Good day all. One of the major crimes, (It’s beyond a scandal as far as I’m concerned), was the suppression and active censorship pushed by the Biden Maladministration. If you haven’t been living under a rock, or have rocks replacing your brain, you have heard about the Twitter Files and that the FBI and Biden administration were actively censoring views that they disapproved of.
Once President Trump was sworn back in and started getting his people into place, one of the first things they did was start dismantling the entire federal censorship system. One of these groups, Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference hub, was run out of the State Department. As soon as Secretary of State Marco Rubio was sworn in, he killed that group. However, there is a problem. A Democrat Judge has told Rubio not to dismantle the group. Here are the details from the Federalist:
Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared in April that the Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference hub (R-FIMI) was dead. But, because of legal interference, it turns out that for now, R-FIMI, formerly called the Global Engagement Center (GEC), is only mostly dead.
Through the miraculous powers of an activist judge, San Francisco’s Senior District Judge Susan Illston ordered Friday that the Trump Administration must not dismantle R-FIMI, the creepy censorship arm within the Department of State that curtails free speech.
I looked up this black robed tyrant. She was appointed by Bubba Horndog, aka Bill Clinton in 1995. She became a “Senior” judge in 2013. This means that she is basically semi-retired, but still hears a few cases. Apparently, this order was part of an argument over who has the authority to run the Executive branch of the federal government. The President of the United States or some federal district judge.
In her June 13 order, Illston said the State Department’s planned employee separations from R-FIMI are prohibited by a previous injunction, and if the State Department plans any other similar actions, it better check with Judge Illston first.
“If the State Department has any question about whether planned actions fall within the scope of the Court’s injunction, the Court ORDERS the Department to first raise those questions with the Court before taking action,” Illston wrote.
Oh, I don’t think so you retard. This is one of the Article II things that a president does. But you being a retired retard, probably have forgotten what the Article says, f you ever bothered to read it in the fist place.
President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 14210 in February, announcing large-scale reductions in force (RIFs) across the administration and directed agency heads to prepare for the RIFs in the Office of Personnel Management, Office of Management and Budget, plus the departments of Agriculture, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Labor, Treasury, Transportation, Veterans Affairs, AmeriCorps, Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Labor Relations Board, National Science Foundation, Small Business Administration, Social Security Administration, and the Department of State.
In May, Illston issued a preliminary injunction preventing the administration from reorganizing and cutting staff at these government agencies. That was in response to a lawsuit brought by federal union employees connected to the American Federation of Government Employees and the AFL-CIO.
This flat out violates the Constitution. What this black robed tyrant is saying is that you can’t get rid of federal workers. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that anyone is guaranteed a government job. There is the Civil Service system, but that’s aimed more at individual government employees. What the Trump Administration was doing was wholesale layoffs and buy outs.
Rubio made the case that the State Department is not subject to the injunction and planned to move forward with cutting employees and sunsetting R-FIMI, until Illston’s order put that on pause.
I would flat out ignore that judge. I would also ask her point blank why she is opposed to the 1st Amendment and Free Speech and supporting government censorship. I would also look at really retiring her and not letting her handle any future cases. It’s time to put an end to these judges who consider themselves to be the one’s in charge and not the President of the United States or the Congress.
Thatisall
(2 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...
~The Angry Webmaster~
