The line between "inferior" and "principal" officers is one that is far from clear, and the Framers provided little guidance into where it should be drawn. See, e.g., 2 J. Story, Commentaries on the Constitution § 1536, pp. 397-398 (3d ed. 1858) ("In the practical course of the government, there does not seem to have been any exact line drawn, who are and who are not to be deemed inferior officers, in the sense of the constitution, whose appointment does not necessarily require the concurrence of the senate"). We need not attempt here to decide exactly where the line falls between the two types of officers, because, in our view, appellant clearly falls on the "inferior officer" side of that line. Several factors lead to this conclusion.
First, appellant is subject to removal by a higher Executive Branch official.... Second, appellant is empowered by the Act to perform only certain, limited duties... Third, appellant's office is limited in jurisdiction.... In our view, these factors relating to the "ideas of tenure, duration . . . and duties" of the independent counsel... are sufficient to establish that appellant is an "inferior" officer in the constitutional sense....
March 1, 2025
"Until this week, government officials had resisted answering inquiries as to who was formally in charge of [DOGE], except to say that it was not Mr. Musk."
"(Nor is Mr. Musk among its employees, the government said.) On Tuesday, a White House official said that Amy Gleason, a former health care investment executive, was serving as the acting administrator. On Friday, Joshua E. Gardner, a lawyer in the Justice Department’s civil division, denied that Mr. Musk had any role with the Department of Government Efficiency. This despite Mr. Musk’s clearly driving its initiatives, including an email blasted out last weekend that attempted to require all federal employees to respond with a list of five accomplishments from the previous week. Although the email was sent by the Office of Personnel Management, the federal government’s human resources arm, Mr. Musk said on Wednesday that he had suggested it and that the president had approved...."
"Judge Appears Skeptical of Claims That Musk Isn’t Driving DOGE/The judge prodded government lawyers for additional clarity on Elon Musk’s role in a case that directly challenges the constitutionality of his operation and his part in the rapid reshaping of government" (NYT).
The argument is that the Appointments Clause applies and Senate confirmation is required because Musk is a "principal officer" and not an "inferior officer." I'll just give you this quote from the 1988 Supreme Court case, Morrison v. Olson:
Posts
91 comments:
This format with Elon not an employee of DOGE and not its director was done so that the Left can’t tie Elon down with lawfare.
Trump learned.
Hey. We're not talking about Valerie Jarret here. Or Hunter Biden.
The judge may, if he likes, declare that all executive actions taken by Elon Musk are null and void. That would seem to resolve the matter. Although there don't appear to be any such actions.
Judges can do anything when they want. So, can nose around demanding to know what Musk is doing cause "muh constitution". And when people present them with evidence of election fraud ala 2020, they can refuse to do anything.. Or they can get involved as in Florida 2000 and basicially rewrite Florida's election laws to help Gore.
When are people going to wake up to this ridiculous judicial clown show?
In other words, Musk can do anything he likes and remain free of oversight or repercussions for any negative outcomes of his unilateral actions. That's a great way to run the government...by "non-employees and non-officials" of the government acting entirely by fiat. This is, of course, what Trump's lumpen admirers want: a strong man rule.
Trump learned.
Sure did. He learned he can ignore the constitution, normal procedures, and say "whatchu going to do about it?"
Revealing use of Marxist terminology by the Seethecook.
"In other words, Musk can do anything he likes and remain free of oversight or repercussions for any negative outcomes of his unilateral actions."
I believe he's only making recommendations — advising. Where are you getting "unilateral actions"?
And when people present them with evidence of election fraud ala 2020
How many times do we have to go over this. There is no evidence of significant fraud in the 2020 election. Even Trump's own Attorney General said so.
Just wondering if Ron Klain was given authorization or approval to run the country between 2020 and 2024? For some reason, attacking Elon Musk for organizing an attempt to ferret out corruption, graft, and waste in our government gets our journalist class and Democrats all up in arms, howlingly so. But allowing an unelected Chief of Staff to oversee the coverup of a man who was failing mentally and physically, knowingly put in the office of the President as a placeholder so that staffers could run what they wanted in those years- that was AOK.
It was OK by our media class. It was OK by our 'allies' around the world. It was OK by our enemies around the world. And, most importantly, it was OK by those now howling from the Democratic Party about Elon Musk.
As if he's the problem with this country.
