January 11, 2025

Absurd prank.

I'm reading "State Department Defies Congress, Revives Infamous Censorship Office in Absurd Prank" by Matt Taibbi.

26 comments:

BUMBLE BEE said...

WaPo gonna get right on it... Oh wait.

BUMBLE BEE said...

Democracy died.

Iman said...

Mean Gurls lashing out.

RCOCEAN II said...

absurd prank. what a dumb title

Kate said...

Behind the paywall. When everyone wants a subscription, no one gets a subscription.

rehajm said...

…gonna be tough to shrink government…

Shouting Thomas said...

Taibbi is an interesting writer. One of the more interesting things about him is that he really, seriously, doesn’t like Trump. He’s written at least one opus magnum on the subject, which I haven’t read because I got the gist on X.

Duke Dan said...

Paging Marco Rubio and DOGE guys

Bob Boyd said...

Has Zukabug become man enough to help fight this stuff?

Canadian Bumblepuppy said...

"misinformation" and "disinformation" are code words that mean "things that the government doesn't like" (and their media partners). It seems to me that people are starting to wise up to this word, and it is losing its effectiveness.

I wonder what they will replace it with.

Dogma and Pony Show said...

Just remember: These are the people protecting our democratic/constitutional norms. Like the norm that says left-wing Deep State ideologues are not only entitled to lifetime employment and pensions as members of a vast, unelected bureaucracy, but they also get to do whatever they please with the powers they hold without accountability to Congress, the Chief Executive, or the American taxpayer.

Peachy said...

Soviet A-holes to the bitter end.

Peachy said...

Democratic-Soviet Jerks to the bitter end.

comments are vanishing.

AlbertAnonymous said...

The Deeper State? Or

Deep State II - Harder and Deeper

Wince said...

Identifying/flagging foreign-source propaganda to inform/warn the government/public might be a worthwhile endeavor, but do they ever do just what they say they'll do in the way they promise they'll do it?

Aggie said...

The Progressive Democrats have used every trick in the book in 2016, 2020, and now 2024, to ensure their legacy of control perpetuates. It'll be a tougher game now, but I think the incoming administration is a lot more focused on making headway this time. Will they be distracted? Have the PD's destroyed the personnel records too? I think Trump should establish that as soon as 'bad faith' tactics are discovered, the gloves are off and lifelong sinecures are all done, and the 20-year veteran adminstrator-warriors are out the door and on the street, no exceptions, see ya in court about that pension. It's the new 'Lawfare'.

Dude1394 said...

Javier Milieu. The only way.

Kirk Parker said...

I've got your genuine insurrection, right here!

Breezy said...

+1

Original Mike said...

I've never heard a clear explanation of the harm perpetrated by so called foreign propaganda. I am skeptical it amounts to much.

ThreeSheets said...

Asking in good faith, can't the new Secretary of State simply close that department and lay off the employees?

n.n said...

The Democratic Cuckoos.

mikee said...

Reassign the entire office to staff the embassy in, oh, maybe Sudan, immediately Definitely Sudan, since that embassy has been empty and closed for over a year now. And assign them all to processing paperwork for legal immigrants from Sudan, immediately after blocking all immigration from Sudan due to the Civil War ongoing there.

Enigma said...

It could seriously happen. Wait for next year's budget. I suspect Trump may place unwanted Deep State staff on the Mexico border in FEMA tents to help process out migrants or ride along for long and dusty patrols, as that'd kill two birds with one stone. Put them of the beltway, out of the chatter loop, make them frustrated by their career's going sideways, and make them hate themselves for doing anti-Woke tasks.

jim said...

Welcome back RT!

Christopher B said...

It depends. IIRC Nixon tried to sequester funds and not spend them as a budget cutting maneuver but the Supreme Court ruled that amounted to a line-item veto and wasn't Constitutional. So if Congress gives a specific budget line to a program then the money has to be spent for that purpose. If the program is just part of the general operations of the Department with no specific funding then I would think the Secretary could shift funds within reason. From reading Taibbi's article it appears what State did was more like the later than the former. The law establishing the GEC function is still on the books (Congressional action would be needed to actually abolish it) but the specific funding was cut from the CR. The State department green-eye-shade people then dug up other unencumbered funds and reassigned GEC staff to various other functional areas but then seconded them to the renamed GEC.