Even by the standards of this administration...... yikes:
Meanwhile, his attempts to raise concerns internally within the NLRB preceded someone "physically taping a threatening note" to his door that included sensitive personal information and overhead photos of him walking his dog that appeared to be taken with a drone, according to a cover letter attached to his disclosure filed by his attorney, Andrew Bakaj of the nonprofit Whistleblower Aid.
9283409232 1 hours ago [-]
This is exactly what I expect from this administration. Mob tactics. Take the silver or get the lead.
404mm 19 minutes ago [-]
I’d not want to be a whistleblower during this presidency. Whistleblowers tend to have really bad luck crossing the street on a good day.
Der_Einzige 56 minutes ago [-]
Trumps favorite political fixer, Rodger stone, was in prison for witness tampering before he was pardoned by Cheeto in chief.
He needs to be back in prison yesterday.
CaptWillard 41 minutes ago [-]
[flagged]
rfrey 37 minutes ago [-]
What does this mean? You sound pleased the administration is doing things like this.
CaptWillard 31 minutes ago [-]
[flagged]
shadowgovt 3 minutes ago [-]
[delayed]
Zamaamiro 25 minutes ago [-]
The gaslighting is you calling the report that this whistleblower was threatened “fan fiction”.
Zamaamiro 38 minutes ago [-]
What kind of response is this?
pc86 33 minutes ago [-]
It's about as on-topic and substantive a comment calling USDS employees "cyber criminal" and calling Trump "Cheeto in chief." Which is to say all these accounts regardless of political belief should just be banned. It would make the discourse on these political threads much better.
But it's certainly telling that only one of these off topic comments actually got flagged.
Zamaamiro 27 minutes ago [-]
Cyber criminals is factual. This is who Elon staffed DOGE with.
> But it's certainly telling that only one of these off topic comments actually got flagged.
Well, right now, the flagged one was "Oh, you guys are adorable.", which didn't try to make a substantive argument or convey information. At least the Cheeto one did. "Adorable" is the least-civil and least-useful comment, so it's not only ideology that explains why it got flagged.
CaptWillard 29 minutes ago [-]
Bingo.
potato3732842 1 hours ago [-]
Maybe I'm too cynical but I think the fact that they gave the guy a warning instead of building a frivolous case, emailing that over to the DOJ and letting the FBI do their typical home invasion or having a few dozen dudes jump out of black SUVs and dog pile him while he's walking down the street is pretty courteous by fed-cop standards.
Edit: I think y'all are unaware how badly the feds treat people under their scrutiny on a "normal day". The Bryan Malinowski treatment is a lot more common than the Martha Stewart treatment.
AIPedant 7 minutes ago [-]
The reason you are being downvoted to smithereens is that Bryan Malinowski was credibly accused of serious crimes (arms trafficking) wheres Daniel Berulis is accused of reporting serious crimes. You're making a preposterous and immoral false equivalence.
potato3732842 2 minutes ago [-]
That's why I compared Brian to Martha (who was not only accused but convicted) and not Brian to Danial.
9283409232 54 minutes ago [-]
DOGE aren't federal agents. They are cyber criminals doing Elon's bidding.
41 minutes ago [-]
acdha 2 hours ago [-]
This part is really damning: a real efficiency audit might need a lot of access to look for signs of hidden activity, but they’d never need to hide traces of what they did:
> Meanwhile, according to the disclosure and records of internal communications, members of the DOGE team asked that their activities not be logged on the system and then appeared to try to cover their tracks behind them, turning off monitoring tools and manually deleting records of their access — evasive behavior that several cybersecurity experts interviewed by NPR compared to what criminal or state-sponsored hackers might do.
The subsequent message about Russian activity could be a coincidence–Internet background noise-but given how these are not very technically skilled and are moving very fast in systems they don’t understand, I’d be completely unsurprised to learn that they unintentionally left something exposed or that one of them has been compromised.
throw0101c 13 minutes ago [-]
> This part is really damning: a real efficiency audit
There were already people auditing departments, but they got fired early on:
<A real efficiency audit might need a lot of access to look for signs of hidden activity, but they’d never need to hide traces of what they did
In fact I would imagine they would do exactly the opposite because they would look at the mere ability to hide what they did as an audit finding.
tjpnz 21 minutes ago [-]
Everything's going to have to be replaced and it's going to be hugely expensive. But that's not going to happen until at least 2029 - plenty of time for bad actors to get settled in and cause real damage.
c-linkage 14 minutes ago [-]
Do you honestly believe there will be fair elections in 2028?
More importantly, do you believe there will be elections?
aftbit 2 minutes ago [-]
Do you honestly believe there have ever been _fair_ elections in America? Do you honestly believe there will not be at least _some_ kind of election in 2028? Even if it's staged, form must be respected.
ndsipa_pomu 33 minutes ago [-]
> criminal or state-sponsored hackers
It looks to be both
atkailash 1 hours ago [-]
[dead]
tlogan 19 minutes ago [-]
The unfortunate reality is that a half of the US population sees the NLRB as a burden on small businesses—primarily because its policies shift frequently, making compliance costly and complex for those without deep legal resources. [1]
And the same half of the population do not trust anything what npr.org says.
Understanding the above dynamic is key to grasping the current state of discourse in the U.S.
Some may claim that NPR is retaliating for getting defunded for the next 2 years.
pnutjam 1 hours ago [-]
This checks out because all those DOGE hires appear to be hackers, and they are now state sponsored.
Most of them could never pass a basic background check, much less a TS or even public trust from one of the more invasive Federal agencies.
> The best-known member of Elon Musk's U.S. DOGE Service team of technologists once provided support to a cybercrime gang that bragged about trafficking in stolen data and cyberstalking an FBI agent, according to digital records reviewed by Reuters.
It’s a common mistake to think that folks like the parent commenter are trying to engage in an intellectually honest discussion.
ceejayoz 22 minutes ago [-]
I'm under no illusions they're commenting in good faith, but at times I find it valuable to highlight that fact.
morkalork 18 minutes ago [-]
"Hark" goes the sealion, "sources?"
flanked-evergl 5 minutes ago [-]
That in no way supports the claim: "Most of them could never pass a basic background check".
If there is no support for it, and if it is baseless, that is entirely fine.
randunel 46 minutes ago [-]
Is the article unclear? Would people who collaborate with known criminal groups pass basic background checks?
Granted, the sample size is low, but it doesn't look likely the rest of the gang would be any different.
flanked-evergl 6 minutes ago [-]
One staffer is not "most of them". The article in no way supportes the claim.
bryanrasmussen 46 minutes ago [-]
a basic background check would invalidate someone with the described background.
boesboes 38 minutes ago [-]
Source: water is wet.
Go gaslight somewhere else.
grandempire 31 minutes ago [-]
> The small, independent federal agency
I still don’t think this notion holds up. Which branch are they under, who do they report to?
