DOGE claims to be auditing FEMA. But sources within FEMA report that the DOGE employees are primarily “computer science guys” and do not understand the basics of financial management. In one instance, a coder brought in by DOGE confronted a FEMA staffer about mismanagement of funds. The FEMA staffer clarified that no funds were allocated during the time period in question and that the DOGE representative simply misunderstood the data.

That sounds thoroughly unremarkable by itself. A staffer asked for an explanation of something he was seeing and got one (he was incorrect about the data). This interaction repeats a zillion times per day for any consultancy project.

Consultants don’t get absolute power to make changes unilaterally.

here is doge https://www.doge.gov/

I've seen rumors that the server isn't on US soil. Any confirmation of that?

It's fronted by Cloudflare, so not sure how someone would assess that, or why it wouldn't be on US soil (or why that would matter).

Because generally speaking, it's not a good idea to have machines with possible links to sensitive government data not under the jurisdiction of the government that owns that data.

A list of Tweets and the Savings site is empty.

Doge Much Transparency

one big sad thing among others is how the doge meme, which carried with it a lot of fun and kindness baggage (the dogecoin community made a ton of random donations) ended up used by people who are the diametrical opposite.

This confirms all my biases and comes from a source I don't recognize. That trips my anti-confirmation bias heuristics.

Can someone do a journalism on this and get 1-2 other independent sources?

Not to be flippant, but why can’t you do that?

A journalist might have contacts in FEMA. Who should Joe Doe contact?

Well, because I'm not a journalist. I don't have the resources or connections to go and find this out. That's why we have professional journalists.

Wait, so you're not just asking for other articles around this, you're asking for a journalist to see your hacker news comment and provide you sources?

I am asking if any journalists, many of whom are active on social media and forums like this, with the resources and access have gotten independent confirmation and, perhaps, written about it for their publications, yes.

edit: I don't know why this is so vexing to sections of the YCombinatorati.

bonus edit after a reply since I'm rate limited for a while: IME people here are happy to share articles when people ask if there's more info. Hackers, at least a broad subset who loosely identify with the principles, love to share knowledge. Some even to the point of exfiltrating it! It's almost a defining characteristic.

That's why this is so vexing!

hey it doesn’t hurt to ask

That's true, but it's an interest tactic to ask for the news to come to them.

"Tactic" is an interesting framing. This is a discussion. Some people who might want to participate are journalists who would already be in the process of confirming or have confirmation.

I'm not doing battle here. We're not at war. I'm asking for a free exchange of knowledge among people trying to be civil toward each other.

I'm operating on the assumption that a passing journalist with a source and an interest is already doing their job and, like most journalists, tries to keep it all free and public in recognizing that's best for the good of the public even if it's hard to fund that way.

As a European this is just so terrifying and fascinating to watch at the same time. I really wonder (and hope for the best) what comes out of all this. With Trump and Musk and this agency that isn't one and all the presidential orders. Will we look at this some time later and think "well, that was really stupid, do not try again" or will the world burn down over this? Crazy times.

We'll look back on it as we do all of the other times people got away with things they shouldn't have gotten away with while holding the power of the state.

I'll also add that there are absolutely people in Europe who aspire to see this kind of thing happen there, and that in some cases, it already has. See: Orban, Brexit, Le Pen, AfD, etc... and that of course doesn't touch on what happens in less-Western European countries.

there are absolutely people in Europe who aspire to see this kind of thing happen there

Yeah, that's exactly what I fear. Seeing this is a working example or a role model on how to do it here, too. And yes, you pointed out the most obvious of the bad guys.

As another European it amuses me that Europe cannot give up this smug attitude and keeps looking at the US in such a condescending way. Meanwhile Europe has been in freefall for a decade and nobody here seems to notice.

Compared to the US the EU falls much slower

You must be kidding, the last decade is about Europe totally shooting themselves in the foot and giving up leadership in almost every field. US and China have been the big winners here.

