Usaid terror

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's entirely possible that USAID should have been given more direction and less money. But the smart think to do would have been to roll it back over time.

yes that is true, but you can't get it down that way. sometimes drastic action is the only way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is horrible - there are many USAID direct hires and their families overseas. How are they getting home? Who is looking out for them?

They're being evacuated this week and if not home by Saturday, Trump is sending the military in.

You’re kidding me - that is so traumatic for everyone, but will the kids really be pulled out of school and their home like that?

Yes. They have 30 days to return to the US. It horrible for the American public servants and unfathomable to the poorest of the poor that USAID has served.

Not true. The email gave examples of exceptions and one of them was kids finishing their school year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's entirely possible that USAID should have been given more direction and less money. But the smart think to do would have been to roll it back over time.

yes that is true, but you can't get it down that way. sometimes drastic action is the only way.

This is the essential logic of authoritarianism. "We need action, and damn the rules."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m not a fan of USAID spending but I strongly disagree with Trump breaking the law to stop it. Trump knows he’s in the wrong and is moving quickly to destroy the agency before the courts can act.

Any lawyers in the house can explain why there already isn’t a TRO or injunction on the Trump admin to stop this? What’s taking so long.

I am wondering this too.... Given Rubio's mutterings about folding it into the State Dept., I wonder if when the dust settles, there will just be a smaller USAID under State control--with the status of employees "on admin leave" still unclear or partially reversed. Still perhaps an illegal move, but much less blatantly so in terms of a would-be lawsuit. Trump/Elon are just maximizing the chaos (and cruelty) for headlines and to create shock & awe, but ultimately the changes are more modest?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not a fan of USAID spending but I strongly disagree with Trump breaking the law to stop it. Trump knows he’s in the wrong and is moving quickly to destroy the agency before the courts can act.

Any lawyers in the house can explain why there already isn’t a TRO or injunction on the Trump admin to stop this? What’s taking so long.

I am wondering this too.... Given Rubio's mutterings about folding it into the State Dept., I wonder if when the dust settles, there will just be a smaller USAID under State control--with the status of employees "on admin leave" still unclear or partially reversed. Still perhaps an illegal move, but much less blatantly so in terms of a would-be lawsuit. Trump/Elon are just maximizing the chaos (and cruelty) for headlines and to create shock & awe, but ultimately the changes are more modest?

Lawsuits? Have you never seen an authoritarian country before?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not a fan of USAID spending but I strongly disagree with Trump breaking the law to stop it. Trump knows he’s in the wrong and is moving quickly to destroy the agency before the courts can act.

Any lawyers in the house can explain why there already isn’t a TRO or injunction on the Trump admin to stop this? What’s taking so long.

I am wondering this too.... Given Rubio's mutterings about folding it into the State Dept., I wonder if when the dust settles, there will just be a smaller USAID under State control--with the status of employees "on admin leave" still unclear or partially reversed. Still perhaps an illegal move, but much less blatantly so in terms of a would-be lawsuit. Trump/Elon are just maximizing the chaos (and cruelty) for headlines and to create shock & awe, but ultimately the changes are more modest?

Rubio is still out of the country. His delegate is making these decisions, and he has wanted to destroy USAID for a long time. Rubio is perfectly happy to have someone else destroy USAID while he's away.

What a dummy.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/globalcitizen/2025/02/05/the-truth-about-us-foreign-aid-a-response-to-secretary-marco-rubio/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not a fan of USAID spending but I strongly disagree with Trump breaking the law to stop it. Trump knows he’s in the wrong and is moving quickly to destroy the agency before the courts can act.

Any lawyers in the house can explain why there already isn’t a TRO or injunction on the Trump admin to stop this? What’s taking so long.

I am wondering this too.... Given Rubio's mutterings about folding it into the State Dept., I wonder if when the dust settles, there will just be a smaller USAID under State control--with the status of employees "on admin leave" still unclear or partially reversed. Still perhaps an illegal move, but much less blatantly so in terms of a would-be lawsuit. Trump/Elon are just maximizing the chaos (and cruelty) for headlines and to create shock & awe, but ultimately the changes are more modest?

Lawsuits? Have you never seen an authoritarian country before?

DP. Musk can move as fast as he wants - the law still works in this country, even if not at lightning speed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's entirely possible that USAID should have been given more direction and less money. But the smart think to do would have been to roll it back over time.

