The question is not so much "will it work", Of course it will to some extent to some people. (I have a bunch or Normie friends that chant NYT narrative talking points. i would have lunch with them this week, but I already know exactly what they will say...)
The point is: does it work in "net." There is a cost for everything and in this case it is in the declining reputation of the NYT et al in of broadcasting something so obviously prima facie absurd. It sets a new level or reeking with desperation, enough so that many left of center people won't chant it.
This "worked" at least for a while for other narrative psyops. Jan 6th Hunter Biden Laptop, safe and effective. You could tell the effectiveness of the narrative by how many semi susceptible people chanted it.
This will have a net loss. Those who chant it will seem guilty of supporting corruption, not the "good people doing the good things" image needed for the "successful" narratives.
MSM is now longer digging a dyke. it is now digging a grave. Dig faster I say.
Hopefully DOGE can find and terminate the Social Security employee who stole my mother's payment by redirecting it into employee's own bank account. No joke. There was even a process to investigate it. You know it happens a lot when the agency has to create a process to deal with it. This happened almost two years ago, and I would bet big money that person still works there. But hopefully not for long. https://signalflare.substack.com/p/inside-job
Not to mention the beneficiary who dies and leave nobody behind to notify SS. How long does it take for SS to find out on their own? Anybody dare a guess? Am I THREATENING DEMOCRACY just by asking?
Happens a lot. The person dies, the beneficiary hides body somewhere, A freezer works, and beneficiary keeps on receiving the check. I read one story that the jig was up when freezer died, beneficiary was out of town and stink was overwhelming for neighbors.
Shameful and unacceptable. Have you contacted your congressman? This is the sort of thing "Congressionals" are for. Also, contact your local conservative radio station with details--amazing how public shame can work.
Now's the time, because you get that payment back WITH INTEREST. Go!
Thrilled to see fellow fans of Jabberwocky! These made my day. ❤️
Many thanks to each of you who kindly responded.
I had to memorize a poem and recite it in Jr. High many moons ago, and Jabberwocky was the one I chose. It has stuck in my head all these years, no doubt in great part because of the strange quirky words Carroll came up with, as well as the bouncy rhythm of the stanzas.
Their arguments reveal their personal roles in the ongoing financial fraud, and that intellectually, they are frauds as well.
With arguments no better than this, from civil servants once in high office, it is plain to see why we are an empire in decline.
Their poor arguments are also clear warning that they, and folks like them, do not believe in the Constituition and crossed their fingers behind their backs when they swore an oath to uphold it.
May posterity forget they were ever our countrymen.
“This is the thing that's killing me. How did people like this end up in charge? How did we elevate all the worst people to the highest positions?”
If you’re talking about the folks who wrote the piece, I think you’re overthinking it.
Some of them are indeed the best and brightest the left have to offer. Rubin, Summers, Geithner in particular are indeed center-left, not hard left, and all without doubt very sharp.
I think you’re just wrong to suggest that these are the worst people on the left. I actually think they are among the *better*, less-evil, and NOT stupid ones on the left.
And their “norms” argument is fine enough, as far as it goes. In fact, I’m even willing to grant that they believe this particular group of servants legit is non-partisan, and that they might actually be. But so what, even if true?
That said, you’re 100% right to question how these folks could sign on to a piece like this.
My *suspicion* is that it’s because they still think they’re living in the age where the MSM fully control the narrative, and that as elites who know best, it is appropriate to use disinformation and disingenuous arguments so long as it is in service to their view of the greater good.
P.S. this comment above about “worst people” aside, fantastic piece that is spot on. Kudos.
I agree with Chris that these are the worst people. They know this argument is fallacious, yet advance it as true. They know that the angelic, wise, non-partisan civil servant is a myth created to obscure the fact that everyone acts in their own self interest. After all 95% of Washington DC bureaucrats voted for the democrat in their self interest, giving the lie to the non-partisan canard.
So Yellen and Colleagues are not acting out of innocent misunderstanding of the Constitution but deliberately misleading the public about the actual structure of the Executive Branch. Quite simply lying. Purposely. Not likely a new habit they just picked up.
I’m just emphasizing that not only do I not think they are the worst of the Dem leadership / elites, they are imo nowhere close to the worst.
But this is more an indictment of the entirety of today’s Dem leadership than any kind of defense of them - or surely of their behavior in signing this piece.
