The Morning Sixpack - February 12, 2025
Trump & Musk are tearing down all of our institutions and only the Courts seem to be putting up any resistance. And that resistance is tenuous, at best.
Listen to the pod!
Trump Administration Sued Over Unpaid USAID Contracts, Mass Layoffs
A new lawsuit alleges that the Trump administration’s dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has left American businesses with hundreds of millions of dollars in unpaid invoices for completed work.
The administration’s abrupt freeze on foreign aid has also led to mass layoffs, including 750 furloughs at Chemonics International, a major USAID contractor.
“One cannot overstate the impact of that unlawful course of conduct: on businesses large and small forced to shut down their programs and let employees go; on hungry children across the globe who will go without; on populations around the world facing deadly disease; and on our constitutional order,” plaintiffs stated in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, represents 170 small businesses, major suppliers, humanitarian organizations, and legal groups.
It names President Donald Trump, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, acting USAID Deputy Administrator Peter Marocco, and Russell Vought, the head of the Office of Management and Budget, as defendants.
The case marks at least the third legal challenge to the administration’s aggressive efforts to shut down USAID, which Trump and ally Elon Musk have publicly criticized as being misaligned with their agenda.
The funding freeze, ordered under Trump’s Jan. 20 executive order, has disrupted critical aid deliveries, stalled $500 million in humanitarian goods, and could result in as many as 566,000 deaths due to delayed medical supplies.
Despite the legal challenges, the administration has defended its actions, arguing that USAID staffers' "insubordination" and "noncompliance" necessitated a halt in funding and operations.
Marocco, a key figure in the agency's overhaul, insisted in a court affidavit that the shutdown was required to conduct a program-by-program review. However, critics argue that the administration lacks the authority to withhold funding mandated by Congress.
As the legal battle unfolds, businesses, aid groups, and displaced workers await answers—and payment—for their work.
Source: AP
Musk’s Education Cuts Spark Legal Showdown Over Research and Student Data
Elon Musk’s team of sociopathic incels has announced $900 million in cuts to the Department of Education (that he cannot legally do), with a primary focus on gutting the Institute of Education Sciences, the agency responsible for research and data-driven policy.
The move, which includes the termination of 89 contracts and 29 grants tied to diversity and equity programs, comes just weeks after federal data revealed historic lows in reading achievement. Sounds like the right thing to do!
Critics warn that the cuts will cripple research into crucial issues like absenteeism and student behavioral challenges, raising alarms among educators, researchers, and lawmakers.
“An unelected billionaire is now bulldozing the research arm of the Department of Education — taking a wrecking ball to high-quality research and basic data we need to improve our public schools,” said Senator Patty Murray.
At a press conference with President Trump, Musk defended his team’s aggressive cost-cutting, calling the federal bureaucracy “an unelected, fourth unconstitutional branch of government” (how quaint) and claiming it wields too much power (pot… meet kettle?).
While he touted transparency, Education Department employees and contractors scrambled to understand the extent of the terminations. The cuts have already impacted major research initiatives, including large-scale studies on student performance, school safety, and support programs for disabled youth.
Some researchers compare the disruption to eliminating federal funding for medical research, arguing that education data is one of the government’s longest-standing public policy functions.
The cuts have also triggered legal challenges, with a federal judge temporarily restricting Musk’s team from accessing student financial aid records amid privacy concerns. What the actual fuck? How do Democrats in Congress NOT storm the fucking buildings Musk is in? There will be blood—eventually. But it won’t be your congressperson’s.
The University of California Student Association and legal advocacy groups argue that Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) (a fake department) is unlawfully combing through sensitive data without oversight. (They are.)
“DOGE employees have no legitimate need for students and their families’ personal information,” said attorney Adam Pulver.
The Justice Department acknowledged it had not been briefed on the extent of Musk’s team’s access to private student records. Plausible deniability? YEP!
As lawsuits and political battles mount, the full impact of Musk’s shakeup of the Education Department remains unclear. Except for this fact: It’s illegal. And it’s complete bullshit.