Who do you think approves USAID budget? Who do you think goes on CoDEL trips (african safari is fun, so is Lake Baikal back in the day, etc etc)? Yep, members of Congress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not a fan of USAID spending but I strongly disagree with Trump breaking the law to stop it. Trump knows he’s in the wrong and is moving quickly to destroy the agency before the courts can act.

Any lawyers in the house can explain why there already isn’t a TRO or injunction on the Trump admin to stop this? What’s taking so long.

I am wondering this too.... Given Rubio's mutterings about folding it into the State Dept., I wonder if when the dust settles, there will just be a smaller USAID under State control--with the status of employees "on admin leave" still unclear or partially reversed. Still perhaps an illegal move, but much less blatantly so in terms of a would-be lawsuit. Trump/Elon are just maximizing the chaos (and cruelty) for headlines and to create shock & awe, but ultimately the changes are more modest?

Lawsuits? Have you never seen an authoritarian country before?

Oh c'mon, there are already about a dozen lawsuits against the Admin in federal court, some which already have met with some success. Whether this Admin ultimately (or fully) complies with court orders is a different question, but hardly means there wouldn't be a lawsuit if there was some legal hook (or willing plaintiffs).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not a fan of USAID spending but I strongly disagree with Trump breaking the law to stop it. Trump knows he’s in the wrong and is moving quickly to destroy the agency before the courts can act.

Any lawyers in the house can explain why there already isn’t a TRO or injunction on the Trump admin to stop this? What’s taking so long.

I am wondering this too.... Given Rubio's mutterings about folding it into the State Dept., I wonder if when the dust settles, there will just be a smaller USAID under State control--with the status of employees "on admin leave" still unclear or partially reversed. Still perhaps an illegal move, but much less blatantly so in terms of a would-be lawsuit. Trump/Elon are just maximizing the chaos (and cruelty) for headlines and to create shock & awe, but ultimately the changes are more modest?

It's called State Capture. It won't end well for anyone but the oligarchs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is horrible - there are many USAID direct hires and their families overseas. How are they getting home? Who is looking out for them?

They're being evacuated this week and if not home by Saturday, Trump is sending the military in.

You’re kidding me - that is so traumatic for everyone, but will the kids really be pulled out of school and their home like that?

Yes. They have 30 days to return to the US. It horrible for the American public servants and unfathomable to the poorest of the poor that USAID has served.

As a long term expat, this was not unusual. Families moved all the time during school years as postings changed or companies sent people back home or transferred to another country. Moving mid term isn't traumatic. In many countries when the work visa is cancelled, you have to leave within a certain number of days, usually 30. If you're an expat you learn to be resilient, especially if working in developing countries. Let's slow down with throwing around the word "trauma" everywhere as it's only making it meaningless.

No this is traumatic - check out the mental health outcomes for TCKs. Family members ignoring the trauma and not helping their children to process their grief about losing friends and your whole routine at the drop of a hat under the guise that kids are "resilient" are not helping anything.

I have been living overseas for 20 years and associated with various missions. I think what is going on is very traumatic. No one thought this was possible like this

[Anonymous]

Let’s be honest—I grew up in a State Department or USAID family (I won’t reveal which for anonymity). My father was in a technical supervisor role, and we lived all over the world. From my firsthand experience, I can say that the lifestyle was far beyond anything we could have had in the U.S., even if we were wealthy.

We basically had our mortgage covered back home by renting out our house while we lived overseas, where our housing was fully paid for. And we weren’t just living in normal homes—these were massive houses with staff: maids, gardeners, and drivers. It was a completely different world. We also traveled frequently, and vacations were either heavily subsidized or fully covered through various allowances. We attended elite American schools that, back home, were only accessible to the ultra-rich, but for us, they were fully funded by U.S. taxpayers.

It was a great lifestyle, no doubt. But it often felt like a fantasy, like a long-term vacation rather than real life. My dad, who was at the equivalent of a GS-15 level, later admitted to me that he only did about 30 minutes of actual work a week. The real purpose of many Americans stationed in these countries seemed more about maintaining a U.S. presence rather than truly making an impact. Embassy life was filled with social events, networking, and parties—it felt like an exclusive club, completely detached from the struggles of the local populations USAID was supposedly there to help.

From my perspective, USAID and similar government programs do fund important projects, but there’s also an enormous amount of waste. The sheer amount of money spent on maintaining the American presence abroad—on housing, benefits, and lifestyles—makes you question whether these funds could be better used elsewhere.