> after they started detecting suspicious log-in attempts from an IP address in Russia
Why would real Russian hackers not do anything to obscure their ip? Also if you have ever run a public server you have gotten such requests from Russia.
This appears to be in the article to mislead technical readers and prey on russia anxiety.
pavel_lishin 16 minutes ago [-]
> > The small, independent federal agency
> I still don’t think this notion holds up.
What notion doesn't hold up? That a federal agency can be small & independent?
> Which branch are they under, who do they report to?
> The NLRB is governed by a five-person board and a general counsel, all of whom are appointed by the president with the consent of the Senate. Board members are appointed for five-year terms and the general counsel is appointed for a four-year term. The general counsel acts as a prosecutor and the board acts as an appellate quasi-judicial body from decisions of 36 administrative law judges, as of November 2023.[4] The NLRB is headquartered at 1015 Half St. SE, Washington, D.C., and it has over 30 regional, sub-regional, and residential offices throughout the United States.
> Why would real Russian hackers not do anything to obscure their ip?
Why would the fox bother hiding the hole someone dug for it under the henhouse?
grandempire 14 minutes ago [-]
> That a federal agency can be small & independent?
Yes. They are either in the legislative, executive, or judicial branch.
And before you send more Wikipedia links, be aware there is a long history and chain of Supreme Court cases about this question.
> Why would the fox bother hiding the hole someone dug for it under the henhouse?
Still spreading the Russian asset conspiracy theory? Why wouldn’t they want to hide their crimes from future enemies?
7 minutes ago [-]
AIPedant 14 minutes ago [-]
The NLRB is one of many independent agencies of the executive branch created by Congrees, and they don't report to anyone except for their own boards. The president and Congress have influence over the boards but no direct control over the agency. The idea that the president can just ignore these laws because of a "unitary executive" theory is authoritarian bullshit.
And the concern probably isn't Russian hackers, it's American hackers spoofing their IP address. Also you are ignoring that DOGE made the server public when it wasn't supposed to be.
grandempire 9 minutes ago [-]
> The idea that the president can just ignore these laws because of a "unitary executive" theory is authoritarian bullshit.
The question of whether the president is violating congresses power by downsizing or neutering an agency they have created is something democrats should pursue.
But no - there are no people outside the org chart. That’s just dysfunctional, no man can serve two masters, etc.
If it were true than congress can create agencies for themselves with more power than is granted them in the constitution.
softwaredoug 1 hours ago [-]
Some context as I understand it is DOGE employees are all temporary gov't employees whose employment expires (in June?). Assuming they follow the law there (big If), then they scramble around these agencies with tremendous urgency trying to please Elon (or the powers that be?).
And they absolutely should be resisted with this deadline in mind...
grandempire 45 minutes ago [-]
> particularly when those staffers noticed a spike in data leaving the agency. It's possible that the data included sensitive information on unions, ongoing legal cases and corporate secrets
This entire article appears to be speculation about data they MAY have taken with no evidence besides large file size that they are misusing something.
The discussion with the “whistle blower” and other experts is only about how serious it would be IF they misused it.
Am I reading it wrong?
JumpCrisscross 40 minutes ago [-]
There is evidence DOGE went out of its way to illegally conceal what it was doing. That, alone, is enough to put these kids in jail one day.
jasonlotito 3 minutes ago [-]
Yes. You claim:
"This entire article appears to be speculation about data they MAY have taken with no evidence besides large file size that they are misusing something ...[and] is only about how serious it would be IF they misused it."
This paragraph makes it clear it's not just about misusing data and large file sizes.
> Those forensic digital records are important for record-keeping requirements and they allow for troubleshooting, but they also allow experts to investigate potential breaches, sometimes even tracing the attacker's path back to the vulnerability that let them inside a network.
Let's be clear:
> Those engineers were also concerned by DOGE staffers' insistence that their activities not be logged, allowing them to probe the NLRB's systems and discover information about potential security flaws or vulnerabilities without being detected.
Neither of these have to do with "large file size" or misusing data.
"Am I reading it wrong?"
Yes. Now, before you go moving goal posts, you made claims, and I've debunked those claims with quotes you said you needed. Because clearly the article is ALSO talking about these other things as problematic as well, so it's not "the entire article". (Also, the "entire article appears"? Appears? Just read it, it talks about numerous things, and is very clear on the different elements it's talking about.)
This isn't the only stuff mentioned, so be careful about claiming "oh, I just missed that" or some such because there are other things that can be referenced, such as the massive amount of text spent on the whistleblower issues and the threats made to them.
And before you talk about this just being "speculation," that's why we have the process we have, so people can make claims that can then be investigated. And that's what's being stopped.
Finally, "no evidence besides large file size" is also not true.
"Am I reading it wrong?"
As someone said, it's more likely you didn't even read it.
9283409232 41 minutes ago [-]
Someone exfiltrated sensitive data. That isn't in question. The only question is who did it and why. As far as DOGE's involvement, there is no proof but there is plenty of evidence.
grandempire 41 minutes ago [-]
Cite a section of the article that makes this claim.
bhouston 36 minutes ago [-]
The issue is we don't know what they took and they took steps to hide their tracks. This is whacked territory we are in. You can defend it but normally there are checks and controls in government for a reason. The fact that we are normalizing that certain very ideologically groups in government do not have checks and balances is pretty strange - based on nothing more than a "trust us, we are the good guys." This never works out in the end.
grandempire 34 minutes ago [-]
[flagged]
bhouston 30 minutes ago [-]
It is right in the article:
"The small, independent federal agency investigates and adjudicates complaints about unfair labor practices. It stores reams of potentially sensitive data, from confidential information about employees who want to form unions to proprietary business information."
"But according to an official whistleblower disclosure shared with Congress and other federal overseers that was obtained by NPR, subsequent interviews with the whistleblower and records of internal communications, technical staff members were alarmed about what DOGE engineers did when they were granted access, particularly when those staffers noticed a spike in data leaving the agency. It's possible that the data included sensitive information on unions, ongoing legal cases and corporate secrets — data that four labor law experts tell NPR should almost never leave the NLRB and that has nothing to do with making the government more efficient or cutting spending."
And because DOGE deleted the access records and logs, we cannot prove it either way. That is pretty suspicious.
32 minutes ago [-]
9283409232 37 minutes ago [-]
> Then, Berulis started tracking sensitive data leaving the places it's meant to live, according to his official disclosure. First, he saw a chunk of data exiting the NxGen case management system's "nucleus," inside the NLRB system, Berulis explained. Then, he saw a large spike in outbound traffic leaving the network itself.
> From what he could see, the data leaving, almost all text files, added up to around 10 gigabytes — or the equivalent of a full stack of encyclopedias if someone printed them, he explained. It's a sizable chunk of the total data in the NLRB system, though the agency itself hosts over 10 terabytes in historical data. It's unclear which files were copied and removed or whether they were consolidated and compressed, which could mean even more data was exfiltrated.