Source: NYT
Try not to laugh too hard. Or cry.
Musk Defends ‘Doge’ Transparency Amid Federal Takeover and Legal Scrutiny
Standing beside Donald Trump in the Oval Office, Elon Musk insisted that his Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) (a fake department) is operating with "maximum transparency" as it reshapes the federal government.
However, his claims starkly contrast with reports of deep secrecy surrounding Doge’s operations, including staff refusing to disclose their identities and Musk himself avoiding public financial disclosures.
“We are actually trying to be as transparent as possible,” Musk stated, pointing to Doge’s social media updates.
Remember, if you have to say you’re being—or trying to be—honest, you most definitely are not being honest. Musk is a lying sociopathic imbecile.
Yet, the reality suggests otherwise, with even White House officials reportedly caught off guard by Musk’s rapid and aggressive cost-cutting measures across multiple agencies.
Musk’s team of incels has been accused of operating in secrecy while pushing out career officials and accessing sensitive government data.
One of his most controversial assertions involved unproven allegations that USAID officials had taken “kickbacks” and that government employees had amassed tens of millions of dollars illicitly.
Meanwhile, Doge’s sweeping cuts have sparked legal challenges, including a federal injunction temporarily blocking Musk’s team from accessing Treasury Department payment systems.
Additionally, reports indicate that Doge personnel have been avoiding scrutiny by withholding last names and objecting to being added to government directories.
Essentially, they are saying they are government employees, but “please leave us out of the employee directory.” Right…
Despite mounting pushback, Musk remains defiant, even suggesting that any missteps could simply be undone.
“Some of the things that I say will be incorrect and should be corrected. Nobody’s going to bat 1,000,” he said, implying that any errors in Doge’s restructuring efforts could be reversed.
However, critics argue that the damage may already be done as Doge eliminates research funding, disrupts federal agencies, and oversteps legal boundaries.
Meanwhile, Trump, who largely remained silent during Musk’s press briefing, continues to back Doge’s bureaucratic destruction as part of his broader agenda to destroy the federal government.
Source: The Guardian
Trump Halts Enforcement of Antibribery Law, Citing ‘Uneven Playing Field’ for U.S. Firms
In a controversial move (aren’t they all?), President Trump has ordered a halt to the enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), a landmark anti-bribery law that has been in place since 1977.
The law prohibits U.S. companies from bribing foreign officials to secure business deals, and it has been a key tool for federal authorities in cracking down on corporate corruption.
Trump’s executive order argues that the law has been "abused in a manner that harms the interests of the United States" and claims its enforcement is hindering U.S. foreign policy and economic competitiveness.
The FCPA has been used to prosecute some of the world’s largest corporations, including Goldman Sachs, which paid $2.9 billion in 2020 to settle allegations that its Malaysian subsidiary funneled $1 billion in bribes to foreign officials.
More recently, U.S. prosecutors accused Indian tycoon Gautam Adani of bribing Indian officials, though his company has denied the allegations as "baseless."
Critics argue that pausing enforcement sends the wrong message, effectively giving corporations a green light to engage in corrupt practices abroad without consequence.
This decision is likely to spark heated debate, particularly among those who view the FCPA as a crucial safeguard against global corruption. Supporters of Trump’s move, however, argue that the law disproportionately penalizes American businesses while foreign competitors operate with fewer restrictions.
With this pause in enforcement, the future of corporate accountability in international dealings remains uncertain.
Source: MDGN
Which leads to… the next story!
Trump DOJ Drops Bribery Case Against Eric Adams, Citing Politics Over Evidence
In a not-shocking reversal, the Trump administration directed federal prosecutors in Manhattan to drop bribery charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, citing political considerations rather than the strength of the case.
The decision, handed down by Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove III, claimed that prosecuting Adams would "unduly restrict" his (Bove’s) ability to focus on key issues like illegal immigration and violent crime—problems Bove blamed on the previous Biden administration.
Basically, Bove is saying that he can’t handle the workload. Maybe he should have thought about the onerous job he was taking on before he accepted it.