Also how is he "free of oversight" if the President is directly overseeing him? And how would Senate confirmation provide oversight as he performs "actions." The Senate oversight precedes his actions.
Robert Cook said... This is, of course, what Trump's lumpen admirers want: a strong man rule.
3/1/25, 10:07 AM
Correct. Strong men want strong leaders, and strong leadeers surround themselves with strong men and women, like Trump has.
Weak men prefer weak leaders, and weak leaders surround themselves with weaklings, like Biden did. Libtards only feel right when a weakling is leading them.
"How many times do we have to go over this. There is no evidence of significant fraud in the 2020 election."
Infinite times. The belief you wish eradicated will never go away. In fact, I believe it is growing.
Sure did. He learned he can ignore the constitution, normal procedures, and say "whatchu going to do about it?"
There is no difference between Elon Musk and Valerie Jarrett. Both advisors of the highest rank to the president, both never confirmed by the Senate to any position, all completely regular and constitutional.
The democrat party and its handlers = a sewer.
The clean up crew - no matter who - would be vilified on Q by the loyal cultists and corrupt media machine. oh look!
I believe he's only making recommendations — advising. Where are you getting "unilateral actions"?"
None are so blind as those who will not see.
On what basis do you believe he is only "making recommendations"? And if he is just making recommendations, can you point to the documents that create DOGE say that it is just to make recommendations? Course you can't, because DOGE doesn't have any official authorization to do shit.
And don't give me the bullshit answer that it is merely an extension of an existing government agency.
If Musk isn’t an employee, then he can only advise and a government employee must take action. I doubt Musk is even seeking renumeration for his advice, so he may not even be a paid consultant. Musk is like a lawyer providing pro bono advice to a government official. When have we seen this previously?
"Infinite times. The belief you wish eradicated will never go away. In fact, I believe it is growing."
Oh, now, that's hyberbole. We only need to keep going over it -- until we get it right!
There is no difference between Elon Musk and Valerie Jarrett.
This is just a ridiculous assertion.
Elon musk petitions his government and demands it redress his grievances (which also happen to be our grievances.)
Trump gets the government to immediately redress said grievances by directing his employees to act.
This Musk's First Amendment right as a citizen. And US Senate approval is not required to exercise this right.
Case closed.
"In other words, Musk can do anything he likes and remain free of oversight or repercussions for any negative outcomes of his unilateral actions. That's a great way to run the government."
You mean like Samantha Power? I remember you squawking about that (cough cough) not.
now do Hunter (and Jill) being at all the cabinet meetings
'On what basis do you believe he is only "making recommendations"?'
Freder, what else could he possibly do? Take their little teenage genius hands and type on the keyboard for them? Lift their Big Balls and carry them around the office? It is almost certainly true, that the young men Elon invited to join DOGE are unlikely to reject his recommendations. But so what? People in the Obama administration were unlikely to reject Moochelle's recommendations. But that doesn't mean the Senate had to confirm their marriage.
“How many times do we have to go over this. There is no evidence of significant fraud in the 2020 election."
Never mind the 2020 election. We haven’t finished arguing about the 1960 election.
"This is just a ridiculous assertion."
Freder likes to make arguments that require no proof and just rely on his belief that everybody secretly agrees with him because he is so obviously right, and we just pretend not to because we are bad people.
BTW, when do we get to hear them start whining about the fact that there are no women at DOGE? (Never mind the fact that no one knows what a woman is. There should be more of them, a lot more, and some of them should be trans).
Don't need any documents. THE President has the constitutional authority to task an advisor to collect any and all requested information not classified and to task the department heads with cooperating in the Executive branch. Then THE president, the SOLE power in the executive branch can approve or disapprove any recommendations attached to the information again undertaken by the heads of the various executive departments. Congress in its infinite wisdom always authorizes moneys but not the rules concerning the final distribution of those monies leaving it to the executive to make the rules. So, unacceptable rules, or rules not properly followed or in line with THE President's agenda can cause those moneys to be recinded. Thank you framers for Article 2 Section 2.
Freder: guess the crap you read never told you this!
“ The USDS
The USDS was launched on August 11, 2014, by President Barack Obama, and funded in 2021. It provided consultation services to federal agencies on information technology. Its mandate was to improve and simplify digital service, and to improve federal websites.” Trump is using this agency to do the work that DOGE needs to do.
