It’ll be handled by the courts then, right?

Personally, I like the bold approach. I really dislike Trump and would never ever consider voting for the guy. This isn’t the outcome that I hoped for, but I appreciate that he’s trying to do something at least, even if it fails. Only 34% of Americans trust the government for a lot of valid reasons. We’ve been at war for pretty much forever. We keep innerworkings of government secret for ‘national security’. And, I have never liked how we influence elections and governments around the world. It always felt so gross.

I’ve done work with USAID and have seen first hand their ineffective humanitarian aid programs. It’s not surprising that they haven’t made much progress in over 50 years when you consider the perverse incentives.

OK, we have an independent judiciary to decide on the legality. Just because you say it's illegal doesn't mean it is. Biden unilaterally cancelled a trillion dollars of college debt, which the Supreme Court said was illegal, then he tweaked the executive order and did it again, which the Supreme Court said was illegal again.

This is the system.

But the DOJ replied to that independent judiciary that was not bound by their decision... It wasn't appealed to a supreme court that would likely overrule the lower court, it was simply asserted that the judges order didn't matter. That is the sort of thing I find concerning. Firing non appointed law enforcement officers without stated cause too. If you walk down the autocratic playbook for the rise to power, there are way too many parallels for comfort. Ask chatgpt to provide them along with relevant quotes from well known autocrats. Some of the judicial orders do seem to be getting followed now, I have some bit of hope that the supreme court won't do anything too obviously biased.

> OK, we have an independent judiciary to decide on the legality.

You don't.

> Just because you say it's illegal doesn't mean it is.

It's illegal to the point it even violates the US constitution.

> Biden unilaterally cancelled a trillion dollars of college debt, which the Supreme Court said was illegal, (...)

The Supreme Court ruled that the Department of Education didn't had the authority to enact such a large program and needed to seek approval from congress, and the rule was called by Trump's appointees.

Biden's student loan debt programs still went ahead because, unlike the original claim, the department of education already was running student debt forgiveness programs before and during Trump's first term, and those existing programs were never questioned as being illegal or unconstitutional.

The fact that you are trying to compare this event to Trump's string of illegal and unconstitutional efforts to shut down and dismantle the whole federal government, not to mention the whole sabotage campaign involving threatening long-standing allies of military invasion and economic war, speaks volumes of how disingenuous you're being.

And what's even worse, the person you replied to may lot even realize how disingenuous they are being. This is the level of propaganda that is tearing through the US.

Which laws protect USAID from Trump's EO, pray tell?

The part of the constitution that says only Congress can create laws and the president just implements them.

He didn't create any law in this matter and he used a legal path way, executive orders. Do cry about the broken system.

No, he is closing down an agency using Executive Orders; however, as currently constituted, only Congress can shut down the agency.

> The Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998, 22 U.S.C. 6501 et seq.) established USAID as its own agency. In a section titled “Status of AID” (22 U.S.C. 6563) it states:

>> (a) In general

>> Unless abolished pursuant to the reorganization plan submitted under section 6601 of this title, and except as provided in section 6562 of this title, there is within the Executive branch of Government the United States Agency for International Development as an entity described in section 104 of title 5.

Because the agency is an independent agency, it cannot be interrupted without going through the appropriate channel.

[0] https://www.justsecurity.org/107267/can-president-dissolve-u...

Please stop promulgating the misinformation about background checks, it only serves to discredit people on the left. Focus on things that are actually illegal or irregular.

The access that DOGE and Elon has is strictly legal via standard government processes.

I guess one positive out of all of this is that Americans will (hopefully) actually learn something about how the government works. I have the benefit of having worked in DC for a long time but every American should have a passing familiarity with this. Misconceptions are rife.

> The access that DOGE and Elon has is strictly legal via standard government processes.

Nope, you are mistaken. The EO gave access for DOGE and unclassified systems. Treasury has quite a bit that is classified. This is why the lawsuits to stop them have merit.

https://home.treasury.gov/about/general-information/orders-a...

You are mistaken. Individuals can be granted access to any classified system without a clearance by an appropriate authority. Happens all the time in some parts of government. I am quite familiar with this part of the law by virtue of need.