Maybe we didn't elevate them to the highest positions at all. Maybe they clawed their way to the top with perseverance and a little extra help from their friends. I guess we by default elevated them then. The universe is full of vacuum, sucking everything into its vortex to fill the void.
This was the party that had Kamala Harris, a person who cannot put together a coherent sentence or thought, as their presidential candidate. So the intellectually bankrupt party continues to show itself naked to the world.
By the time Kamala was elevated to the nomination without votes, her sentences and thoughts were *clearly* more coherent than those of the sitting president she replaced…
Great picture. Joe and Kamala……..these are the leaders the left picks to lead the free world. Aging dementia patient and Lawyer Barbie. Definitely should go back to merit based candidates.
When obedience to authority and observing the forms and rituals takes precedence over the result and the resources and methods used, you get this.
It's a human thing, and it may crop up under any system. The only real safeguards I can think of are:
>Having a code of ethics, as a culture, that makes it clear such actions are wrong
>Making sure officials of any kind, on every level, are in some way immediately accountable to the electorate; essentially, every executive position ought to be an elected one, rather than by appointment. Corollary to this, government on must therefore be so small that the electorate can keep track of candidates and elected persons. (Or a lottery, where everyone is eligible to win, but only once in their life for any given position. Would also be the most representative system.)
>Locking wages for elected officials and civil servants to the same amount, plus 15%, as minimum wage.
>Making being elected a chore: upon election, the state confiscates your assets of any kind and deposits an amount equal in value in a locked account. When leaving office, you get the money, not adjusted for inflation.
Et cetera, in a similar vein. That way, slick grifters who don't want to put their shoulder to the wheel, will go look elsewhere for opportunities.
You can tell they’re loyal to the British Crown by their use of the term “civil servants.” No Americans ever used that phrase until recently. They should all be hanged for treason.
All I see in these former leaders is neglect of their duties to ethically manage taxpayer dollars. In reality these ghost payments that DOGE have found are most likely end-around pathways to funnel money to activist orgs and NGOs. These NGOs/activist groups then give these former leaders some of this money back in salaries to be on boards or as speaking/consulting fees. It’s that simple. It’s one enormous scam.
Congress may have the power of the purse (dictating what is to be spent on what), but Treasury cuts the checks and has its own responsibilities.
And if Congress doesn't do its job and specify exactly what is to be spent on exactly what, well, no crying if the executive has to make judgment calls.
I suppose Congress could micromanage this process, but they're too lazy and chickenhearted to do the heavy lifting there.
Congress wants no part of the details. Just authorize great gobs of money and let someone else smear it around; with a cut to the appropriate people. That is USAID, and many other agencies, in a nutshell.
The New York Times arguing against auditing the gubmint office paying them $3 million to cover for them. This despite the NYT’s ownership by a Mexican billionaire. Precious.
Definitely the liberal media is on the payroll as huge amounts of taxpayer dollars slosh around! “ Will you come between a fool and his money ?”as Bad Company asked decades ago
They are consistent in their inconsistencies, misdirection and deceptions. They can't speak truth because it would incriminate them. The best part of their accusation is that they are admitting to the country being ruled by captured and empowered bureaucrats, electors only as figureheads. They are shocked and retreating to the worn-out playbook they've used for years. Now if only judges would not be given so much authority as they so often and easily reverse voter's wishes. They and their defenders will throw fits like three-year-olds and lie and point fingers, but their credibility is shot.
Let us remember the bold face lies they spoke recently repeatedly to us without blinking, Fauci "safe and effective"; Mayorkas, "the border is secure." We can make the conclusion that whatever the swamp creatures say, exactly the opposite is true.
But at least they are not doing the, "misinformation" defense. (which sadly kinda worked for a while, WAYYYY too many people bought the Hunter Biden laptop disinformation ruse)
This, "you can't audit our books", is a much weaker defense (prima facie absurd and false) and won't work.
The "Musk has our Social Security numbers!"FUD screams of desperation.
How is it possible that Musk, a presidential appointee, should not be allowed access to the Treasury’s payment system because he is unelected (although Trump, who appointed him, has been elected), but “nonpartisan civil servants” who are unelected (and, unlike Musk, unaccountable) should have access?
“No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.”
When was the last time that Congress complied with this section of the Constitution? It doesn’t say ‘if you want to’, or ‘if it pleases your highness’, it says “shall be published from time to time”! It’s fucking time!