I’ll bet you will still itch and stomp your feet: “Musk can’t do this”! And I laugh every single time at the garbage you post .
And who says there wasn’t any issues with the 2020 election?
https://www.justice.gov/usao-edpa/pr/former-us-congressman-and-philadelphia-political-operative-pleads-guilty-election-fraud
Freder said:
"There is no evidence of significant fraud in the 2020 election. Even Trump's own Attorney General said so."
Bill Barr's excellent book, "One Damn Thing After Another" described Barr's conversations with Trump on this topic. Barr essentially said that you don't have enough evidence to overturn the reported outcome, and you aren't likely to find such evidence before January. That was accurate counsel. Once the mail-in ballot is slipped into the post box or ballot box, it's pretty much lost its auditibility. Joe Biden was recorded as receiving 81 million votes, many more than the 69 million for Obama in 2008, the 65 million for Obama in 2012, and the 75 million for Harris in 2024. Why would people feel any doubts about the 81 million votes, given Biden's strong 2020 campaign and dynamic message? It will be a long time before we have another presidential candidate so masterful that he or she is able to exceed Biden's vote total.
All of this controversy is an argument for voter ID, paper ballots, limited absentee voting, and prompt ballot counting. I very much doubt that the fraud that occurred affected the outcome. The fact that I have any doubt is the reason we need to tighten electoral integrity.
Think of DOGE as investigative journalists granted extraordinary access.
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
What Musk has failed to realize is the evident truth that some people ought not answer their email.
The left's obsession as gatekeepers to Crook Joe's insertion keeps rolling on.
That the Sewer-Democrats are 100% against Voter ID... Tells us everything we need to know about them.
"gilbar said...
now do Hunter (and Jill) being at all the cabinet meetings
3/1/25, 10:28 AM"
Or do Jill RUNNING cabinet meetings.
Is this the judge who issued the injunction to force USAID to pay out all of the monies, which just happened to include tens of millions to the organization his wife runs?
"On what basis do you believe he is only "making recommendations"?"
From reading the news and commentary every damned day. In lieu of tracing down what I read originally, I asked Grok. Answer:
"In his role with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Elon Musk is positioned as an advisor rather than a direct decision-maker. DOGE, despite its name, is not an official government department but an advisory body established by President Donald Trump to provide recommendations on improving government efficiency. Trump has described Musk’s role... as providing “advice and guidance from outside of government,” partnering with the White House and the Office of Management and Budget to suggest reforms. This structure implies that Musk does not have formal authority to execute decisions himself; instead, he analyzes data, identifies inefficiencies, and makes recommendations for others—namely, the President or relevant agency heads—to act upon.
Musk’s designation as a “special government employee” further clarifies his role. This status, as outlined by the White House, limits him to advising Trump and communicating the President’s directives without granting him unilateral power to enact changes. For instance, a White House filing in February 2025 stated that Musk “has no actual or formal authority to make government decisions himself,” a point reinforced by Trump’s own comments that Musk’s actions require approval from higher authorities. Musk’s activities, such as reviewing federal spending or proposing cuts, align with this advisory capacity—his suggestions, like reducing the federal budget by $2 trillion or restructuring agencies, must be channeled through official government processes, often requiring congressional approval or executive action by Trump. However, Musk’s public portrayal and influence blur this line at times. He has framed his involvement as revolutionary, promising to “send shockwaves through the system” and posting on X about transparency in DOGE’s actions, which might suggest a more hands-on role to the public. Critics, including some lawmakers and legal experts, have questioned whether his actions—like accessing sensitive Treasury systems or influencing agency operations—overstep his advisory mandate, prompting lawsuits and ethical debates. Despite this, the legal and operational framework of DOGE positions Musk as a recommender, not an executor. Any direct changes, such as agency shutdowns or staff reductions, would stem from Trump or department heads, not Musk independently. In short, Elon Musk’s role in DOGE is to advise and recommend actions—such as cost-cutting measures or bureaucratic reforms—rather than directly execute decisions, though his outsized influence and proximity to Trump can make that distinction appear less clear in practice."
It's actually kind of an interesting question. In the military, you know who is boss because he can throw your disobedient ass in the brig. But for the rest of us, the boss is The Boss because he can fire you. Period. Except, he can't fire you if you quit.
So, what this judge is effectively asking for, is evidence that Musk can't fire his DOGIEs. Good luck with that one, Your flea-flickin' Honor! Have you heard the one about angels dancing on a pinhead? Your Honor? Nice black dress, by the way.