The US fell in a month much deeper than the EU in a decade.

Like I said the EU falls slower.

I'm not going to try convincing you, as again, the attitude you express is very common across Europe. Just a small question you may want to consider: how come the US is calling the shots everywhere around the world, Mid-East, Ukraine, etc., and in all technological issues that matter. Where is Europe in all this? Ten years ago, at least Angela Merkel was sitting at the table. Can you claim with a straight face that the influence of Europe has not decreased?

It may fall slower but it also keeps falling... US' GDP is now 80% higher than EU's. The usual retort is that Europeans are not chasing money and prefer to have good quality of life, healthcare, etc. but this misses the key thing that if your income falls behind little by little at some point you will no longer be able to afford those things... we're already seeing it.

we're already seeing it.

Where exactly are we seeing this? AFAIK, most people in Europe still has access to healthcare, and still be able to have a job + free-time, with parental leave and more. Has that disappeared from any countries where it used to exist?

I think the constant worry and focus on GDP is a great example of the differences of mindset between Americans and Europeans. As long as "number goes up!" is true, Americans seem to think that most things are fine and working alright, while a European might be more focused on things on the ground and around them in their daily life, rather than judging their quality of life based on how the economy is doing for the rich people.

That is probably because you live in the states that you think that. The EU is so regulated its hard to do anything nowadays.

The EU is so regulated its hard to do anything nowadays.

What are you referring to here, specifically? Something that is a net-positive for society, and that would be legal in the US but is illegal in Europe or EU?

Starting the next Google or OpenAI. Not illegal, just not possible.

Thanks to what laws/regulations? Or was that just the meme "Europeans are lazy/slow" but tailored to HN readers?

AFAIK, things like specific the text and data mining (TDM) exceptions would allow you to even train on copyrighted materials without permission in certain cases, in the example of LLMs.

Mistral also seems to be making progress, and I'm not aware of any African, South American or Australian efforts that are further ahead, so while it might not be number 1, Europe is at least not last.

Oh, that's not a very high bar now, not being the last :)

Siemens, Bosch, Mercedes-Benz, etc. etc. were innovative startups once that defined their industries and they put the foundations of the high standard of living that you enjoy now. Where are the similar European innovations of today?

Meanwhile Europe has been in freefall for a decade and nobody here seems to notice.

We all have different values that matter. Europeans (for better or worse) tend to prefer stability, probably because of past experiences, over oligarchy and free capitalism, while the US is almost the exact opposite.

So both parties look at the other and see "freefall decline for decades", both being smug about the other being worse, while we in reality care about different things.

The stability of Europe is an illusion. Politically and economically Europe is becoming a lightweight who will not be able to do anything without the US permission.

The stability of Europe is an illusion

I'm not sure how familiar you are with the history of the continent, but this is probably the most stable and peaceful time-period of the continent since humans started populating it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Europe is a great introduction to the subject.

Yes, and the second most stable and peaceful moment was 1913 when people were celebrating a half-century of continuous growth and prosperity. I think I'll pass your introduction, thanks.

As I said, Americans and Europeans clearly care about different things :) Your sole focus on "growth" and "prosperity" makes this crystal clear and will make a good example of this in future discussions.

We're watching the ultimate destructive expression of the comp sci "oh, we can just automate that" hubris.

And we will be caught in the resulting cultural collateral damage.

Not to mention financial. Its all but inevitable this will have expensive financial fallout, likely for individuals and the government.

I am absolutely gobsmacked that the markets simply don't care about any of this.

They muscled through COVID, they're gonna try and muscle through this.

It's in essentially every person with power's benefit for the number to go up, so everyone ensures the number goes up. See also: Bitcoin pricing.

Thought process: “In theory auditing a government agency is simple. I can write assembly for a computer with millions of moving parts. How hard could it be to debug an organization with twenty thousand employees that need support to configure their own email? I spent literally two weeks watching accounting channels on YouTube, so with my mighty developer ultrabrain, this should be a snap. If only developers had time to work on these problems the world wouldn’t need all of these suits.”

