Crazy Source]

- Didnt Trump creonte Australia, bro?

"Creonte" is traitor, right? He is a traitor to Australia, just as those pathetic Canadian MAGA LARPers are traitors to their country.