@freemayonnaise the US owes all the people with whom we collaborated in Afghanistan refuge, and all of the politicians who deny or prevent that, who gum up the works, have their future blood on their hands and besmirch our nation's honor. you make too light, walk away too easily, from things that are not light, easy, or frankly yours to walk away from, whatever you personally agreed or disagreed with.

@freemayonnaise you can have plenty of accountability and oversight. we have a whole army of people with security clearances, and you can clear more if you don't like their politics. Congress can ban USAID from the practice of covert aid. i'd favor that. but you—yes, you too if you're an american—can't ethically welch on obligations with life and death stakes that predecessors took on, no matter how shitty you think the predecessors.

@freemayonnaise the issue is that, since (rightly or wrongly, it's actually not a practice i favor) the US sometimes does provide aid to people or organizations without their country's government's knowledge or approval, what we are talking about risking is, yes, murder, the murder of people USAID has covertly assisted, if that information is disclosed to the wrong people or made public.

@Phil @freemayonnaise @Harald_Korneliussen i'd say the "we" in this case is the government of the United States, a formal institution that promised discretion under high stakes to some of the people it financed. that "we", and its obligations, survive changes of administration, just like Boeing survives (for now) its many CEO changes.

@freemayonnaise @Phil @Harald_Korneliussen you, my friend, are free to have whatever opinion of me or anything else you like. and i enjoy the same privilege with respect to you! it's a free country. let's keep it that way.

@freemayonnaise @Phil @Harald_Korneliussen i'm saying confidential aid has been part of what USAID has done, and whether you think it's a good idea or not (i'm mostly on the not side), it's ethically and practically critical that we maintain the confidences we've promised, however we might decide to narrow the practice going forward.

@Phil @Harald_Korneliussen in order to access classified information, by law, people are supposed to be vetted and trained. the reason for that is such confidences are hard to maintain when adversarial intelligence services seek to penetrate them.

according to public reporting, DOGE associates without such vetting and training have done so. if that's the case (yes, Katie Miller did dispute it), they've *prima facie* put people at risk.

@realcaseyrollins I won't leave voicemails. I'll speak to staffers, or write letters.

I think it's part of the job description of a Senator to accept feedback and petitions from his constituents.

I don't know I have any way to enforce that, other than vote against and try to persuade others to vote against him, but yes, I think it is part of his democratic role to receive them, and for at least his office to read them and take constituent concerns into account.

@Phil @Harald_Korneliussen I'm glad to see a President pare back agency activity to what he perceives is within the lawful, Congressionally mandated scope, or for outside parties to sue if they believe the President has overly narrowed the scope. That doesn't affect the fact that USAID has provided aid on terms that are importantly confidential, and its entirely unethical and contrary to US interests to treat those confidences incautiously.

what are the odds identities of confidential USAID funding recipients, named in classified files now accessed by 20-somethings with no vetting or counterintelligence training or legal authority, will evade professional intelligence activities of US adversaries? whose lives are in these kids’ hands?

Interesting on “coequal branches” and the US Constitution. by #RichardBishirjian riffing on #DavidSiemers. https://theimaginativeconservative.org/2019/10/myth-of-coequal-branches-david-j-siemers-richard-bishirjian.html

Brad Setser makes an important point about trying to replace the US by reanchoring trade relationships around China.

It’s easy to buy from China, but what you wanted from the US was someone you could sell to.

https://vimeo.com/1052379677

#economics

@Phil when USAID funds democracy activism in Cuba, do you think there might be a reason for the names of the activists to be classified?

maybe USAID shouldn’t fund activities to which host governments object. that’s a policy call. but so far Congress has supported that sort of work. until they don’t, some documents really do need to be classified and remain secure.

“we apologize as we are busy assisting other constituents”

(from the message when you hit voicemail at Senator Rick Scott’s office)

Suppose you think USAID is more about official cover for intelligence work than aid. I think that’s exaggerated, untrue, but OK.

Then it is *more* outrageous its classified docs shld be compromised. Agents in the field don’t determine US intelligence policy but it is they whom these leaks may kill.

for whatever it’s worth, i just called my (MAGA) Congresswoman’s office to demand Elon Musk’s arrest and imprisonment for the flagrant lawbreaking this weekend with respect to USAID.

@Phil bureaucracy is the form of institution by which nearly all human action is coordinated at scale. every military is a bureaucracy. does that upset you?

article 1 of the Constitution creates Congress, before the executive, whose role is to put into practice the laws that Congress creates. the people exercise their authority by electing a legislature, not by electing a king.

your glory will become mass atrocity quite soon, if it is not nipped in the bud.

@_dm what’s happening at Treasury and USAID, the recission of the OMB memo but cagey language about what the EOs might still freeze, suggests to me an extraordinary degree of willingness to test the enforceability of the law.