I’m not saying that every single person in USAID is doing nothing, but from what I saw growing up, it was a system that provided an incredibly cushy deal for those involved. It raises the question: how much of this is actually about development, and how much is just about sustaining a privileged American presence overseas?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is so illegal and unconstitutional

I'm sorry USAID-- I'm sure you are just the first in a wave of illegal actions but it hurts my heart to see you and your work treated this way.

Same here. I am so, so sorry that this is happening to you.

NP. Also sorry to see this happen . I worked for a USAID contractor decades ago. Everyone I worked with was dedicated and passionate about their work. No one should be treated this way. Elon Musk is so callous that he can’t begin to fathom what humanitarian work is or means.

USAID lost its way and the baby is being thrown out with the bathwater. Their careless spending, arrogance and bloated bureaucracy got them in this position and now they'll suffer the consequences.

Agree. A lot of good things happened under USAID. But a lot of wasteful spending also happened under USAID. The independent presses are having a field day reporting on the obscure spending like funding for a transgender opera and parties for LGBTQ kids in Serbia. and USAID funding more often than not ended up in pockets of local corrupt politicians who owned the companies that won the USAID contracts to build water pipes or whatever. And often did a terrible job. And, of course, USAID was working hand in hand with CIA for certain operations, funneling money for certain schemes that may have been dubious. As a long time expat in developing/adjacent developing countries I heard plenty of wild stories about USAID and clandestine operations - from seasoned NGO veterans. I don't doubt most people at USAID were committed to their missions but I can see that in recent years some of those missions were getting ridiculous. Funding identity politics in countries, including Ireland, makes no sense.

As a recently retired case officer with many overseas tours, I am going to give you and your "seasoned NGO veterans" a giant eyeroll on that one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be honest—I grew up in a State Department or USAID family (I won’t reveal which for anonymity). My father was in a technical supervisor role, and we lived all over the world. From my firsthand experience, I can say that the lifestyle was far beyond anything we could have had in the U.S., even if we were wealthy.

We basically had our mortgage covered back home by renting out our house while we lived overseas, where our housing was fully paid for. And we weren’t just living in normal homes—these were massive houses with staff: maids, gardeners, and drivers. It was a completely different world. We also traveled frequently, and vacations were either heavily subsidized or fully covered through various allowances. We attended elite American schools that, back home, were only accessible to the ultra-rich, but for us, they were fully funded by U.S. taxpayers.

It was a great lifestyle, no doubt. But it often felt like a fantasy, like a long-term vacation rather than real life. My dad, who was at the equivalent of a GS-15 level, later admitted to me that he only did about 30 minutes of actual work a week. The real purpose of many Americans stationed in these countries seemed more about maintaining a U.S. presence rather than truly making an impact. Embassy life was filled with social events, networking, and parties—it felt like an exclusive club, completely detached from the struggles of the local populations USAID was supposedly there to help.

From my perspective, USAID and similar government programs do fund important projects, but there’s also an enormous amount of waste. The sheer amount of money spent on maintaining the American presence abroad—on housing, benefits, and lifestyles—makes you question whether these funds could be better used elsewhere.

I’m not saying that every single person in USAID is doing nothing, but from what I saw growing up, it was a system that provided an incredibly cushy deal for those involved. It raises the question: how much of this is actually about development, and how much is just about sustaining a privileged American presence overseas?

LOL This sounds like State, not USAID. The people I know who work for AID are managers of local NGOs, administer grants and meet with local partners on building civil society and women's health initiatives and the like. What you had sounds like what my parents had in India working for the Ford Foundation. Yes, let's defund our cushiest Ambassadorships but building democracy around the world is worthy work, IMO but only the people at the very top have what you describe..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. This is intentionally executed to create chaos. Everyone - stay vigilant, better times will come but USAID the way we knew is done. Sad times - US is ending its global supremacy.

I just don't believe that. This will have to be reversed and any terminations pursuant to illegal, unconstitutional conduct are invalid.

I don't understand why there isn't already a lawsuit--you can't cut an agency created by statute via unilateral executive action. While the "admin leave" route creates a bit of a work around, it is clearly a sham if the entire staff is being recalled and operations ceased. This development would seem to put this ridiculous move in the same bucket as the general spending freeze (that has already been enjoined by two courts).

Still waiting for clarification. USAID was created by EO. The law Foreign Aid Act (FAA) says the US will provide foreign aid. Does FAA say USAID must administer the aid??