Musk apparently just announced that the "5 things" email is bullshit. They're not actually interested in what anyone did, but rather they're just running a "pulse check" to see who's alive, but for some reason couldn't be honest about their goal. Good to remember when evaluating Musk's credibility in the future.
On the other hand, the email asks for responses every week going forward, so either he's trying to assess how many federal workers are dying unreported each week, or it's the "pulse check" rationale that's dishonest. Or perhaps there was never any actual thought behind it, beyond five seconds of "hey, this would be cool ."
It sounds like Musk is volunteering his time. He's not an employee of the U.S. government, right?
Yes and no. He's not getting paid anything, and he's classified as a "special government employee." NPR discussion
When the NYT doesn't put things in quotes, I do not trust what you are saying.
On Friday, Joshua E. Gardner, a lawyer in the Justice Department’s civil division, denied that Mr. Musk had any role with the Department of Government Efficiency.
That's obviously ridiculous. Give us the quote, fucker!
"So, what this judge is effectively asking for, is evidence that Musk can't fire his DOGIEs."
No, the judge is relating the facts to actual precedents where the Appointments Clause was interpreted. Remember that the independent counsel under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 Act was not regarded as a principal officer and Senate confirmation was therefore not required.
"Musk apparently just announced that the "5 things" email is bullshit."
Musk said he presented this idea directly to the President and the President told him to do it.
The president’s advisors aren’t officers. People bitched about Valerie Jarrett too.
Get over it
The argument that Senate confirmation is required for a volunteer position where you're not getting paid is idiotic.
This is just a ridiculous assertion.
No, it isn't, and you're flailing. Jarrett was a member of the top level of advisors to Obama, as is Musk to Trump; neither were appointed to any position that was confirmed by the Senate; both had partisans bitching about their influence on policy. Where is the difference, other than you're upset and want there to be one?
In my mind, I equate Musk as filling a role Raphael to 'xxx Czar' that Obama made popular and Biden continued with. He holds no office from which authority is derived to order action, instead he has a position from which he can make recommendations to those who do hold authority to take action. Similar to the relationship between SETA contractors in government offices, particularly the ones with strong engineering backgrounds. Yes, they have no authority to make governmental decisions, but you had better listen to them during discussions because they basically represent the government position which the government side of the program office will then ensure gets enforced.
He should start just calling himself the DOGE Czar as it will both clarify his role and continue to poke his antagonists in the eye.
Every single action taken on DOGE's recommendation has the proper officer implementing them- full stop. Only morons like Fredo and Inga and others could possibly believe that department heads and, both acting and confirmed, aren't the ones firing people within their departments. And we know this because when DOGE oversteps even a little bit it gets immediate pushback from the people Trump himself has appointed. The reason pushback comes is blindingly obvious- it is because the legal counsels overseeing all of this are forcing things to be done in the proper order.
However, let's suppose the judge decides he doesn't believe this- all that is going to happen is that he is going to be buried in the paperwork proving otherwise or he is just going to get overturned very quickly.
No evidence of election fraud in 2020? Didn't Democratic vote-counters in five states shut down the vote counting simultaneously, send the Republican vote-counters home, and then sneak back in and count tens of thousands of votes without supervision? As I recall, those unmonitored votes made all the difference, and in all five states Trump won the election if you count only legitimate votes witnessed by both parties, and Biden only 'won' because the unmonitored votes were somehow - in all five states! - much more pro-Biden than the monitored ones. That may not be proof - coincidences do happen - but it is certainly very strong prima facie evidence of cheating.
I have read that 2020 was the first election in 60 years not to have any 'Making of the President' books written about it. Is that true? If so, why would that be? Is it impossible to write a detailed book about that one election that doesn't show it was crooked as Hell?
Finally, how exactly did five states stop the count simultaneously? Who made the phone calls? Or did they arrange in advance that they would do this, with some kind of bat-signal only visible to those looking for it, so they wouldn't have to make any phone calls? I don't recall any such send-the-other-party's-vote-counters-home shenanigans in any previous election. Having it happen simultaneously in five states - the five that just happened to be the ones where Trump was winning by the smallest margins - by pure coincidence is simply incredible.
You have to be very gullible, or very dishonest, to say that there is no evidence of cheating in 2020. No proof beyond a shadow of a doubt: fair enough. But no evidence?