But no, that’s not how these sociopaths work. They WANT the government to fail.
Legal experts and former prosecutors were stunned, calling the move an unprecedented injection of politics into the Justice Department’s handling of corruption cases.
Adams had been accused of accepting bribes from foreign interests, including Turkish entities, in exchange for political favors. Sounds like a great use for the FCPA, huh?
The case, brought by federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York, had reportedly gathered substantial evidence.
However, the directive from Washington overruled local prosecutors, disregarding the traditional independence of U.S. attorney offices.
“The U.S. attorney community is in shock at the language of the memo, the political nature of the scores being settled,” said Tim Purdon, a former U.S. attorney for North Dakota.
Critics argue that this intervention represents a dangerous precedent, where legal decisions are dictated by political calculations rather than the rule of law. Welcome to Trumplandia!
This move is part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to weaken federal corruption enforcement. Attorney General Pam Bondi has signaled a shift away from aggressively prosecuting public officials, favoring a more lenient approach that critics say will embolden corrupt actors.
“No one is saying that there is not a chain of command, but independence of U.S. attorney offices from the politics of Washington is a crown jewel of our government, and I think this memo certainly sends a message that that crown jewel is under attack,” Purdon added.
As the fallout continues, many are questioning whether political loyalty now outweighs legal accountability in the highest levels of government.
Let’s leave this one right here:
"The actions send a message that going forward, you can get good contracts by paying bribes," said Debra LaPrevotte, a former FBI agent.
Source: NYT
I leave you with this, a stunning but not surprising statement from none other than nearly-absent JD Vance, supposedly the Vice President:
Vance Challenges Judicial Oversight as Trump’s Agenda Faces Court Battles
Supposed “Vice President” JD Vance has escalated the Trump administration’s challenge to the judiciary, arguing that federal judges are overstepping their authority in blocking executive actions.
"Judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power," Vance wrote on X, as lawsuits continue to stall key parts of Trump's aggressive cost-cutting agenda.
The key word above is “legitimate.” What Trump is doing is illegitimate.
His comments came after a federal judge halted members of Trump's newly formed Department of Government Efficiency (Doge), led by Elon Musk, from accessing sensitive Treasury Department systems. The ruling, prompted by a lawsuit from 19 state attorneys general, alleges that the administration violated federal law by granting Musk’s team access to Americans' financial and personal data.
The Trump administration has faced over two dozen legal challenges in its first three weeks, with federal courts blocking several executive orders on constitutional grounds.
Critics, including Democratic Senator Chris Murphy, have called the administration’s attempts to bypass judicial oversight "the most serious constitutional crisis the country has faced, certainly since Watergate."
Meanwhile, Trump dismissed the latest court ruling as a "disgrace," while Musk called it "insane," arguing, "How on Earth are we supposed to stop fraud and waste of taxpayer money without looking at how money is spent?" When you’re looking for waste, fraud, and/or abuse, you bring in auditors who provide evidence of wrongdoing and make suggestions on how to right the wrongs. You don’t bring in coders who know nothing about any of this. Musk is such a danger. He really is a Bond supervillain.
The legal battle underscores the growing tension between the judiciary and a White House determined to push through its policies at breakneck speed.
Vance’s remarks reflect a broader strategy to challenge the courts' ability to check executive power.
He compared judicial rulings on Trump’s policies to an imaginary scenario in which a judge tried to dictate military operations or prosecutorial decisions.
Former Representative Liz Cheney swiftly rebuked Vance, warning, "If you believe any of the multiple federal courts that have ruled against you so far are exceeding their statutory or constitutional authority, your recourse is to appeal. You don't get to rage-quit the Republic just because you are losing. That’s tyranny."
And Cheney knows about tyranny—her dad was VP during the George W. Bush years, when he circumvented all sorts of laws to get us into the almost-forever Iraq War and subsequent prisoner torture, including waterboarding.
With a hearing scheduled for Friday, the legal battle over Doge’s access to treasury systems is shaping up to be a critical test of the administration’s willingness to abide by the rule of law.
Source: BBC