> Berulis says someone appeared to be doing something called DNS tunneling to prevent the data exfiltration from being detected. He came to that conclusion, outlined in his disclosure, after he saw a traffic spike in DNS requests parallel to the data being exfiltrated, a spike 1,000 times the normal number of requests.
> And Berulis noticed that an unknown user had exported a "user roster," a file with contact information for outside lawyers who have worked with the NLRB.
And more if you actually read the article. About a third of it is about the data that was taken.
grandempire 36 minutes ago [-]
> with no evidence besides large file size that they are misusing something.
bhouston 33 minutes ago [-]
Why did they actively hide their tracks? In law this relates to:
- Spoliation of evidence - Intentionally destroying or concealing evidence can lead to legal sanctions and adverse inferences.
- Consciousness of guilt - Actions taken to cover tracks (deleting logs, hiding records) are often admissible to show awareness of wrongdoing.
- Obstruction of justice - Deliberately impeding an investigation by destroying evidence is itself a crime in many jurisdictions.
intermerda 26 minutes ago [-]
> Am I reading it wrong?
Based on your comments, you're not reading the article at all.
grandempire 25 minutes ago [-]
Easiest way to correct me is with a quote - that way others can see your interpretation from the text.
josefresco 1 hours ago [-]
Wow this made it through the "snowflake" filter on Hacker News regarding anything negative about Elon or Trump. Typically these posts are flagged as being "political" yet here we are on the front page no less! Proud of you guys.
This is like 947 on a list of terrible things happening because of this administration.
> The federal judge presiding over the case seeking Abrego Garcia's return to the United States, Paula Xinis, noted that he has no criminal record in the United States or in El Salvador, and said the gang membership charge came from “a singular unsubstantiated allegation.” “The ‘evidence’ against Abrego Garcia consisted of nothing more than his Chicago Bulls hat and hoodie, and a vague, uncorroborated allegation from a confidential informant claiming he belonged to MS-13’s ‘Western’ clique in New York — a place he has never lived,” she found.
They can do this to YOU, your children, your loved ones. Anyone can be dissapeared with no recourse.
yodsanklai 20 minutes ago [-]
> This is like 947 on a list of terrible things happening because of this administration.
This is on purpose. Trump has been slowly pushing the Overton window. It seems everything is fair game and US citizens are largely apathetic, scared or favorable to Trump's action.
bruhwait 44 minutes ago [-]
[dead]
mistrial9 50 minutes ago [-]
[flagged]
josefresco 45 minutes ago [-]
> rampantly false
Is Abrego Garcia not real?
JumpCrisscross 39 minutes ago [-]
Garcia has not been disappeared. Kidnapped, illegally detained, denied habeus corpus, yes. But not disappeared.
HelloMcFly 24 minutes ago [-]
"Disappeared" in this sense refers to the manner in which he was abducted, not his ongoing status. The word is not subject to a strict legalese interpretation in these comments.
Though I'd argue both uses are acceptable in common use discussion since even if we know where he is since he's going to be incarcerated indefinitely with no due process, no access to lawyers, no civil rights. How long could he be dead without anyone knowing? Literally indefinitely?
JumpCrisscross 35 seconds ago [-]
> word is not subject to a strict legalese interpretation in these comments
Disappearing has been consistently used to refer to illegal and inconspicuous detention since WWII. The person was there and now they are not. There is no arrest record. There are no lawyers. They may be detained, dead or on holiday.
Diluting the term, particularly on this precipice, is incredibly dangerous.
veridies 40 minutes ago [-]
Supreme Court justice Sotomayor notes that nothing in the government’s reasoning about not returning Garcia is unique to noncitizens. President Trump says he wants to send “homegrowns” to the gulag in El Salvador, and is exploring his legal options. In court, the government has argued that they have no recourse to force the return of any prisoner from that gulag. This is neither false nor inflammatory; it is the administration’s stated goal.
freen 43 minutes ago [-]
Some of us work in tech and have skin colors that are similar to the person in question, and are deciding on the level of risk we are willing to take.
That this is not obvious to you is a clear indication of the fact that this isn’t something you personally worry about.
phanimahesh 11 minutes ago [-]
It is probably not a bad idea for people that don't fit in to consider obtaining citizenship elsewhere for their safety. Some non citizens are returning, though many who are considering this are tied down by their work or other constraints.
soco 2 hours ago [-]
I'm not american so can somebody please explain me, how is deleting logs and every trace of your actions helping with government efficiency?
rsynnott 2 hours ago [-]
Nothing they are doing is related to government efficiency. You can't really put too much faith in names.
XorNot 49 minutes ago [-]
The basic rule of government naming: the more of GOOD THING in the name, the less of that it will be.
viraptor 26 minutes ago [-]
That generalises to a lot of naming. Papers like Fakt or Pravda, country DPKR, political parties that mention law, justice and order, etc.
rsynnott 18 minutes ago [-]
I always particularly liked the Committee of Public Safety, for this (they're the ones who did the Reign of Terror, which doesn't seem _particularly_ public-safety-oriented.)
JKCalhoun 14 minutes ago [-]
В « Правде » нет известий, а в « Известиях » нет правды
croes 2 hours ago [-]
How is firing people helping government efficiency?
2OEH8eoCRo0 54 minutes ago [-]
Yes, how?
lesuorac 2 hours ago [-]
Log storage is expensive.
skeeter2020 41 minutes ago [-]
It's not the storage, but processing with NR and DataDog is what's expensive. That's why the efficiency team asked to not have their actions logged in the first place.
phanimahesh 10 minutes ago [-]
I can honestly not tell if this comment was intended to be taken seriously, or if it was tongue in cheek.
alistairSH 1 hours ago [-]
Nothing about DOGE or the Trump administration is about efficiency. It's just a label they use to con gullible voters.
Their real goal is more likely a combination of grift and settling grudges.
Edit - typos
dandanua 4 minutes ago [-]
The next administration won't be able to spend time and money investigating crimes of the current one /s
delusional 2 hours ago [-]
That way they can save some money litigating Elon and his goons. It's not like that litigation would get anywhere anyway, so better to save the public the waste /s
actionfromafar 2 hours ago [-]
To more efficiently rout trouble-makers and unions.
tyrrvk 19 minutes ago [-]
This coupled with the hot mike incident yesterday where Trump was saying how El Salvador needed to build more mega prisons for the "home grown..terrorists" is beyond concerning. Sure sounds like DOGE is compiling lists of 'less desirable s' that will soon be swept off the streets in unmarked vans. America has turned fully fascist.
9283409232 1 hours ago [-]
It should be clear at this point that DOGE is trying to create a unified database of all persons in the US for targeting. Every single bit of data that they can get about you from the government or social media will be tagged to you Minority Report style. They were clear about wanting to deport citizens to El Salvador as well. Once you are identified as the other side they will come for you. If you are waiting for it to get worse before taking action and getting involved, we are already at that point.