The belief you wish eradicated will never go away. In fact, I believe it is growing.
Now that we have a small revelation of the nature and scope of what the political/media establishment was up to in USAID and the EPA, the belief that there wasn't widespread and significant election fraud in 2020 seems rather naive, to say the least.
Yeah, Joe Biden didn't have a cabinet meeting for almost a year. They were hiding him from his own cabinet. And when they finally had a meeting, Jill Biden is there.. Where's her confirmation hearing?
The Truman library on the importance of a cabinet.
The President meets with his/her Cabinet frequently to hear their reports and their suggestions. Usually, they meet together once a week or every other week.
Or not!
Many people in the cabinet need to be confirmed by the Senate. That's because, traditionally, cabinet members are very important and you want to keep the in the loop. Not in the dark. Unless you're worried about that 25th Amendment!
Anyway, Musk is not in the cabinet. He's not even working for the government in the classical sense. He's a volunteer! You know, like Jill Biden.
(It would be hilarious if First Ladies had to be confirmed by the Senate, and they voted one or more of them down).
Contemporary evidence and analysis showing the 2020 election was stolen:
https://shylockholmes.substack.com/p/evidence-suggesting-voter-fraud-in
It is instructive to Google "Is White House Chief of Staff confirmed by the Senate?"
The only way you appease corrupt democrats is by letting them control you and then ruin and destroy you. That's how modern Soviet Democratics roll. Obey.
Note what excerpt says and doesn't say- the plaintiffs and the judge aren't even questioning that the actions implemented aren't being done by the proper officers, both superior and inferior- the entire line of attack is trying to pretend that none of those officers are actually implementing stuff at all despite every single piece of evidence saying otherwise. They are trying to pretend that Musk is the one issuing termination orders for both employees and funding. So, why haven't the fired employees showing us the termination orders with Musk's name on it?
@FOOL_NELSON
Little known fact... DOGE's predecessor agency, the US Digital Service, was stood up by Mikey Dickerson who also worked as a contractor for Fusion GPS (think Steele Dossier), potentially related to cyber propaganda. Elon should review his agencies prior actions and communications.
WIKI
The first head of the USDS was Mikey Dickerson, a former Google engineer who had previously been involved in the 2013–14 rescue of the HealthCare.gov website. He was succeeded by Matt Cutts, who held the position until April 2021. The third administrator of the USDS was Mina Hsiang. During the Biden administration, Hsiang led the USDS in deploying a new website about COVID-19 vaccines.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Digital_Service#:~:text=The%20first%20head%20of%20the,the%20USDS%20was%20Mina%20Hsiang.
From reading the news and commentary every damned day. In lieu of tracing down what I read originally, I asked Grok. Answer:
So, with Grok, available, original research is no longer necessary. Good to know.
And Grok claims "[Musk] has framed his involvement as revolutionary, promising to “send shockwaves through the system” and posting on X about transparency in DOGE’s actions, which might suggest a more hands-on role to the public. "
Now this is obviously bullshit. Have you looked at the DOGE website? It is a piece of shit. Plus, he had to take a bunch of savings off after actual journalists looking at his claimed "savings" were bullshit.
Also, most of the site consists of just reposting his shitposts on X, which requires an X subscription to read the full post. As for "transparency", that is a joke too. He just lists the government contracts he has cancelled with zero explanation about why the contracts were cancelled. Even the EO cited does not say one thing about cancelling contracts or recommending closure of agencies and mass layoffs. The stated purpose (according to the EO) of DOGE is to : commence a Software Modernization Initiative to improve the quality and efficiency of government-wide software, network infrastructure, and information technology (IT) systems. Among other things, the USDS Administrator shall work with Agency Heads to promote inter-operability between agency networks and systems, ensure data integrity, and facilitate responsible data collection and synchronization."
I guess all the stuff they are actually doing is included in the catchall phrase "[a]mong other things". What a terrible way to justify cancelling contracts and laying people off.
A New York venue. A New York judge. The outcome is not in doubt in the land the law forgot. Funny how the leftmedia, the Democrats, their judges and their trolls, here and elsewhere, ignore the damage being done to the Party by its unwavering support for grift and waste.
"So, with Grok, available, original research is no longer necessary. Good to know."
Says the person who wanted ME to do HIS research. You do your own research. Or check what I gave you from Grok. You're the one who doubts the assertion.