Are the “arguments” being made by these types actually landing with anyone anywhere? Or is all this simply bad theatre, a sort of town meeting in a Potemkin village?
They are trying to leverage status as former Treasury Secretaries to mislead the public regarding the Constitution, and I suspect for some individuals that stature may be persuasive. Mostly preaching to the choir however.
This will definitely get the Karen Class in a tizzy, the NYT "argument" has all of the narrative chanting points for them to feel Q.E.D.
Your and Musk's rebuttal can finally has the reach to be effective.
This is "51 former intelligence officers say Russian Disinformation!" 2.0 and it won't work this time.
No one is getting blue pilled. NO ONE. The red pilling may take longer than it should, but it is accelerating.
The total number of people who will be red pilled from this is 0.
Good analogy at the end. But it will "work" - at least, on the people whose opinions they care about.
The question is not so much "will it work", Of course it will to some extent to some people. (I have a bunch or Normie friends that chant NYT narrative talking points. i would have lunch with them this week, but I already know exactly what they will say...)
The point is: does it work in "net." There is a cost for everything and in this case it is in the declining reputation of the NYT et al in of broadcasting something so obviously prima facie absurd. It sets a new level or reeking with desperation, enough so that many left of center people won't chant it.
This "worked" at least for a while for other narrative psyops. Jan 6th Hunter Biden Laptop, safe and effective. You could tell the effectiveness of the narrative by how many semi susceptible people chanted it.
This will have a net loss. Those who chant it will seem guilty of supporting corruption, not the "good people doing the good things" image needed for the "successful" narratives.
MSM is now longer digging a dyke. it is now digging a grave. Dig faster I say.
Hopefully DOGE can find and terminate the Social Security employee who stole my mother's payment by redirecting it into employee's own bank account. No joke. There was even a process to investigate it. You know it happens a lot when the agency has to create a process to deal with it. This happened almost two years ago, and I would bet big money that person still works there. But hopefully not for long. https://signalflare.substack.com/p/inside-job
Not to mention the beneficiary who dies and leave nobody behind to notify SS. How long does it take for SS to find out on their own? Anybody dare a guess? Am I THREATENING DEMOCRACY just by asking?
Happens a lot. The person dies, the beneficiary hides body somewhere, A freezer works, and beneficiary keeps on receiving the check. I read one story that the jig was up when freezer died, beneficiary was out of town and stink was overwhelming for neighbors.
Not all beneficiaries will fit in a standard freezer, I presume.
Disassembly required
I'm starting to wonder if it's those dead folks who voted for Brandon.
Biden looks in the mirror: "I see dead people!"
Shameful and unacceptable. Have you contacted your congressman? This is the sort of thing "Congressionals" are for. Also, contact your local conservative radio station with details--amazing how public shame can work.
Now's the time, because you get that payment back WITH INTEREST. Go!
Thank you! Something tells me the public shaming route will be more fruitful. And you're right--it is shameful and unacceptable.
Standing up for aging parents means you earn the right to fight dirty.
If you need any help or encouragement, find me on substack, DM is fine. I've had some experience with this sort of feckless bullying.
It’s definitely Brillig o’clock and well past time to grab our vorpal blades and slay the Jabberwock!
Lewis Carroll’s wonderful nonsense poem makes far more sense than anything that spews forth from the mouthpieces of the blob.
They are slithy toves!
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe...
All mimsy were the borogoves
And the mome raths outgrabe.
Beware the JubJub Bird and shun the Frumious Bandersnatch!
Also, take no prisoners.
Thrilled to see fellow fans of Jabberwocky! These made my day. ❤️
Many thanks to each of you who kindly responded.
I had to memorize a poem and recite it in Jr. High many moons ago, and Jabberwocky was the one I chose. It has stuck in my head all these years, no doubt in great part because of the strange quirky words Carroll came up with, as well as the bouncy rhythm of the stanzas.
It’s my fave of all time! 🥳
Their arguments reveal their personal roles in the ongoing financial fraud, and that intellectually, they are frauds as well.
With arguments no better than this, from civil servants once in high office, it is plain to see why we are an empire in decline.
Their poor arguments are also clear warning that they, and folks like them, do not believe in the Constituition and crossed their fingers behind their backs when they swore an oath to uphold it.
May posterity forget they were ever our countrymen.
"...and that intellectually, they are frauds as well."