> And Berulis noticed that an unknown user had exported a "user roster," a file with contact information for outside lawyers who have worked with the NLRB.
Possibly looking for lawyers for Trump to target with EOs or blackmail.
wormlord 29 minutes ago [-]
How you are getting downvotes is beyond me. People are finally waking up to the idea that the whole point of the Trump admin is to privatize the government, but haven't woken up to the fact that we are entering an era of state terror. Keep your heads buried HN, you'll be dragged kicking and screaming into reality in a few months anyways.
giraffe_lady 4 minutes ago [-]
It's extremely frustrating and something I've thought a lot about over the years where we were pretty obviously building towards this outcome. A couple things:
First the "average" american is softly but ideologically committed to liberalism¹ & democracy as fundamental values. From that perspective the mind kind of recoils from accepting this. If this is really what's happening, what does civic obligation demand of me? How does that reconcile with my inability to keep my family safe in the face of a motivated & powerful state that wishes to harm me through them? Easier to believe this isn't what is happening, I don't need to take action yet.
Second a significant part of the userbase here, as with the general population, supports some or all of these actions. Simple as.
¹ Like in the traditional sense, ie "a political and moral philosophy based on the rights of the individual, liberty, consent of the governed, political equality, the right to private property, and equality before the law" from wikipedia.
ck2 48 minutes ago [-]
That backdoor code is going to lurk for decades.
Not only will Musk be able to tap into it for years but foreign governments.
bilbo0s 23 minutes ago [-]
This is the real problem, and the reason we never should have allowed access to sensitive government and societal data in this fashion.
31 minutes ago [-]
ajross 24 minutes ago [-]
I've said this repeatedly, but write this down: before this administration is out we are going to have a major (probably multiple) scandal where DOGE staffers get caught with some kind of horrifying self-enrichment scam based on the data they're hoovering. It could be simple insider trading, it could be selling the data to a FBI sting, it might take lots of forms. But it's going to happen.
These are a bunch of 20-something tech bro ego cases convinced of their crusade to remake government along libertarian axes they learned from Reddit/4chan/HN. These are simply not people motivated out of a genuine desire to improve the public good. And they've been given essentially unsupervised access to some outrageously tempting levers.
potato3732842 6 minutes ago [-]
Doesn't matter if they're good people or not "given essentially unsupervised access to some outrageously tempting levers" that scandal WILL happen eventually.
giraffe_lady 2 hours ago [-]
The administration has said they want to start gulaging citizens. They aren't going to do it randomly, it'll start with sure actual criminals, and then people they think you'll believe are criminals, but why would they stop there. What can a palantir-ICE collaboration do with this data. "First they came for the trade unionists" is halfway through the poem you know.
marcosdumay 10 minutes ago [-]
> it'll start with sure actual criminals
Have they target any single criminal yet? Because they have sent two planes of people here to Brazil and nobody there was wanted by either country.
Also, Brazil has a list of wanted criminals at Interpol with known addresses in Florida that they aren't arresting.
actionfromafar 2 hours ago [-]
Combined with "oops can't get them back" it's very powerful. Combine it with not advertising faces of snatched people on broadcast TV, and it's a very useful tool inded. People will just disappear. It won't be legal or illegal, just a thing that happens from time to time. Police won't search too hard for the missing people, because no good can come out of finding out.
practice9 46 minutes ago [-]
Kinda similar in a way to China or Russia “disappearances”
thrance 2 hours ago [-]
They've already sent an innocent man there and acknowledged he was innocent, then refused to bring him back when the courts, the opposition and finally SCOTUS each commanded them to bring him back.
This was just a test, and it was successful. They can now disappear and deport anyone they want with no repercussions whatsoever. The GOP is a criminal organization and their followers share the responsibility of what happens next.
xnx 2 hours ago [-]
> then refused to bring him back when the courts
It was extra ridiculous/insulting/terrifying to see the heads of both countries in the same room saying that there was nothing they could do about the situation.
tromp 1 hours ago [-]
SCOTUS granting the president far reaching immunity was an invitation for the president to be in contempt of SCOTUS whenever it pleases him, and to just piss on the constitution he took an oath on defending.
avhception 2 hours ago [-]
Wasn't the argument for the right to bear arms always that it would prevent a criminal government from having it's way?
Now, how's that working out so far?
alabastervlog 50 minutes ago [-]
Not “always”. It wasn’t the reason that became an amendment, national defense was. People later emphasized that rather off-label justification when state militias were nationalized and the main purpose of the amendment became wholly obsolete.
avhception 34 minutes ago [-]
Today I learned, thanks! As a European, I'm not overly familiar with the genesis of American law ;)
wormlord 26 minutes ago [-]
America's gun culture is very closely tied to its settler culture. Most right wing gun nuts are barely able to conceal their fears/hopes for a race war in all but name.
That said, there are plenty of examples of progressive forces arming themselves. The Black Panthers are a good example. Without their armed militancy I think the US government would have been a lot less likely to capitulate to the demands of the peaceful civil rights activists.
watwut 2 hours ago [-]
No. It was what peoppe who want to use guns to force own autocracy say.
The people with guns support these measures.
DaiPlusPlus 2 hours ago [-]
> This was just a test, and it was successful
It's too soon to say it's "successful": SCOTUS was 9-0 against and that was still only a few days ago, so far from being a success it's now turning into a constitutional crisis... assuming the administration doesn't fold, or flip-flop, or some combination of the two - which we've already seen plenty of[1].
----------
[1] the seemingly arbitrary and capricious tariff changes announced almost every day ever since the-day-after-April-fools-day.
thoroughburro 1 hours ago [-]
So, he’s being brought back then?
ben_w 44 minutes ago [-]
Roll a D20: if it's even he comes back, if it's less than 10 he mysteriously disappears.
dionian 43 minutes ago [-]
If you read the SCOTUS ruling, all it upholds from the lower courts decision is that the USG must 'facilitate', not 'effectuate' his release. AFAIK the Court doesn't have a way to order El Salvador to do so
I'm assuming the response to this is going to be along the lines of 'oh this doesnt prove he was innocent, they say he was a member of ms-13 etc etc etc' because evidently innocent until proven guilty (which they provided no proof of) isn't a thing anymore
flanked-evergl 58 minutes ago [-]
The article in no way claims the man was innocent. If you can't cite the claim thats okay, I did not think you could.
VoidWhisperer 52 minutes ago [-]
"The US government has conceded Mr Ábrego García was deported because of an "administrative error", though it also says he is a member of the MS-13 gang - something his lawyer denies. "
Try actually reading the article next time. Again, the burden of proof here should be falling on PROVING he is a member of ms-13, not proving he isn't. You are obviously arguing this in bad faith.
flanked-evergl 2 minutes ago [-]
Does not make him innocent. They had every right to remove him, just not to El Salvador[1].