People might read that and think I’m being hyperbolic, but I had someone on HN argue that their debugging skills rendered them better at medical diagnosis than doctors, and better at fixing cars than mechanics, by their own totally objective genius developer standards.

That's exactly how they think. Coders tend to employ systems thinking to a fault, where they reduce something very complex to fit a too-simple mental model. It's like going into a room with a lion and thinking it's a house cat because they're both shaped the same. Failing to take note of the key differences will quickly lead to your demise.

Can't speak to doctors, but I've been a mechanic and yes there's some large overlap in debugging skills between a good mechanic and a programmer, a mindset of wanting to understand how things work, and breaking down the problem into manageable parts.

Well, some professionals fail at being counter-examples.

Is there anything we can do?

I don’t mean to ask that and imply that there is nothing. I mean it as an honest question. Is there a process or organization to snap into right now to help?

Congress, lol

That. Or pitchforks. Or holes outside of towns[1].

[1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42318504

Vote when the time comes, and hoping the judiciary behaves independently.

However, considering SCOTUS has largely decided POTUS is largely immune from most anything, I don't see why he can't just ignore the courts when the time comes...

What does that say for the rest of us? If the leader of the free world has decided laws don't matter, then as far as I'm concerned that applies to the rest of us, rendering it "legal" to remove him via whatever means we as polite society choose fit.

At least, my hope is that they don't push the limits with ignoring laws because they're afraid that would happen...

Is there anything we can do?

Keep durable notes and share them with your electeds. Particularly at the state level. These kids won’t be prosecuted immediately, possibly never federally. But their actions will need to be systematically undone at the federal level and individually prosecuted at the state and/or local levels. This is going to be a massive bureaucratic and legal undertaking, and we’ll need record preservation to do it.

How will local/state prosecute it?

The crimes are on the federal level and pretty sure they'll receive pardons.

I think maybe the user is implying that a civil war will break out. I started reading about the original American Civil War after recent events. The lead up to that was protracted. As long as some states begin assembling militias now and unify, it's probable they will be able to mount an attack against the Federal government as happened back then.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_leading_to_...

maybe the user is implying that a civil war will break out

I’m not. Short of a decapitation strike in which MAGA and Musk are taken out in a night of long knives, which would itself be more destabilising to our republic than anything they’ve done, there is little to play for a military conflict à la the Civil War in a nuclear state. If we’re going to see a civil war, it wouldn’t be states vs U.S. but some compartment of the U.S. claiming legitimate power while another denies it, e.g. the military deposing Trump or him refusing to step down after impeachment and conviction or an electoral loss.

I see. My opinion is that nuclear weapons are more or less useless in a modern conflict, as has been observed in the Russia-Ukraine war with endless Russian sabre-rattling. The collateral damage from nuclear weapons makes their usage suicidal, and in the case of the US, states breaking away from the Federal government would also inherit a nuclear arsenal -- leading to a stalemate.

The Russia-Ukraine war has convinced me that artificial intelligence driven drone warfare has rendered nuclear warfare obsolete. The drones act as a force multiplier which can mass target the enemy with little collateral damage.

nuclear weapons are more or less useless in a modern conflict, as has been observed in the Russia-Ukraine war with endless Russian sabre-rattling

Russia is constrained by India and China in its use of tactical nukes in Ukraine. That wouldn't apply in America.

collateral damage from nuclear weapons makes their usage suicidal

The excess damage caused by tactical nukes when compared with conventional weapons, particularly the low-efficiency sort that tend to find their way into civil wars, is principally diplomatic. We're currently seeing a breakdown of the rules-based international order.

in the case of the US, states breaking away from the Federal government would also inherit a nuclear arsenal

Why? The nukes are on U.S. land, legally and militarily. A state militia attempting to storm a nuclear silo is, if anything, the closest legitimate reason I can think of for why Washington might nuke its own homeland.