I am sure the trivial act of granting that access was done given that the people now in charge have that authority.

Again, this ignorance of the basic mechanics of US government is discrediting to valid arguments. You are being manipulated to look like you have no idea what you are talking about, which will discredit your valid arguments by association.

Cite the regs. Cure what you feel is inaccurate.

This isn’t a serious request. The ability of authorities to grant arbitrary people access to classified information has been the law of the land forever. If you are unfamiliar with this then you are not in a position to make a credible argument. I am not going to play a game of “fetch a rock” with someone incapable of cursory research.

This is my world, I know how it works.

> This is my world, I know how it works.

"Trust me bro"

Where you have made your claim isn't 'your world,' it's the open web. You may or may not spend any time at all, but taking people at their word was ruined by 4chan and other trolls.

Since I'm pretty sure you're wrong, and I actually chatted about my questions with people who operate in the space, let me add more information to the conversation.

First, governing documents:

Executive Order 13526 - Governs classification of national security information, including Top Secret, Secret, and Confidential levels. - Who Can Override? President - Override Process: The President can declassify or reclassify any classified information at will.

Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) - Controls handling of classified information in legal proceedings. - Who Can Override? Federal Courts (Judges) - Override Process: Judges can determine whether classified evidence can be disclosed in court.

National Industrial Security Program (NISP) (Executive Order 12829) - Regulates access to classified information by contractors and private entities. - Who Can Override? President, Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) - Override Process: The President can issue waivers; DCSA can grant or deny access based on security clearances.

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) - Regulates intelligence gathering on foreign entities and individuals. - Who Can Override? FISA Court (FISC) - Override Process: Judges can approve or disapprove classified surveillance requests.

Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1954 - Governs access to classified nuclear information ("Restricted Data"). - Who Can Override? President, Department of Energy (DOE), Congress - Override Process: The President and DOE can declassify certain nuclear information. Congress can pass legislation altering classification.

Presidential Records Act (PRA) of 1978 - Regulates access to presidential records, including classified materials. - Who Can Override? Incumbent President - Override Process: The sitting President can restrict or release prior administration records.

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) - Allows public access to government records but exempts classified materials. - Who Can Override? Agencies, Courts, President - Override Process: Agencies can deny requests, courts can order disclosure, and the President can override agency decisions.

Department of Defense (DoD) Information Security Program (DoDM 5200.01) - Regulates access to military and defense-related classified information. - Who Can Override? Secretary of Defense, President - Override Process: The Secretary of Defense can restrict access within DoD, and the President can override classifications.

While a President could certainly grant access to classified (and sensitive) systems, there are still laws that prevent hostile takeovers like what Elon Musk and DOGE have done (which, you recall, were explicitly given access by executive order to unclassified systems).

The laws, acts, and regs I would have expected you to cite include:

- FISMA (2014)

- CISA (2015)

- EO 13800

- Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (2004)

- CFAA (Title 18, USC Sec.1030)

Can the president override these restrictions? Not directly -- while the prez has authority over classified information and executive agencies, federal laws explicitly prohibit unauthorized access to IT systems, even by high-ranking officials such as DOGE. IT systems within agencies like the Treasury, OPM, and USAID operate under internal security policies and congressional oversight. A president attempting wholesale access to these systems without proper legal justification can lead to legal challenges (as it has), congressional investigations, and potential violations of federal law.

Some of the policies in these agencies, based on decades of experience in securing the systems, are

- DoD Instruction 8500.01 (Cybersecurity) - established RBAC and principle of least privillege

- DoD Instruction 8530.01 (Cybersecurity Activities Support to DoD Information Network Operations) -- monitoring of privileged users

- Army Regulation (AR) 25-2 (Army Cybersecurity) - MFA requirements -- Army specific, but similar regs at other agencies.

Now, what if someone with authority grants unauthorized access? You're talking espionage act now. CFAA too. Privacy act. Insider threat (EO 13587). Granting unauthorized access to federal IT systems, classified data, or sensitive records is a serious crime. If national security is compromised, penalties become even harsher under espionage laws.

Now, if you're actually in this world, I welcome your substantive additions to the conversation.

Not legal at all I'm afraid to say