The removal being in error does not make him innocent.
alabastervlog 52 minutes ago [-]
I can’t find any proof you’re innocent, only a complete lack or evidence that you are guilty.
Guess we better send you to CECOT. Have fun with your 0.6m^2 of living space. Too bad you weren’t innocent.
potato3732842 51 minutes ago [-]
He's an illegal who had a credible (like actually credible, like you could pitch it to someone in the year 2002, not the flimsy 2020s BS) claim for asylum but didn't file in time. He was eventually caught up in the system for reasons not related to the commission of any crime. ICE looked at his case, and gave him a "we won't deport you because your case is pending" status.
And that does make the deportation erroneous, that does not make him innocent.
viraptor 40 minutes ago [-]
> He's an illegal ...
Small but important difference in this case: He entered illegally initially. Since the immigration hearing he's been a legal resident. So "He was an illegal ...".
flanked-evergl 4 minutes ago [-]
This is false. He has no legal status [1]. He could be removed, just not to El Salvador. That does not give him legal status or make him a resident.
I don't disagree, but I bet ICE doesn't see it that way. I mean why else would someone who's been granted a legal status pending his case wind up on their list of people to roll up on.
ziddoap 1 hours ago [-]
If you google "innocent man sent to el salvador" you'll get dozens on dozens on dozens of results from which you can pick your favorite news site to catch up.
flanked-evergl 1 hours ago [-]
I checked the first two results and not one of them said the man was innocent [1][2]. It's okay if the claim is baseless and there is no citation, but asking me to find a citation for someone else's baseless claim is not really okay.
>asking me to find a citation for someone else's baseless claim is not really okay.
It is one of the biggest news stories in the last month, and various articles (at least 3 that I can think of) have been here on HN. It's trivially searchable. Asking for a citation is almost certainly bad faith.
>I checked the first two results and not one of them said the man was innocent
It's pretty obscure, but there's this thing called "innocent until proven guilty". The man never had his time in court. The US admitted it was a mistake. What are you looking for? Just being contrarian for the sake of it?
ceejayoz 58 minutes ago [-]
Our system deems people innocent until proven guilty of a crime. That has not happened - he is not charged with any.
Can you cite anything showing him having been convicted of something?
flanked-evergl 57 minutes ago [-]
I made no claim one way or the other. I asked you to cite a claim.
You probably were taught this in elementary school.
miltonlost 52 minutes ago [-]
All you do is ask for "cite?" and then complain when the citation isn't want you asked for, partly because you never ask for anything specific. You're just a troll.
viraptor 58 minutes ago [-]
"The Trump administration trapped a wrongly deported man in a catch-22", "There is no evidence that Abrego García is a terrorist or a member of the gang MS-13 as the Trump administration has claimed." from your first link.
flanked-evergl 56 minutes ago [-]
[flagged]
viraptor 48 minutes ago [-]
Unless you can find a court hearing / docket / charges, or some report about them, he's innocent.
If you think that's not enough, you're probably not innocent either... unless you have a way to prove that no charge exists against you in any jurisdiction in the world. Do you get why people assume innocence here now?
SoyAnto 43 minutes ago [-]
I think you're arguing in bad faith.
You would think this administration would jump at the opportunity of showing the media any proof that Abrego Garcia was a member of any gang, no matter how circumstantial or weak the proof is. But I've yet to see any of it.
viraptor 1 hours ago [-]
Check any website with news from the last few weeks.
flanked-evergl 59 minutes ago [-]
I checked the first two results and not one of them said the man was innocent [1][2]. It's okay if the claim is baseless and there is no citation, but asking me to find a citation for someone else's baseless claim is not really okay.
Well it would help if there weren’t numerous issues with the data as presented on that site. Specifically now they are only claiming somewhere around 28 billion saved in cancelled contracts when in early February they claimed like 55 billion. Seems odd that over time the amount saved would go down despite the alleged number being of cancellations going up.
Also it is concerning that the largest amount from an individual contract saved is a cancelled deportation facility contract. Seems at odds with the Administration’s goals to ramp up mass deportation but cancel the contract for building a holding facility for unaccompanied minors.
My suggestion would be if the goal is to eliminate debt we would need to target social security reform such as raising the retirement ages and eliminating the cap on the payroll tax. Additionally, but far less realistic would be implementing a Land Value Tax. Not cancel random contracts that amount to a tiny fraction of the budget and propose massive tax cuts like the current administration seems to be doing.
fads_go 2 hours ago [-]
The parent's russian propoganda post does not mention that the posted savings are full of inaccuracies.
Nor does the propoganda define "waste", if one looks at the actual cuts, it seems to be focused on "things Herr M. doesn't like". which is not a good definition of "waste".
I've timestamped the above video to where it mentions the Clinton / Gore bit, but the whole video is enlightening.
alabastervlog 1 hours ago [-]
There are also constant ongoing efforts at improving efficiency, which is why they keep going “ah ha! We found it!” then poor bureaucrats who are trying to do their fucking jobs while these idiots run around messing things up have to explain, “no, you’re seeing an artifact of record-keeping practices that exist because [very good reason], you’re wrong yet again, maybe try asking literally anyone who knows about these data sets”
They also love to throw around the word “fraud” while bringing no charges. Despite the DOJ being in Trump’s control. Same pattern as other lies (“rampant voter fraud! We have proof” ok so when you’re in change you’ll prosecute, right? You should! That’s bad if true! I mean I’ve looked at your proof and it doesn’t appear true, but maybe you have more proof you haven’t shown! “Uhhh… [smoke bomb]”)
Plus, we have the GAO and CBO. Trump won’t want to listen to them because they’ll say “our #1 problem is we keep cutting taxes”, and “there’s not much waste to be eliminated cutting government workers”, because that’s true at this point, but they exist. It’s not like nobody’s been looking at these kinds of things. That’s just bullshit.
djaychela 1 hours ago [-]
"The people voted for major reform."
What they got was a pocket-lining idiot, and genuinely one of the most morally bankrupt people I've ever known of as his tech right-hand man. Musk is a moral imbecile, a 13-year old incel trapped in the body of an overweight mid-50s mess. Yes, he's been involved in some great things (SpaceX and Tesla), but he thinks that translates into a god-like ability to do anything and that he's right about everything.
These numbers don't even stand up to casual scrutiny. And I'm from the UK so it doesn't really directly affect me (although the orange idiot's shenanigans have done so to a small degree). But if you really believe this site, you're divorced from reality, and maybe drinking the same kool-aid that the tech muppets who are on DOGE are.
ipython 1 hours ago [-]
Realistic alternative? How about starting by reading tfa? I’d say you don’t need to physically threaten people who ask for basic security practices to be followed, for one.