Russia-Ukraine war has convinced me that artificial intelligence driven drone warfare has rendered nuclear warfare obsolete

There have been no AI drones in that war. Drones are reigning free because nobody established air superiority.

There have been no AI drones in that war. Drones are reigning free because nobody established air superiority.

This hasn't been true since last year, when automated targeting systems began entering the battlefield. They still are not as widely deployed as personnel controlled drones, but over time it appears to be shifting towards battlefield autonomy. Nuclear weapons are a cudgel, automated human-free weapons are a scalpel.

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/missiles-...

Keep in mind that the ruling party has massively powerful surveillance systems at their fingertips. It's hard to say how things will unfold, but being a dissident may not be in one's best interest.

Look for politicians (in your district and state) who are already active, pick the one who seems to be not a useless parrot (but also not someone who doesn't get the big picture), and ask them how can you help them, how can you support their efforts.

The good playbook consists of rebooting the D party. (Which lost the election because it did not understand what the majority wants, and how to authentically offer something that is close enough.)

Rebooting the D party is unnecessary.

Losing only by 1.5% in an election where globally nearly every _incumbent_ lost is pretty good.

In the UK, the incumbents lost 20% of their seats [1]. The democrats lost 2 seats in the senate [2] and _gained_ 2 seats in the house [3].

Making drastic changes to a party because you narrowly lost an election with a candidate that never won a primary is dumb.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_general_el...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_Senate_elec...

[3]: (idk how it's 2 since 215-214 = 1). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_House_of_Re...

Making drastic changes to a party because you narrowly lost an election with a candidate that never won a primary is dumb.

That depends on who you lose to.

How is a candidate that didn't win a primary _narrowly_ losing to a candidate that won a primary a big deal?

Like if Democrats decided to run Ron DeSantis how huge do you think Trump's lead would've been?

If you're a marathon runner, and you lose to another marathon runner, that's OK.

If you're a marathon runner, and you lose to a toddler, that's probably not.

The Dems fought an eminently beatable candidate and lost, and they continue to struggle with messaging now (stop putting Schumer up there to deliver it!). They flubbed the response to Dobbs, the consultant class nixed the Harris campaign parts that were working (weird etc.) in favor of things that don't (Cheney endorsements). etc.

If you're a marathon runner, and you lose to a toddler, that's probably not.

You understand that in this analogy, the toddler won the NYC marathon 2 years ago and then beat somebody that lost their local 5k?

How you frame a problem, determines what solution you are going to find.

I went over many assumptions after the elections, to understand what I had missed. But things changed when I asked a different question.

Its not a question of how Harris lost. Its a question of how Trump ran in the first place.

With that change, things clicked into place.

Decades of ignoring existing anti-trust laws leading to large conglomerates with monopolistic pricing power?

Unfriendly labor rulings like the time you spend in mandatory employer required security screenings doesn't count as paid time?

Do share with the class what you think is special about Trump running consider he's done it for 4 elections [1] and considered it against Obama (you may remember the whole birther movement).

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_presidential_camp...

Do please share your conclusions with the rest of us?

Isn't this what you guys have the second amendment for? To secure a free state?

There's a word for people who start shooting when they don't like the outcome of an election: insurrectionists.

I know you were trying to be smart here, but this isn't about debating the outcome of the election, that transition was already handled in a peaceful manner.

The security and intelligence apparatus made bet big that they could prevent a second trump election, after quite successfully destabilising the first -- they failed. And now the very system of unaccountable executive power which has been built up, is now being used against the executive itself.

This makes me increasingly concerned for a similar turn of events in the UK (ie., given the many actions of the UK state to enable state propaganda, censorship of the UK internet, and tracking of all citizens -- how these will be used if a far-right party comes into power.

