The correct way for the government to reel in USAID would be for congress to give them less funding and to tell them specifically what they want funded. Regardless if it offends you personally, those are all lawful uses of the money and the only illegal thing that's happened here is the funding being stopped by the President.
First, I would not trust the current USAID disbursement personnel not to piss the money into the wind. I want them gone.
And it's not a question of being offended personally - these are just ridiculous expenses that cannot possibly be justified. But I am indeed offended that the amount 4x of my real estate taxes that I can barely scrape off the bottom of a barrel is being wasted on some opera abroad. If you are wondering why people vote for Trump, this is one of those reasons.
Regarding legality of funding being stopped by the President, I am not a lawyer (and I am guessing neither are you), so I am not going to take your legal opinion on this and will wait for the courts to issue the final ruling.
That they are senseless enough to their their personal opinions on budgeting should run the entire government, and that their little agendas are the reason everything should burn to the ground? Yes, that is why people voted for trump (they are stupid and vindictive).
You can't berate or threaten people into thinking your voting or political opinions are smart/well founded. It either is or it isn't.
Watching Trump illegally destroy institutions that collectively use <5% of the federal budget, while increasing the defect, and rationalizing it as "At least Trump is trying to do something about the runaway government spending" is stupid. Straight up stupid.
The fact that there’s a specific law called the Impoundment Control Act where the specific actions Trump is trying were made illegal should give you a hint to which way the court cases are going to go..
Why are you confident the Supreme Court will not declare the Impoundment Control Act an unconstitutional restriction of executive power? Or declare the only recourse is impeachment? Who do you expect would enforce the ruling you predicted?
That is surely the elephant in the room.. every time it’s been litigated before the court in the past, the Act has been found constitutional but who knows with this specific set of justices and their obsequiousness to Trump and his executive branch.
Those numbers are for the wrong line items, and the WH press secretary was wrong about the source of those funds. Both of those were out of the state department budget, which (putting aside the present murky status) did not oversee USAID at the time.
What can I say... if you are correct about this (there are a lot of claims from both sides but no proofs), I hope DOGE gets its hands on the State Department, too. We have enough worthy causes to take care of inside the US.