Peritract 1 hours ago [-]
Do you have a more independent/reliable source?
cedws 1 hours ago [-]
DOGE results according to DOGE. We all know what kind of track record Elon Musk has as a bullshitter.
piva00 43 minutes ago [-]
Not only that, Trump has already spent US$ 155B more than Biden, DOGE claims to have shaved US$ 150B, overall this administration has already increased spending by US$ 5B even after firing a lot of civil servants.
The worst is that the effects of this shaving off will only be felt over time, when National Parks start crumbling, when ATCs start quitting, the government machine of the USA has been eroded, inevitably it will fall into a landslide.
acdha 1 hours ago [-]
First, every objective audit has found many problems with that data, ranging from taking credit for things which were terminated under the Biden administration to listing the maximum ceiling on a flexible contract (IDIQ) as the total savings even though the amounts actually spent were far lower (like canceling your credit card and saying you saved the limit), and even counting the same contract multiple times.
Second, you have to look at the cost of their actions. They’ve disrupted the functioning of the entire federal government and doing in a very haphazard manner. That means that a lot of current spending is wasted by DOGE _and_ that the business of the government isn’t getting done. For example, whether or not you think the U.S. should engage in foreign aid, under DOGE they paid money to send people to help in Myanmar only to lay them off after they arrived on site, squandering all possible value. That story is being repeated all over the country right now and in many cases the loses are permanent: if they choose to waste payroll having people come back to an office where they can’t work, the job isn’t getting done and there’s no way to recover the wasted payroll. As they keep losing lawsuits, it’s also likely that the amounts cut will be exceeded by the cost of settlements when they breach contracts or fail to provide a service required by statute.
One really big area is tax collection: the IRS is already estimating revenue reductions on the order of half a billion dollars, and since they’ve been sacking a lot of the law enforcement for businesses and high-net wealth individuals, that will get worse as people feel confident cheating more aggressively.
Lastly, you have to look at the economy. Estimated have each federal job supporting 2-3 other jobs, and federal spending drives the economy in many parts of the country. They’ve already cut growth of the entire economy into the negative (from +2.5% in January to -2-3% now - see https://www.atlantafed.org/cqer/research/gdpnow) and a lot of that is driven by federal cuts.
hypeatei 1 hours ago [-]
There were already people called "inspector generals" which handled waste, fraud, and abuse but Trump fired about 17 of them in his first week. Deploying tech bros to solve the problem is naive at best and malicious at worst. The arrogance in assuming that no auditor before them looked into the SSA database and saw DOB records going back to 1875 is outstanding.
Sonnigeszeug 1 hours ago [-]
You do understand, that the upcoming tax cuts for rich people will throw the USA Debt above defence savings?
And it will increase the debt significantly?
All of that while DOGE, some random dudes without any understanding how things work, stop things which are globally agreed on (global aid) or just not even worth mentioning in the grand schem?
But hey if you prefer to defend DOGE ssaving 160 Billion while the tax cut for the rich adds Trillions to debt, yeah do a happy dance. Be proud. Or whatever your comment is trying to do.
Funny that IRS also gets defunded. But hey taxes right? :D
gibsonf1 18 minutes ago [-]
[flagged]
dboreham 1 hours ago [-]
Are we great again yet?
indoordin0saur 28 minutes ago [-]
"Whistleblower details how executive branch looked at executive branch's data."
Rendered at 14:03:32 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
He needs to be back in prison yesterday.
But it's certainly telling that only one of these off topic comments actually got flagged.
https://fortune.com/2025/03/27/a-doge-staffer-working-as-a-s...
Well, right now, the flagged one was "Oh, you guys are adorable.", which didn't try to make a substantive argument or convey information. At least the Cheeto one did. "Adorable" is the least-civil and least-useful comment, so it's not only ideology that explains why it got flagged.
Edit: I think y'all are unaware how badly the feds treat people under their scrutiny on a "normal day". The Bryan Malinowski treatment is a lot more common than the Martha Stewart treatment.
> Meanwhile, according to the disclosure and records of internal communications, members of the DOGE team asked that their activities not be logged on the system and then appeared to try to cover their tracks behind them, turning off monitoring tools and manually deleting records of their access — evasive behavior that several cybersecurity experts interviewed by NPR compared to what criminal or state-sponsored hackers might do.
The subsequent message about Russian activity could be a coincidence–Internet background noise-but given how these are not very technically skilled and are moving very fast in systems they don’t understand, I’d be completely unsurprised to learn that they unintentionally left something exposed or that one of them has been compromised.
There were already people auditing departments, but they got fired early on:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inspector_general#United_State...
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_dismissals_of_inspectors_...
There's even an entire agency devoted to auditing:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Accountability_Offi...
Trying to find efficiency by bringing in the private sector is not a new thing:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Commission
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownlow_Committee
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoover_Commission
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Partnership_for_Reinv...
In fact I would imagine they would do exactly the opposite because they would look at the mere ability to hide what they did as an audit finding.
More importantly, do you believe there will be elections?
It looks to be both
And the same half of the population do not trust anything what npr.org says.
Understanding the above dynamic is key to grasping the current state of discourse in the U.S.
[1] https://edworkforce.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?Docum...
> The best-known member of Elon Musk's U.S. DOGE Service team of technologists once provided support to a cybercrime gang that bragged about trafficking in stolen data and cyberstalking an FBI agent, according to digital records reviewed by Reuters.
If there is no support for it, and if it is baseless, that is entirely fine.
Granted, the sample size is low, but it doesn't look likely the rest of the gang would be any different.
Go gaslight somewhere else.
I still don’t think this notion holds up. Which branch are they under, who do they report to?
> after they started detecting suspicious log-in attempts from an IP address in Russia
Why would real Russian hackers not do anything to obscure their ip? Also if you have ever run a public server you have gotten such requests from Russia.
This appears to be in the article to mislead technical readers and prey on russia anxiety.
> I still don’t think this notion holds up.
What notion doesn't hold up? That a federal agency can be small & independent?
> Which branch are they under, who do they report to?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Labor_Relations_Board
> The NLRB is governed by a five-person board and a general counsel, all of whom are appointed by the president with the consent of the Senate. Board members are appointed for five-year terms and the general counsel is appointed for a four-year term. The general counsel acts as a prosecutor and the board acts as an appellate quasi-judicial body from decisions of 36 administrative law judges, as of November 2023.[4] The NLRB is headquartered at 1015 Half St. SE, Washington, D.C., and it has over 30 regional, sub-regional, and residential offices throughout the United States.
> Why would real Russian hackers not do anything to obscure their ip?
Why would the fox bother hiding the hole someone dug for it under the henhouse?
Yes. They are either in the legislative, executive, or judicial branch.
And before you send more Wikipedia links, be aware there is a long history and chain of Supreme Court cases about this question.
> Why would the fox bother hiding the hole someone dug for it under the henhouse?
Still spreading the Russian asset conspiracy theory? Why wouldn’t they want to hide their crimes from future enemies?