The difference in the UK is, there is no recourse. It's actually why America exists as a state to begin with. They have parliamentary supremacy and no enshrined checks and balances against parliament. Nor do they have a formal constitution. And the populace is disarmed. A sufficiently united parliament can in theory do what it wants. The only practical risk they have is a coordinated coup by the military.

The US system, while far from perfect, does have enshrined checks and balances. A formal constitution that limits the powers of branches. And an armed populace with a history of protest and unrest when things don't go their way.

Was that executive power really accrued as a result of a resistance to Trump during his first term? My understanding is that the executive branch has been exerting more power for while now, regardless of who has been in office.

And does it really matter? The authority for doing many of the things Trump's current admin is doing don't actually fall to the executive branch; they're doing them anyway.

Ah, here we go with the "invisible deep state" theory that secretly controls -- or tries to -- things behind the scenes.

Does make for good movies though.

It's not invisible, nor is it much of a secret. Nor does it "control" anything in particular. Much of the coordination against trump by NGOs funded through USAID, publicly, is just online -- you can just go watch recordings of the conferences.

It's just an institutional consensus about Trump's style of populism which gave profound motivation to a large number of groups, to organise against his perceived threat. The issue is how the US government was involved -- not the activity itself -- , eg., leaning on mass media organisations to censor americans -- unconstitutional, and widely documented. You may think it's "for the good", but either way, its unconstitutional for the US gov. to do that. The US gov cannot demand social media censor americans, it's a prominent part of the bill of rights.

The US gov. funds many programmes under the guise of aid, or sponsorship of "democracy" or "independent media", or, eg., "healthcare".

Consider how egreious it would be for the US gov to lie about funding healthcare, but instead to use that as a guise for one of your "impossible, movie plot lines..."

Oh wait, ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_fake_vaccination_campaign_...

FYI, this happened to the far-left in the 60s & 70s, leading to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee --- it's just now happening to Trump and the far-right. Kinda funny the right have discovered it, after decades of calling the left nutjob conspiracy theorists.

Consider how egreious it would be for the US gov to lie about funding healthcare, but instead to use that as a guise for one of your "impossible, movie plot lines..."

Sorry, what part of the CIA hatching hare-brained schemes is incredulous? (You should have linked to acoustakitty.)

People like to pretend the intelligence agencies don't operate this way today, and this was some past insanity.

I mean, even more relevant would be the leaked recording of state department officials discussing who to replace the elected president of ukraine with in 2013.

I just chose the HIV thing, since it's relevant how we interpret USAID's programmes -- in particular, ones which fund the NGOs that run censorship campaigns and kompromat collection (eg., the occrp).

None of this is very remarkable, of course. The more concerning thing is how this has become turned inward on the USA itself via the internet, mass media, and so on.

People like to pretend the intelligence agencies don't operate this way today

Who? How do you think soft power works?

how this has become turned inward on the USA itself

The CIA isn’t conducting political campaigns at home. To the extent we have intelligence operations running amok in our bureaucracy, it’s DOGE.

Honestly, this edginess-seeking behaviour reminds me of students in New York and San Francisco convinced they’re being silenced. No, the truth is nobody cares.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/14/u-s-repeals-propaganda-...

...oops, the law preventing that was amended under obama, to allow it. Drat.

(cf. the original Smith-Mundt act preventing it, and the Modernization Act of 2012 allowing it again. The original, of course, created because law makers were terrified of what would happen if this was turned inward.)

Did you know we also have NPR and PBS? A literal public-TV censorship board?

Also, we’re talking about the CIA. Your conspiracy theory has them waiting for a law to be repealed before acting? Do you think a single DOGE bro hired a lawyer before acting?

because law makers were terrified of what would happen if this was turned inward

What nonsense. Where did you read this? We had a massive and celebrated domestic propaganda board during the Great Depression and WWII.

The CIA has done a ton of bad shit - especially in other countries - over the past 50 years, but that’s a completely separate matter from a “deep state” controlling things and trying to prevent Trump’s election.