Didn't Democratic vote-counters in five states shut down the vote counting simultaneously, send the Republican vote-counters home, and then sneak back in and count tens of thousands of votes without supervision?
No they didn't. That is simply another lie
And unlike Althouse, I didn't rely on Grok to tell me about it. And the vast majority of the websites say your contention is bullshit. Sure, you can find right wing websites that promulgate these lies, but I can also find websites that say chemtrails are a real thing.
"..There is no evidence of significant fraud in the 2020 election."
True crime murder suspect:
I wasn't there
I was there but didn't shot him
I shot him, but in self defense.
-----------------
(Progress)
Fraud deniers:
There was no fraud
There was fraud, but no significant fraud..
By the end of the Trump era, only bitter clingers will pretend to believe 2020 was not stolen.
4 Years of HIDDEN un-elected bureaucrats. Hidden. Secret.
(including butt-f***ers on film!) and other various democrat sewer rats... wasting our money on DEI and other hot garbage. All A-OK with the Soviet courts.
Field Mashall Freder: "Sure did. He learned he can ignore the constitution, normal procedures, and say "whatchu going to do about it?"
LOL
Anita friggin' Dunn for dementia boy.
Valerie friggin' Jarrett for obambi
Harry friggin' Hopkins for FDR
The exact same status as Musk...every single one of them.
They're not actually interested in what anyone did
Well, duh. That was made clear at the start.
Says the person who wanted ME to do HIS research. You do your own research.
Well, I did. But you just chose an ad hominem attack instead of addressing the content of my post.
Freder Frederson's link proves the opposite of what he pretends. It says that no state stopped counting votes overnight. Well, duh! That's not the accusation. The accusation is that they sent the Republican vote-counters and poll-watchers home, saying that they were going to stop counting, and then they continued counting without them. The fact that they didn't stop counting is part of the crime, Freder! They should have stopped counting, since they didn't have the bipartisan safeguards against cheating, but they continued counting in a totally corrupt way.
The great thing about Karma and cumupance is that it is real.
The left demanded that Trump be ousted in 2020 - and did so with every crooked method. Including inserting an unpopular old puppet - who was compromised due to his illegal family deals in Ukraine and China. The mob had Biden by his short hairs.
Funny - had they simply let the chips fall - and Trump - who enjoyed a strong economy and peace (no new wars) would have won. Flash forward to the 2024 election - the left could have won an election on their own with a good candidate (big "if" - we know)
Feel the karma. Own it.
The left is opposed to eliminating waste and fraud and is freaking out because someone is looking for it?
Sounds about right.
Obviously, Musk has a huge role advising the president and directing a platoon of IT geeks that are feeding back into the nominal governmental structure who are taking actions based on what the Musk team is discovering.
The more and more I watch this play out, it seems to me that it's really a war between billionaire types. Right now the monetary billionaires are in control of the administrative state and the Democratic party in addition they are also in control of Europe. Because they essentially make their money out of thin air by stealing it out of people's pockets legally, they are not affected by all of the practical regulations that govern everyday life for people in general and for hard and soft industrial corporations.
I think the real fear is that Trump is going to figure out a way to dissolve the Federal reserve system and replace it and all of the people running it servicing it and profiting from it with AI and blockchain technology.
Funny - had they simply let the chips fall - and Trump - who enjoyed a strong economy and peace (no new wars) would have won.
You do know that more service members were killed by hostile action under Trump than Biden? As for the strong economy, it was good (not fantastic or the best economy in the history of the universe) until COVID hit. But of course, everything that happened after that is Fauci's, not Trump's, fault. So much for "the buck stops here".
You wouldn’t have an advisor and then take none of his advice - duh. Of course things Elon suggests are getting done. If not there is no point having him around. Doesn’t mean he isn’t an advisor.
"Well, I did. But you just chose an ad hominem attack instead of addressing the content of my post...."
She quoted from your post, numb-nuts. What, do you expect her to correct your spelling and grammar too, in addition to your thinking?
She quoted from your post, numb-nuts.
After my snark, I did indeed provide information that Grok was incorrect. She did not address those points, just accused me of not doing my own research.
Cook said: Musk can do anything he likes and remain free of oversight or repercussions for any negative outcomes of his unilateral actions.
Do you even think before you post, Kook?
What unilateral "actions" is Musk taking?