And the concern probably isn't Russian hackers, it's American hackers spoofing their IP address. Also you are ignoring that DOGE made the server public when it wasn't supposed to be.
The question of whether the president is violating congresses power by downsizing or neutering an agency they have created is something democrats should pursue.
But no - there are no people outside the org chart. That’s just dysfunctional, no man can serve two masters, etc.
If it were true than congress can create agencies for themselves with more power than is granted them in the constitution.
And they absolutely should be resisted with this deadline in mind...
This entire article appears to be speculation about data they MAY have taken with no evidence besides large file size that they are misusing something.
The discussion with the “whistle blower” and other experts is only about how serious it would be IF they misused it.
Am I reading it wrong?
"This entire article appears to be speculation about data they MAY have taken with no evidence besides large file size that they are misusing something ...[and] is only about how serious it would be IF they misused it."
This paragraph makes it clear it's not just about misusing data and large file sizes.
> Those forensic digital records are important for record-keeping requirements and they allow for troubleshooting, but they also allow experts to investigate potential breaches, sometimes even tracing the attacker's path back to the vulnerability that let them inside a network.
Let's be clear:
> Those engineers were also concerned by DOGE staffers' insistence that their activities not be logged, allowing them to probe the NLRB's systems and discover information about potential security flaws or vulnerabilities without being detected.
Neither of these have to do with "large file size" or misusing data.
"Am I reading it wrong?"
Yes. Now, before you go moving goal posts, you made claims, and I've debunked those claims with quotes you said you needed. Because clearly the article is ALSO talking about these other things as problematic as well, so it's not "the entire article". (Also, the "entire article appears"? Appears? Just read it, it talks about numerous things, and is very clear on the different elements it's talking about.)
This isn't the only stuff mentioned, so be careful about claiming "oh, I just missed that" or some such because there are other things that can be referenced, such as the massive amount of text spent on the whistleblower issues and the threats made to them.
And before you talk about this just being "speculation," that's why we have the process we have, so people can make claims that can then be investigated. And that's what's being stopped.
Finally, "no evidence besides large file size" is also not true.
"Am I reading it wrong?"
As someone said, it's more likely you didn't even read it.
"The small, independent federal agency investigates and adjudicates complaints about unfair labor practices. It stores reams of potentially sensitive data, from confidential information about employees who want to form unions to proprietary business information."
"But according to an official whistleblower disclosure shared with Congress and other federal overseers that was obtained by NPR, subsequent interviews with the whistleblower and records of internal communications, technical staff members were alarmed about what DOGE engineers did when they were granted access, particularly when those staffers noticed a spike in data leaving the agency. It's possible that the data included sensitive information on unions, ongoing legal cases and corporate secrets — data that four labor law experts tell NPR should almost never leave the NLRB and that has nothing to do with making the government more efficient or cutting spending."
And because DOGE deleted the access records and logs, we cannot prove it either way. That is pretty suspicious.
> From what he could see, the data leaving, almost all text files, added up to around 10 gigabytes — or the equivalent of a full stack of encyclopedias if someone printed them, he explained. It's a sizable chunk of the total data in the NLRB system, though the agency itself hosts over 10 terabytes in historical data. It's unclear which files were copied and removed or whether they were consolidated and compressed, which could mean even more data was exfiltrated.
> Berulis says someone appeared to be doing something called DNS tunneling to prevent the data exfiltration from being detected. He came to that conclusion, outlined in his disclosure, after he saw a traffic spike in DNS requests parallel to the data being exfiltrated, a spike 1,000 times the normal number of requests.
> And Berulis noticed that an unknown user had exported a "user roster," a file with contact information for outside lawyers who have worked with the NLRB.
And more if you actually read the article. About a third of it is about the data that was taken.
- Spoliation of evidence - Intentionally destroying or concealing evidence can lead to legal sanctions and adverse inferences.
- Consciousness of guilt - Actions taken to cover tracks (deleting logs, hiding records) are often admissible to show awareness of wrongdoing.
- Obstruction of justice - Deliberately impeding an investigation by destroying evidence is itself a crime in many jurisdictions.
Based on your comments, you're not reading the article at all.
This is like 947 on a list of terrible things happening because of this administration.
We should be talking about this, and only this:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43682744 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43687058
> The federal judge presiding over the case seeking Abrego Garcia's return to the United States, Paula Xinis, noted that he has no criminal record in the United States or in El Salvador, and said the gang membership charge came from “a singular unsubstantiated allegation.” “The ‘evidence’ against Abrego Garcia consisted of nothing more than his Chicago Bulls hat and hoodie, and a vague, uncorroborated allegation from a confidential informant claiming he belonged to MS-13’s ‘Western’ clique in New York — a place he has never lived,” she found.
They can do this to YOU, your children, your loved ones. Anyone can be dissapeared with no recourse.
This is on purpose. Trump has been slowly pushing the Overton window. It seems everything is fair game and US citizens are largely apathetic, scared or favorable to Trump's action.
Is Abrego Garcia not real?
Though I'd argue both uses are acceptable in common use discussion since even if we know where he is since he's going to be incarcerated indefinitely with no due process, no access to lawyers, no civil rights. How long could he be dead without anyone knowing? Literally indefinitely?
Disappearing has been consistently used to refer to illegal and inconspicuous detention since WWII. The person was there and now they are not. There is no arrest record. There are no lawyers. They may be detained, dead or on holiday.
Diluting the term, particularly on this precipice, is incredibly dangerous.
That this is not obvious to you is a clear indication of the fact that this isn’t something you personally worry about.
Their real goal is more likely a combination of grift and settling grudges.
Edit - typos
> And Berulis noticed that an unknown user had exported a "user roster," a file with contact information for outside lawyers who have worked with the NLRB.
Possibly looking for lawyers for Trump to target with EOs or blackmail.
First the "average" american is softly but ideologically committed to liberalism¹ & democracy as fundamental values. From that perspective the mind kind of recoils from accepting this. If this is really what's happening, what does civic obligation demand of me? How does that reconcile with my inability to keep my family safe in the face of a motivated & powerful state that wishes to harm me through them? Easier to believe this isn't what is happening, I don't need to take action yet.
Second a significant part of the userbase here, as with the general population, supports some or all of these actions. Simple as.
¹ Like in the traditional sense, ie "a political and moral philosophy based on the rights of the individual, liberty, consent of the governed, political equality, the right to private property, and equality before the law" from wikipedia.
Not only will Musk be able to tap into it for years but foreign governments.
These are a bunch of 20-something tech bro ego cases convinced of their crusade to remake government along libertarian axes they learned from Reddit/4chan/HN. These are simply not people motivated out of a genuine desire to improve the public good. And they've been given essentially unsupervised access to some outrageously tempting levers.
Have they target any single criminal yet? Because they have sent two planes of people here to Brazil and nobody there was wanted by either country.
Also, Brazil has a list of wanted criminals at Interpol with known addresses in Florida that they aren't arresting.
