Well let's start with the fact that ------- doesn't have the legal authority to do it
From what I understand, POTUS, has the authority to close programs that aren't specifically stated in Congressional USAID appropriations.
POTUS cannot dissolve USAID, and cannot terminate programs explicitly stated by appropriations.
What Musk and his team have determined is that USAID has granted money to programs, given to it by the US Treas. These programs that are not appropriated by Congress. These can be terminated by the Executive branch.
Whats interesting is the CRs congress have passed has led to USAID just spending without any oversight by Congress or the Executive branch.
Those days appear to be over, at least in the short term.
I don't see it as alot of money as people are claiming, but its a sort of cleaning house. Whats amazing looking at all this is how many donor advised funds get government USAID money, and how its just a web of graft, not really doing anything other then skimming money and paying it forward.
Here's a good break down ...
For donors interested in controversial or political-advocacy matters, donor-advised grantmaking creates a layer of privacy against public scrutiny, since contributions to a DAF are shown as grants to the sponsoring charity (for instance, the Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund). While grants from a DAF are reported as contributions by the sponsoring charity, that does not reveal the particular donor-advisor who directed the grant to its final destination.
capitalresearch.org
Now how can this be appropriated by Congress? There is no specificity.
I would think you'd want to get rid of this sort of graft? No?
