20 billion dollars for leftists through the EPA
From Lee Zeldin, on the Inflation Reduction Act’s grants to the EPA:
And when Democrats had one-party rule in Washington, D.C., they passed this bill called the Inflation Reduction Act that had tens of billions of dollars to go out through EPA.
Well, EPA didn’t know how to spend tens of billions of dollars, so they decided to park $20 billion at an outside bank and have that bank send the money through eight pass-through entities.
All these NGOs—pass-through entities—were riddled with self-dealing and conflicts of interest, former Obama and Biden officials, Democratic donors, as you pointed out. And the EPA was a party to the account control agreement with those prime recipients.
But here’s the thing: when the money goes through the prime recipients to others, in many cases also pass-throughs, EPA is no longer a party to the account control agreement. EPA is losing oversight — by design, intentionally, these grant agreements and arrangements were set up to tie EPA’s hands behind its back.
Zeldin went on to say that it’s still not known exactly how the money was spent after it passed through the pass-through entities, but he aims to claw it back.
On a related issue, a disjointed Supreme Court ruling allows the clawback of DEI grants from the NIH
Supreme Court Allows Trump Admin To Revoke DEI-Related NIH Grants
The Supreme Court voted 5–4 on Aug. 21 to allow the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to cancel hundreds of millions of dollars in research grants linked to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/supreme-court-allows-trump-admin-revoke-dei-related-nih-grants
This is another reason I’m optimistic for future elections.
Democrats have maneuvered tons of taxpayer money into NGOs and no small amount of that goes into slush funds essentially for Democrat activism.
The Trump administration is cutting off those sources. As John Lennon sang:
Imagine all those activists working without pay…
Oo-ooo
For unrelated reasons I was reading up on the “Revolt of the Admirals” and the cancellation of the USS United States.
The money for the USS United States was appropriated by Congress in 1948, but the Secretary of Defense cancelled it after the keel had been laid. I can’t find the text of the appropriation, but either Congress wrote in there that the Secretary of Defense was allowed to do that, or they didn’t have to because everyone accepted that the Executive was not obligated to follow through on the construction. If it was the second case then I don’t understand where these rulings are coming from that the Executive can’t refuse to spend money on something Congress appropriated for.
Every time I see a story like this about the demonstrable malfeasance of the previous administration and/or the Obama administration and/or powerful Democrat figures in general that is being brought to light, I have a series of mixed feelings.
1.) On one hand, of course I am happy that it’s being brought to light. I’m never surprised at the corruption itself, just pleased that it’s being an uncovered and (hopefully) addressed.
2.) On the other hand, I’m frustrated at the state of our discourse regarding such stories and the current mindset of Democrat voters. I know full well that most Democrat voters will either never hear about stories such as this, but even if they do it’ll be framed in such a way to attempt to make Trump and his administration look like the bad guy in all this somehow, no matter how convoluted or absurd it may appear. And I also know due to their deep seated delusions about Trump and everyone supporting him they’ll be more than willing to believe the nonsense narrative cooked up by the Legacy Media that will try make Trump and the rest of us look as evil and fascistic as possible.
The Democratic Party is a collecting pool of criminal scum. Who knew?
I’m sure the Dem leadership borrows ideas from a wide variety of different organizations and over longer periods of history.
One of the tenets of the early anarchist movement was that they knew that their program was a hard sell. Because of that, they also knew that they would never have enough money or a big enough base to take political power the old-fashioned way. So one compensatory tactic is to take the base they have and radicalize it. A hyper radical supporter might be worth 5 or 10 lackadaisical supporters.
And to get more money you have to be willing to break all the rules, including criminal actions. That the Biden family had all these shell corporations is almost amusing given how basic and rather obvious that dodge is. (That’s a self-serving example, not a party serving instance.)
These pass-throughs, NGO’s, and what the Brits call QUANGO’s (quasi autonomous) are clever and pernicious. But it’s not much more impervious to discovery than the shell corp. game. Did they really think they would not get caught? I’d guess they were counting on the nearly unlimited cover-ups, lack of prosecution, and a complicit media.
The Democrats stole billions in all kinds of departments.
“I’d guess they were counting on … a complicit media.”
Despite the ongoing erosion in trust of the “legacy media” this is still a huge factor.
But how is it possible that federal monies can be so irresponsibly distributed, that the government’s own system of audit and control have no way of knowing how the money is spent? It’s like running a charity of free wine for winos, and claiming to do good.
What about the power of the injunctions that freeze the machinery in its tracks until the controls can figure out what happened? Surely this devilment has not made the system so hidebound that it cannot move to protect itself.
The Dems have always protected their own and operated this way. Imagine what went on in the 8 years of Obama.
The Stacey Abrams deal was really horrible.
This is what I voted for. Go Lee, go! And thanks Trump!
In the Appendix to the Federal Budget, you see frequent references to ‘Grants, subsidies, and contributions’ in data tables. With few exceptions, ‘Grants, subsidies, and contributions’ to corporate bodies should not exceed $0. Such expenditures should be presumed to be embezzlement.
So, this doesn’t look like corruption to me. No sir not at all….
I would love to see someone–anyone–with the cajones big enough to do a deep investigation into the nexus between the NGO’s involved in the immigration invasion from 2021-2025, the DHS/HHS/other gov’t agencies involved & the Mexican cartels involved in human trafficking.