This was just a test, and it was successful. They can now disappear and deport anyone they want with no repercussions whatsoever. The GOP is a criminal organization and their followers share the responsibility of what happens next.
It was extra ridiculous/insulting/terrifying to see the heads of both countries in the same room saying that there was nothing they could do about the situation.
Now, how's that working out so far?
That said, there are plenty of examples of progressive forces arming themselves. The Black Panthers are a good example. Without their armed militancy I think the US government would have been a lot less likely to capitulate to the demands of the peaceful civil rights activists.
The people with guns support these measures.
It's too soon to say it's "successful": SCOTUS was 9-0 against and that was still only a few days ago, so far from being a success it's now turning into a constitutional crisis... assuming the administration doesn't fold, or flip-flop, or some combination of the two - which we've already seen plenty of[1].
----------
[1] the seemingly arbitrary and capricious tariff changes announced almost every day ever since the-day-after-April-fools-day.
Probably more then one.
I'm assuming the response to this is going to be along the lines of 'oh this doesnt prove he was innocent, they say he was a member of ms-13 etc etc etc' because evidently innocent until proven guilty (which they provided no proof of) isn't a thing anymore
Try actually reading the article next time. Again, the burden of proof here should be falling on PROVING he is a member of ms-13, not proving he isn't. You are obviously arguing this in bad faith.
[1]: https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/abrego-garcia-and-ms-13...
The removal being in error does not make him innocent.
Guess we better send you to CECOT. Have fun with your 0.6m^2 of living space. Too bad you weren’t innocent.
And that does make the deportation erroneous, that does not make him innocent.
Small but important difference in this case: He entered illegally initially. Since the immigration hearing he's been a legal resident. So "He was an illegal ...".
[1]: https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/abrego-garcia-and-ms-13...
[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/14/abrego-garci...
[2]: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-meet-with-el-salvador...
It is one of the biggest news stories in the last month, and various articles (at least 3 that I can think of) have been here on HN. It's trivially searchable. Asking for a citation is almost certainly bad faith.
>I checked the first two results and not one of them said the man was innocent
It's pretty obscure, but there's this thing called "innocent until proven guilty". The man never had his time in court. The US admitted it was a mistake. What are you looking for? Just being contrarian for the sake of it?
Can you cite anything showing him having been convicted of something?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence
You probably were taught this in elementary school.
If you think that's not enough, you're probably not innocent either... unless you have a way to prove that no charge exists against you in any jurisdiction in the world. Do you get why people assume innocence here now?
You would think this administration would jump at the opportunity of showing the media any proof that Abrego Garcia was a member of any gang, no matter how circumstantial or weak the proof is. But I've yet to see any of it.
[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/14/abrego-garci...
[2]: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-meet-with-el-salvador...
Also it is concerning that the largest amount from an individual contract saved is a cancelled deportation facility contract. Seems at odds with the Administration’s goals to ramp up mass deportation but cancel the contract for building a holding facility for unaccompanied minors.
My suggestion would be if the goal is to eliminate debt we would need to target social security reform such as raising the retirement ages and eliminating the cap on the payroll tax. Additionally, but far less realistic would be implementing a Land Value Tax. Not cancel random contracts that amount to a tiny fraction of the budget and propose massive tax cuts like the current administration seems to be doing.
Nor does the propoganda define "waste", if one looks at the actual cuts, it seems to be focused on "things Herr M. doesn't like". which is not a good definition of "waste".
The 8 billion saving that turned out to be a 8 million saving?
https://youtu.be/lG9pxvpGY-Q?si=cii2iggD-9hAj0ms&t=900
I've timestamped the above video to where it mentions the Clinton / Gore bit, but the whole video is enlightening.
They also love to throw around the word “fraud” while bringing no charges. Despite the DOJ being in Trump’s control. Same pattern as other lies (“rampant voter fraud! We have proof” ok so when you’re in change you’ll prosecute, right? You should! That’s bad if true! I mean I’ve looked at your proof and it doesn’t appear true, but maybe you have more proof you haven’t shown! “Uhhh… [smoke bomb]”)
Plus, we have the GAO and CBO. Trump won’t want to listen to them because they’ll say “our #1 problem is we keep cutting taxes”, and “there’s not much waste to be eliminated cutting government workers”, because that’s true at this point, but they exist. It’s not like nobody’s been looking at these kinds of things. That’s just bullshit.
What they got was a pocket-lining idiot, and genuinely one of the most morally bankrupt people I've ever known of as his tech right-hand man. Musk is a moral imbecile, a 13-year old incel trapped in the body of an overweight mid-50s mess. Yes, he's been involved in some great things (SpaceX and Tesla), but he thinks that translates into a god-like ability to do anything and that he's right about everything.
These numbers don't even stand up to casual scrutiny. And I'm from the UK so it doesn't really directly affect me (although the orange idiot's shenanigans have done so to a small degree). But if you really believe this site, you're divorced from reality, and maybe drinking the same kool-aid that the tech muppets who are on DOGE are.
The worst is that the effects of this shaving off will only be felt over time, when National Parks start crumbling, when ATCs start quitting, the government machine of the USA has been eroded, inevitably it will fall into a landslide.
Second, you have to look at the cost of their actions. They’ve disrupted the functioning of the entire federal government and doing in a very haphazard manner. That means that a lot of current spending is wasted by DOGE _and_ that the business of the government isn’t getting done. For example, whether or not you think the U.S. should engage in foreign aid, under DOGE they paid money to send people to help in Myanmar only to lay them off after they arrived on site, squandering all possible value. That story is being repeated all over the country right now and in many cases the loses are permanent: if they choose to waste payroll having people come back to an office where they can’t work, the job isn’t getting done and there’s no way to recover the wasted payroll. As they keep losing lawsuits, it’s also likely that the amounts cut will be exceeded by the cost of settlements when they breach contracts or fail to provide a service required by statute.
One really big area is tax collection: the IRS is already estimating revenue reductions on the order of half a billion dollars, and since they’ve been sacking a lot of the law enforcement for businesses and high-net wealth individuals, that will get worse as people feel confident cheating more aggressively.
Lastly, you have to look at the economy. Estimated have each federal job supporting 2-3 other jobs, and federal spending drives the economy in many parts of the country. They’ve already cut growth of the entire economy into the negative (from +2.5% in January to -2-3% now - see https://www.atlantafed.org/cqer/research/gdpnow) and a lot of that is driven by federal cuts.
And it will increase the debt significantly?
All of that while DOGE, some random dudes without any understanding how things work, stop things which are globally agreed on (global aid) or just not even worth mentioning in the grand schem?
But hey if you prefer to defend DOGE ssaving 160 Billion while the tax cut for the rich adds Trillions to debt, yeah do a happy dance. Be proud. Or whatever your comment is trying to do.
Funny that IRS also gets defunded. But hey taxes right? :D