The ruling concerning the USAID grant by the Supreme Court was Constitutional. They maintained the sanctity of a contract as defined below. I suggest people read the ruling and understand that it applies to a portion of one USAID grant, not all foreign aid. The ruling states that only work done prior to the Trump administration’s freezing of payments was in question. In other words, the work completed before the freeze had to be paid as per the contract.

This ruling was not about an activist judge; it was about the rule of law and the sanctity of a contract. But the interesting part is that the portion of the Constitution for contracts applies to States, not the federal government.

I may not agree with the excessive fraud and criminal acts of the Deep States but in this case, work completed should be paid. If there is any question as to the quality of the work or fraud, that is a separate matter.

What is surprising is how easily our “side” is misled by the twisting of the truth.

David DeGerolamo.............more...........