Davin News Server

On Sat, 22 Feb 2025 15:19:18 -0800
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

> On 2025-02-22 14:17, Mercy-a-lago wrote:
> > On Sat, 22 Feb 2025 13:38:02 -0800
> > Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> >  =20
> >> On 2025-02-22 13:03, pothead wrote: =20
> >>> On 2025-02-22, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: =20
> >>>> On 2025-02-22 12:38, Mercy-a-lago wrote: =20
> >>>>> On Sat, 22 Feb 2025 12:32:00 -0800 Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> >>>>>    =20
> >>>>>> On 2025-02-22 09:15, tye syding wrote: =20
> >>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 19:02:55 -0800 Siri Cruise
> >>>>>>> <chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>    =20
> >>>>>>>> Musk's political hit squad. He declares as waste his
> >>>>>>>> political enemies. He lies and declares waste which you
> >>>>>>>> cretins =20
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Stupid meth whore.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> https://www.foxnews.com/politics/doge-takes-chainsaw-federal-
> >>>>>>> spending-7-major-victories-week-got-done
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> DOGE finds a nearly untraceable budget line item responsible
> >>>>>>> for $4.7T in payments Earlier this week, DOGE announced it had
> >>>>>>> discovered an identification code linking U.S. Treasury
> >>>>>>> payments to a budget line item, which accounts for nearly
> >>>>>>> $4.7 trillion in payments, that was oftentimes left blank.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "The Treasury Access Symbol (TAS) is an identification code
> >>>>>>> linking a Treasury payment to a budget line item (standard
> >>>>>>> financial process)," DOGE wrote in a post on X.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "In the Federal Government, the TAS field was optional for
> >>>>>>> ~$4.7 Trillion in payments and was often left blank, making
> >>>>>>> traceability almost impossible. As of Saturday, this is now a
> >>>>>>> required field, increasing insight into where money is
> >>>>>>> actually going."
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The agency thanked the U.S. Treasury for its work in
> >>>>>>> identifying the optional field.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> According to the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, which is under
> >>>>>>> the Treasury, TAS codes are used to describe any one of the
> >>>>>>> account identification codes assigned by the Treasury and are
> >>>>>>> also referred to as the "account."
> >>>>>>>    =20
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "$4.7 Trillion" so scary.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> My question:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Over what period of time? =20
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What part of _almost impossible tracing_ got past you?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://nypost.com/2025/02/17/us-news/doge-discovers-4-7-trillion-i=
n-
> >>>>> treasury-payments-were-missing-critical-code/
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) announced Monday
> >>>>> that some $4.7 trillion in payments from the Treasury Department
> >>>>> were missing a critical tracking code, which made tracing the
> >>>>> transactions =E2=80=9Calmost impossible.=E2=80=9D =20
> >>>> What part of "over what period of time" confused you?
> >>>>
> >>>> There are obviously individual records of expenditures.
> >>>>
> >>>> Those records allegedly lack a particular code.
> >>>>
> >>>> Does that mean they aren't dated? =20
> >>>
> >>> It means they are difficult if not impossible to track/trace. =20
> >> As to their PURPOSE, perhaps (assuming we're getting all the facts.
> >>
> >> But obviously, there is an amount being claimed for each of the
> >> records found.
> >>
> >> And those records almost certainly have dates, so I ask again:
> >>
> >> Over what time period? =20
> >=20
> > Do you ever relent to reality?
> >=20
> > "The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) announced Monday
> > that some $4.7 trillion in payments from the Treasury Department
> > were missing a critical tracking code, which made tracing the
> > transactions =E2=80=9Calmost impossible.=E2=80=9D
> >  =20
>=20
> They make tracking the PURPOSE of the expenditures "almost
> impossible".
>=20
> The very fact they can claim an amount means that other aspects of
> the expenditures ARE knowable.

Some are, some not.

Oh well.