OK, well I was choosing one of you "movie plot" cases to show you that the CIA does not care if it runs movie plot programmes.

The mechanism of anti-trump coordination has yet really to be briefed out, and wikiepedia will be dragged kicking and screaming before there's an article on it. Give it a decade, perhaps.

For now, if you want examples here's the atlantic council (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Council) -- training journalists to treat emerging rightwing politics as disinformation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSAz0agYEeI

A lot of rightwing stuff that circulates is disinformation -- there are plenty of examples of it. Trump is an inveterate liar about almost everything (this is easily fact-checked), and his followers have adopted the same strategy (lies are powerful because they are usually more shocking and travel faster than a boring fact-check).

Not to say that other politicians don't lie or distort the truth, but Trump has taken this to a whole other level.

The issue isn't whether that's true or not (personally, I think you're 80-90% correct). If private citizens, or organisations, want to get together and develop political counter-narratives that's fine -- entirely within the constitution, and always a good idea.

The issue here is the top-down astroturfing from state-sponsored orgs whose boards are the last x heads of the CIA/etc.

At the moment there is no strong firewall between private polticial organisation, and state power, within the USA. You may think that's fine if its being used against trump, but it isnt.

Not least, since the example the AC gave in that video was trump tweeting "witch hunt" about the russia investigation -- calling this disinformation. Now, who was right? Trump. There was no Trump-Russia conspiracy, it was a witch hunt.

The only thing the muller report found was trump obstructed the investigation, it completely exonerated any supposed connections to russia. Then you might ask: where did all these intelligence dossiers come from?

And why is the atlantic council training journalists to label trumps poltical speech about this investigation as disinformation? (HINT: to enable its censorship etc.)

I say this as a UKian with a constitutional monarch as head of state:

These actions suggest that today the United States seems to have a de facto King with far greater powers than even those held by George III at the time the founders decided that America did not need a King.

They might not be called that, but they have the ability to exert behaviours akin to an English monarch not seen much since Henry VIII. Arguably, we're heading into Magna Carta territory.

The checks and balances are about to get a big test. I hope they work, and I'm proven wrong.

The checks and balances assumed the entire country didn't vote the exact same people into majorities in all 3 branches

Trump won the popular vote with 49.8% of votes cast, let’s stop pretending the entire country gave him the mandate to do whatever he wants.

Fourth smallest margin in POTUS election history.

An eligible voter who doesn't vote is effectively a vote for the winner, so a majority was at least complicit.

“Complicit” is an interesting word choice here—as if a non-voter is somehow responsible for wrongdoing? What “wrong” was done here? Trump won because he was democratically elected by every measure we have, both popular vote and electoral college. If your candidate lost it’s because they didn’t earn the votes, have the message, or created the reason for that non-voter to vote for them. The candidate and campaign are more responsible for their loss than the non-voter. You are shifting blame to where it doesn’t belong.

If an incident of mobbing occurs in a Norwegian school the bystanders are held to account as well as the actual perpetrators.

This is not even remotely equivalent. Making not intervening when a crime takes place means there is a crime taking place.

In the US elections are not a crime and “not voting” is not a crime.

Thats a poor reading of the effort the Republicans have put into ensuring they win.

Firstly, its not because of reasons that people win in America, not anymore. People didnt know that the ACA was Obamacare, or that Biden dropped out.

Fox and the GOP created an orwellian political power that has parasitized democratic processess.

Classic example would be climate change, in the 90s, when FOX was created.

Fox platformed cranks, and made them look legitimate. Republican lawmakers pointed to Fox news reports, and stalled if not killed climate change legislation.

The governing principle at that time, was to not provide credibility to cranks. However, shocked by the effectiveness of Fox, scientists decided to talk directly to viewers on Fox.

This resulted in them being fed to the media lions, because the goal of Fox was to discredit them, along with the ivory tower education systems.