This is the thing that's killing me. How did people like this end up in charge? How did we elevate all the worst people to the highest positions?
We were too busy living in reality to notice.
or being seduced by award shows,gossip, advertisements and trinkets.
Real good point
Very true.
“This is the thing that's killing me. How did people like this end up in charge? How did we elevate all the worst people to the highest positions?”
If you’re talking about the folks who wrote the piece, I think you’re overthinking it.
Some of them are indeed the best and brightest the left have to offer. Rubin, Summers, Geithner in particular are indeed center-left, not hard left, and all without doubt very sharp.
I think you’re just wrong to suggest that these are the worst people on the left. I actually think they are among the *better*, less-evil, and NOT stupid ones on the left.
And their “norms” argument is fine enough, as far as it goes. In fact, I’m even willing to grant that they believe this particular group of servants legit is non-partisan, and that they might actually be. But so what, even if true?
That said, you’re 100% right to question how these folks could sign on to a piece like this.
My *suspicion* is that it’s because they still think they’re living in the age where the MSM fully control the narrative, and that as elites who know best, it is appropriate to use disinformation and disingenuous arguments so long as it is in service to their view of the greater good.
P.S. this comment above about “worst people” aside, fantastic piece that is spot on. Kudos.
I agree with Chris that these are the worst people. They know this argument is fallacious, yet advance it as true. They know that the angelic, wise, non-partisan civil servant is a myth created to obscure the fact that everyone acts in their own self interest. After all 95% of Washington DC bureaucrats voted for the democrat in their self interest, giving the lie to the non-partisan canard.
So Yellen and Colleagues are not acting out of innocent misunderstanding of the Constitution but deliberately misleading the public about the actual structure of the Executive Branch. Quite simply lying. Purposely. Not likely a new habit they just picked up.
To be clear we are agreeing that they are bad.
I’m just emphasizing that not only do I not think they are the worst of the Dem leadership / elites, they are imo nowhere close to the worst.
But this is more an indictment of the entirety of today’s Dem leadership than any kind of defense of them - or surely of their behavior in signing this piece.
Maybe we didn't elevate them to the highest positions at all. Maybe they clawed their way to the top with perseverance and a little extra help from their friends. I guess we by default elevated them then. The universe is full of vacuum, sucking everything into its vortex to fill the void.
I think John Carter may have the answer.
https://barsoom.substack.com/p/the-blitzkrieg-through-the-institutions
This was the party that had Kamala Harris, a person who cannot put together a coherent sentence or thought, as their presidential candidate. So the intellectually bankrupt party continues to show itself naked to the world.
Hey, c’mon now.
By the time Kamala was elevated to the nomination without votes, her sentences and thoughts were *clearly* more coherent than those of the sitting president she replaced…
Marginal improvement
Great picture. Joe and Kamala……..these are the leaders the left picks to lead the free world. Aging dementia patient and Lawyer Barbie. Definitely should go back to merit based candidates.
the cunt and corpse is the phrase on the streets
When obedience to authority and observing the forms and rituals takes precedence over the result and the resources and methods used, you get this.
It's a human thing, and it may crop up under any system. The only real safeguards I can think of are:
>Having a code of ethics, as a culture, that makes it clear such actions are wrong
>Making sure officials of any kind, on every level, are in some way immediately accountable to the electorate; essentially, every executive position ought to be an elected one, rather than by appointment. Corollary to this, government on must therefore be so small that the electorate can keep track of candidates and elected persons. (Or a lottery, where everyone is eligible to win, but only once in their life for any given position. Would also be the most representative system.)
>Locking wages for elected officials and civil servants to the same amount, plus 15%, as minimum wage.
>Making being elected a chore: upon election, the state confiscates your assets of any kind and deposits an amount equal in value in a locked account. When leaving office, you get the money, not adjusted for inflation.
Et cetera, in a similar vein. That way, slick grifters who don't want to put their shoulder to the wheel, will go look elsewhere for opportunities.
In the Peter principle you are promoted till you are ineffective. With DEI you are promoted until the system collapses.
In many cases, the color was right, and that does go for ANY color.
I rather hope their names live on in infamy, so we don’t forget how easily men and women can be corrupted and turn on their own people and country.
Eternal vigilance must be called forth. May we never fall asleep at the wheel again.
You can tell they’re loyal to the British Crown by their use of the term “civil servants.” No Americans ever used that phrase until recently. They should all be hanged for treason.