He is an advisor as anyone with half a brain understands.
Also, please explain what a unilateral action is? Is it worse that a bilateral action or an omnilateral action?
Freder: "But of course, everything that happened after [Covid started] is Fauci's, not Trump's, fault."
MAGA voters are a bit more sophisticated than that. They believe Fauci and other deep staters, along with senior GOP politicals, stymied the crap out of Trump. They may also blame Trump (I know I do) for not figuring that out much earlier in his first term and doing something about it. But they also look around at the alternatives, and see RINOs, plus MAGA true believers who have even less experience in government than Trump. And Musk isn't a natural-born citizen.
Plus, there is something irresistible about the whole innocent-getting-revenge arc, kind of like I Spit on Your Grave III: MAGA Edition.
So they decided to keep the commander who lost the first battle, in the hope that he's internalized the lessons learnt and won't repeat them.
So far they have been right.
JSM
"The argument is that..."
Democrats think Republicans should only be permitted to do things that Democrats approve of.
Trump campaigned on cutting waste and fraud and a majority of voters approve of his efforts. Democrats don't like it and that's all that matters to them. What the voters want? Who the fuck cares about that, anyway? Not Democrats.
Freder - You are a loyal democrat fool.
Tell us about your side insisting that Covid was from a wet market - and making it a grave sin - with social media banning - to say otherwise.
Freder - tell us about the Pennsylvania Blackrock AD kid (democratic/CIA patsy) who tired to kill Trump and killed an innocent bystander.
And now That kid is cremated and the media are dead silent about all of it.
You loyalist Democratic-Soviets would have cheered had the democratic paid patsy been successful in killing Trump.
The problem isn't Musk or anyone else who advises the president (this president or any president).
The problem is a Judicial Branch that gives hundreds of unelected individuals veto power over matters far beyond their jurisdiction, with no meaningful recourse other than reversal by other unelected members of the Judicial Branch.
When it comes to checks and balances, The Judicial Branch seems exempt.
You fear one man/woman rule? Just give 'em a robe and Humpty Dumpty-like power to declare, "When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean..." and the power to hold those who disagree, "in Contempt" and to punish them immediately.
Actually, the word "judge" seems a bit of a stretch. Many judge only the arguments of mere attorneys' abilities to tie the matter at hand to former interpretations of some possibly relevant aspect of the constitution or law.
Judge Bork famously repsonded to Sen Alan Simpson, asking why he (Bork) wanted to be a Supreme Court Justice by saying, "...I think it would be an intellectual feast to just be there and and to read the briefs and discuss things with counsel and discuss things with my colleagues."
His excitement at the prospect of intellectual excercise is both evident and accurate. BUT his appeal, IMO, is his view -
"I don't think the Constitutuion is studied almost anywhere, including law schools. In law schools, what they study is what the court said about the Constituion. They study the opinions. They don't study the Constitution tself."
If we ever get around to burning books, I think Law Libraries should be first to go. Save the Constitution and existing statutes.
Imagine if Cookie and Freder had an "Alternate Universe AI" to push back on stodgy old Grok? It's easy if you try.
"No, the judge is relating the facts to actual precedents where the Appointments Clause was interpreted."
Yes, that is what judges do, when they are not just expressing their personal preferences in stylized form. But suppose this tyrant in a black dress decides that Musk is, in fact, driving DOGE, and this is totally unacceptable, sans Senate confirmation. Then what? Off with his head? Proscribe him? Tell everyone to pay no attention to that little man behind the curtain?
The DOGists say they are doing what DOGists do. The plaintiffs (who, by the way, has been found to have standing?) are claiming that the DOGists are not doing what DOGists do, but rather are doing what Elon tells them to do. So, I suppose the judge could tell the DOGists that they must stop doing what Elon tells them, and follow their own inclinations instead. Is that the remedy requested?
“ Hey. We're not talking about Valerie Jarret here. Or Hunter Biden.”
Not to mention Jill.
Calling it a department, rather than a commission was a mistake from the beginning. "Department" makes people think of Cabinet secretaries who do need confirmation from the Senate.
Some very powerful posts don't require Senate confirmation. Most of the presidential appointed "czars" didn't need Senate approval. My sense is that Senate confirmation was only required if Congress had created the position by creating an agency or bureau, or if the appointee was also an undersecretary in some department.