Through this process, FOX and the GOP own the overton window for climate discussions. THEY decide what positions Dems must take.

Repeat this proces year after year, and eventually there is no place you can hold a position to win at a national level.

For state level elections this is different, apparently local knowledge overcomes this distorition field.

However, thats not the only trick.

Republicans are beholden to never grant Democrats any credibility. See Romneycare and Obamacare. It shocked me even then, that Repubs actually credited Obama for getting Osama.

This election, people remember Harris as being the Trans supporter. The Campaign itself never focused on this topic.

The Repubs sets the stage on which everyone dances.

Yes - the other candidate should earn peoples votes. They should create the right message.

Yes - as a voter, you should know when its not a fair fight.

Simply so that you can apply the right handicap when viewing candiates.

No offense but my comment was a response to the suggestion that someone who didn’t vote somehow committed wrongdoing. Not sure how a diatribe against the “evils” of the GOP voter persuasion machine speaks much to that. It’s obvious to me both parties denigrate the other candidate through media and publicity.

My decision to not vote for Harris boiled down to my opinion that she failed in her one duty as VP, which was to effectively step in and govern in the event that Biden was unable to function as president. That much was painfully obvious during his debate, which exposed her dereliction of duty.

We're getting wrapped up over the word "complicit." Fine, let's be neutral: "An eligible voter who doesn't vote, through inaction supports whoever ends up winning." The act of not voting can mean nothing but "I'm OK with whoever."

Presidents aren't elected through popular votes. He won 312 to 226.

There have been cases before where both the Executive and Legislative branches have been held by the same party. What's different now is that Trump is trying to consolidate much more power in the Executive branch (an explicit Project2025 goal), and Congress is powerless because the GOP are all afraid of highly vociferous MAGA reprisals (I mean, he did pardon all those who violently stormed the capitol and threatened to kill government officials). Trump's strategy (a smart one, I might add), is to push beyond the boundaries of the law as far and fast as he can and see what, if any, resistance he meets.

Nixon attempted something similar but Congress didn't let him get away with it (and passed the Impoundment Control Act, which Trump is now flouting).

Congress is powerless because the GOP are all afraid of highly vociferous MAGA reprisals

They're afraid of their voters, as they should be, as Trump is more popular with their voters than any of them are. All Trump/Musk need to do is endorse an opponent in their primaries.

Its even worse than the same party having a majority everywhere.

Trump's cult-like pull and the associated threat of the world's richest man (who still talks about the dangers of the global elites with no sense of irony) bankrolling a primary against anyone who steps out of line have effectively erased the congress as an independent branch entirely.

There are Republicans in the house and senate and even Trump's own administration that I believe aren't aligned with what he is doing but they lack the spine to say so beyond the most superficial talk about their "concerns" (and then still voting for everything he demands).

who still talks about the dangers of the global elites with no sense of irony

As with "DEI mayor", "urban youth", "rootless cosmopolitans", etc., it's a euphemism.

We're watching the checks and balances fail in real time. By the time the first court order comes through the DOGE boys are already doing something else somewhere else. The legal system can't create injunctions as fast as Trump can sign things. It's proving impossible for a legitimate system to keep up with the wanton pillaging.

Also courts can't act until someone sues for "harm" which they themselves suffered. That takes a long time, and by then, the damage is very difficult, or maybe impossible, to undo.

It is way worse than than that. If it all falls apart, the worst for Trump is to lose an election and retire to Florida. He has no real stake in any of this. The king is the king and the only way out is abdication, passing the problem to his own family.

I am so very happy we have a monarchy. I used to be against it, but the fact that no one person can wreak this kind of havoc is fantastic. And of course the king has really very little power.

I've turned into a monarchist (thanks to Trump)!

If it all falls apart, the worst for Trump is to lose an election and retire to Florida.

He doesn't have another election to lose. He gets 4 years (less a few weeks now) and then gets to retire from being POTUS. There are few consequences for him this term. For the Republicans, on the other hand, if DOGE and their trade wars and other things fail, they could be fucked for a decade or more trying to rebrand themselves.