All I see in these former leaders is neglect of their duties to ethically manage taxpayer dollars. In reality these ghost payments that DOGE have found are most likely end-around pathways to funnel money to activist orgs and NGOs. These NGOs/activist groups then give these former leaders some of this money back in salaries to be on boards or as speaking/consulting fees. It’s that simple. It’s one enormous scam.
Another revolving door. How many are there in bureaucracy, I wonder? It’s absolutely staggering. I don’t understand how people can defend this.
It's the agencies themselves that are usurping the power of the purse.
Video of Tin Pool interviewing former USAID workers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7M2vS6c_1c
Congress may have the power of the purse (dictating what is to be spent on what), but Treasury cuts the checks and has its own responsibilities.
And if Congress doesn't do its job and specify exactly what is to be spent on exactly what, well, no crying if the executive has to make judgment calls.
I suppose Congress could micromanage this process, but they're too lazy and chickenhearted to do the heavy lifting there.
Congress wants no part of the details. Just authorize great gobs of money and let someone else smear it around; with a cut to the appropriate people. That is USAID, and many other agencies, in a nutshell.
All aided and abetted by regime media
The New York Times arguing against auditing the gubmint office paying them $3 million to cover for them. This despite the NYT’s ownership by a Mexican billionaire. Precious.
Definitely the liberal media is on the payroll as huge amounts of taxpayer dollars slosh around! “ Will you come between a fool and his money ?”as Bad Company asked decades ago
They are consistent in their inconsistencies, misdirection and deceptions. They can't speak truth because it would incriminate them. The best part of their accusation is that they are admitting to the country being ruled by captured and empowered bureaucrats, electors only as figureheads. They are shocked and retreating to the worn-out playbook they've used for years. Now if only judges would not be given so much authority as they so often and easily reverse voter's wishes. They and their defenders will throw fits like three-year-olds and lie and point fingers, but their credibility is shot.
Let us remember the bold face lies they spoke recently repeatedly to us without blinking, Fauci "safe and effective"; Mayorkas, "the border is secure." We can make the conclusion that whatever the swamp creatures say, exactly the opposite is true.
Totally true.
But at least they are not doing the, "misinformation" defense. (which sadly kinda worked for a while, WAYYYY too many people bought the Hunter Biden laptop disinformation ruse)
This, "you can't audit our books", is a much weaker defense (prima facie absurd and false) and won't work.
The "Musk has our Social Security numbers!"FUD screams of desperation.
How is it possible that Musk, a presidential appointee, should not be allowed access to the Treasury’s payment system because he is unelected (although Trump, who appointed him, has been elected), but “nonpartisan civil servants” who are unelected (and, unlike Musk, unaccountable) should have access?
Because they are the good people. How could you not know this? 😉
Unelected administration employees are auditing the work of…
…unelected administration employees.
Since we’ve cited Lewis Carroll, let’s pull in Dr. Seuss and his Bee Watcher Watchers.
To make the audits completely redundant, there should be a third team of auditors working to break any ties.
Brilliant point!!
Awesome job! Thank you!
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/29/how-a-country-lawyer-pulled-off-the-biggest-social-security-fraud-ever-and-why-it-could-happen-again.html
That's impressive numbers 🤯
A random wealthy dude in Minnetonka where I live asked for money from the state for vaguely social service reasons and got two or three million.
The somalis have swindled the state with their complicity for half a billion? Feeding our future and other scams including daycare rackets.
Watching it all unravel brings us joy
So So So much joy
They made a Netflix doc on that sleazball.
The Big Conn - pretty good documentary.
US Constitution
Article I
Section 9 Powers Denied Congress
Clause 7 Appropriations
“No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.”
When was the last time that Congress complied with this section of the Constitution? It doesn’t say ‘if you want to’, or ‘if it pleases your highness’, it says “shall be published from time to time”! It’s fucking time!
Why would we want the President interfering with operations of the Executive Branch? Joe Biden never did!
Are the “arguments” being made by these types actually landing with anyone anywhere? Or is all this simply bad theatre, a sort of town meeting in a Potemkin village?
I’m sure they play very well with the midwit college-educated left that is the core of the Dem party and almost the entirety of the Dem activist base.
They are trying to leverage status as former Treasury Secretaries to mislead the public regarding the Constitution, and I suspect for some individuals that stature may be persuasive. Mostly preaching to the choir however.