As I understand it, Musk is only acting in an advisory role. It would be wise to make it clear that he is not running the government or any part of it other than his own ragtag group of youthful tekkies.
The judge could certainly issue an opinion to the effect that Elon Musk is not the head of DOGE, and cannot be until he has been nominated and undergone Senate confirmation. But he would merely be concurring in the claims of the Trump administration.
Elon Musk fits the role of a "kitchen cabinet" advisor—a close, confidant to the President and other memebers of the adimistration—without ever crossing into federal employment. Historically, Colonel House under Wilson or Harry Hopkins under FDR had great influence as trusted advisors, yet remained outside official government. Musk mirrors this: he’s not on the payroll, holds no formal title, and isn’t shackled by federal rules. No matter how much advice he gives—or how often the President acts on it—Musk isn’t a federal employee because advising isn’t the same as executing. The President and official staff bear the responsibility for decisions; Musk merely shapes the conversation, like a consultant recomending actions while management executs. His influence is real, but his status is not of a goverment employee or officer.
Joining this thread late it’s clear to me the resident lefties are unaccustomed to not getting their way, and now I see why…
It would have been better if Fauci had not changed some definitions in a regulation in order to continue research on bat coronaviruses at Wuhan against Federal law, but hey! He has a pardon for that time period, so I guess he never committed any crimes or did anything that cost millions of lives!
Yeah, Fauci deserves the most blame of anybody for this, even more blame than "patient zero" the Chinese researcher at Wuhan who received millions from USAID to perform research on bat viruses, which had to be altered with a CRISPR machine to infect humans and which no longer would infect the bats they got the viruses from originally.
Musk is the obvious primary and sole leader here. He's in a social circle where he might say "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?" and it would happen in moments. The contrast with Trump 45's leadership style is extreme. Trump's 2025 actions are identical to Musk's behavior with Twitter in 2022. Trump 47's execution has been 100% set by Musk.
Political party = a group of like-minded people on a shared power and control mission. See Biden's followers and lock-step parroting of their inane messages by Congress and in the media.
The Left has shown zero evidence of Musk actually doing something illegal. There's plenty of feet stomping and of course their favorite weapon, the fake news blast.
Is the goal of making government more efficient, or spotting waste and fraud, having any effect? Well according to the DOGE website - "The Commodity Futures Trading Commission took out a yearly subscription to POLITCO, for $255,000, which was renewed on 07/24 for $195,000." - while not a lot of money in the grand scheme of things, it is curious as to why they need a periodical like POLITICO at all, being they provide oversight on Futures Trading.
No, it just seems the Left just can't stand to see the government reduced in size or authority.
Do they prefer this instead - "All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state." - Mussolini
I guess we will find out if our federal government grinds to a halt because of recent staff reductions, sooner or later.
@JIM: "I guess we will find out if our federal government grinds to a halt because of recent staff reductions, sooner or later."
The government could easily function with 50% of its current staff -- if they had modern computer systems and software. It could function with 25% if a bunch of low ROI programs were cut. It can take 25 government employees to screw in a lightbulb: one to stand on a conference table and 24 to rotate the table.
But that's not the issue here, as politicians want stupid new programs to advertise with every election, they want to give away jobs to their supporters after each election (left and right), and they've refused automation to eliminate tedious and complicated jobs for many decades.
"Musk is the obvious primary and sole leader here."
Being among the duller cutlery in the Althouse drawer, I often have trouble seeing the obvious. Consequently, I respectfully request a clarification in sufficient detail to satisfy my sadly low-order noodle. And please don't be enigmatic; it makes one wonder if your comments worth the CPU time investment.
That said, I've enough smarts to know your historical allusion is really, really stupid. There's hardly any historical situation with greater chirality to Trump and Musk than Henry II's difficulties with Thomas à Becket. Yeah, you know the lore, but I conclude you don't understand it.
Robert Cook said..."In other words, Musk can do anything he likes and remain free of oversight or repercussions for any negative outcomes of his unilateral actions."
This assertion, and the assertion that Musk is "in charge" are so ridiculous that I'm surprised people aren't embarrassed to make them. Does anyone believe that if Musk "did" something which met with Trump's disapproval that Musk wishes would prevail? Anyone?
Post a Comment
Comments older than 2 days are always moderated. Newer comments may be unmoderated, but are still subject to a spam filter and may take a few hours to get released. Thanks for your contributions and your patience.