Elected officials trying to do what they told voters they would do is literally the textbook definition of monarchy.

Elected officials trying to do what they told voters they would do is literally the textbook definition of monarchy.

I expect that you intended to say "textbook definition of democracy", but the Freudian slip is quite something.

No no, its monarchism. Doing what his supporters voted for makes Trump a king.

You don't get to vote to break laws. You can vote to change or remove laws, but that is not what is happening here.

DOGE is also working with a FEMA IT Specialist and a grant director, according to Drop Site’s reporting. “Everyone is complying. Everyone is afraid to lose their jobs,” sources within FEMA told Drop Site. They describe the situation as FEMA employees following a “chain of command and that leads to DOGE even though they’re not part of it.”

This is how a democracy slowly falls into fascism. Not because it's a overnight coup d'état, but because people freely give power away instead of resisting, and just agree to actions they never would otherwise.

I think there's value of having good people there when the trump administration is gone.

Having those people quit is effectively part of the current administration's plans.

It's difficult to resist when it means likely losing your job and not being about to afford rent or your mortgage.

You're right, it is really difficult and can come with severe consequences. These situations are when our values are truly put to the test.

These moments test us, but they also define us.

Or quit and return when it's not a hostile environment. No one has to eat his shit. They can leave and come back when they have a genuine opportunity to have an impact. Is that impossible in your view?

There are several character qualities more important than immediate personal comfort.

Affording to feed your family and put a stable roof over their heads is a bit more than “immediate personal comfort”.

Why does everything D0G3 get flagged?

Yeah it's a pattern for sure. Lotta folks seem to not want other people to talk about this kind of thing. Same goes for most other Trump administration articles.

I get not wanting to read it, but that's not what flagging is for IMO...

Visit /active: https://news.ycombinator.com/active

You'll see every single article criticizing DOGE has been flagged by users, in order to try to bury it.

Im surprised my comment is still up!

I guess the HN crowd are too able to understand what's happening. There's too much specific criticism here. Who is blocking these discussions? Where else can we go? Every day the discussions here are blocked. YCombinator has taken a side and it is a worrying one.

There are a very large number of discussion venues online that do not tend to penalize controversial political issues. Many of them have strong political biases (but, then again, so does HN.)

I'm aware that there are other discussion forums but the demographic here has a very specific technical knowledge which is hugely relevant to current events. I want to see these things discussed by people with that knowledge. Other forums have different userbases. That's why it's distressing to see YCombinator take such a clear side in this, or at least not seem to care about the clear abuse of the flagging system.

every day a dozen critical of Musk/DOGE discussions land on HN main, and zero non-critical/positive ones

it is an illusion of being surrounded by brigades of conservatives censoring you, if anything - the opposite is true

when I tried submitting a positive take on recent happenings in DC - my own post was flagged withing 5 minutes, and I was chastised for posting a link to nazi platform (it was a link to X longpost)

It is a nazi platform, in that it's owned and controlled by a nazi.

Please control yourself and stop being hysterical

And ... there we go - flagged by Musk's tech bros again. HN is starting to feel like X -- I've deleted my X account, and might have to do the same here.

I've now switched my primary HN link from the home page to /active, where, thankfully, flagged posts still show up.

I've now switched my primary HN link from the home page to /active, where, thankfully, flagged posts still show up.

Great tip, thanks!

Yea, the difference between home and /active has never been starker. I feel like HN's well-intentioned user-flagging system assumed good faith, and was not built to handle the obvious partisan brigading that we've been seeing.

Oh look this has already been flagged.

I think it’s important to recognize that HN is most likely supportive of the Trump/Musk regime. Remember that Gary Tan wanted to run the same playbook in the city of San Francisco.

Please keep this in mind when posting here.

Finally, depending on where we end up, I wonder how history will remember HN.