Stonewall loss of jobs and funding after US aid cuts

[Cismyfatarse]

Who knew they were funded via the US government? Not me.

Trump aid freeze ‘may force Stonewall to cut up to half of staff’

www.thetimes.com/article/62cb4fe0-1d91-43f5-a364-bc539eb3234f?shareToken=28cd28f7a1e212f58fca18b4f8ff68b7

I thought Harris would win too. It did actually make me think how influenced we are by the news bubble that we are a part of. I mean if you were a cnn fan it’d of seemed utterly implausible that he’d be elected.

It was very clear Musk was going to be part of the team. I followed the election and would have been shocked if Musk hadn’t taken a role. Whether you like or loathe Trump he is doing what he said he would do. I know people who didn’t support Trump who say they are impressed so far.

The amount of waste being discovered in the US is eye opening and surely any party would be pleased they are saving tax payers money? A governments primary concern should be its own citizens. It’s normal for private companies to conduct audits, they have a huge debt as a country, someone had to tackle it at some point.

Transparency is important and if you think spending money on Guatemalan Transgender operations is important for your country then tell the electorate and make sure USAID doesn’t fund your news channels so it can be explored critically by journalists. But when you say you can’t help flood victims in the US but you can fund stonewall campaigns in the UK I can see why voters are supporting Trump and Musk.

That sounds like ACTUAL interference in another country's politics. So sorrrry, Stonewall.😂

I’d quite like to know how much waste is being discovered. I was listening to a podcast on this the other day ( the economist) and they didn’t think musk would get anywhere near the two trillion. 2/3rd spending is statutory Medicare , medicaid, veterans, social security. Defence unlikely to be cut. Agriculture would be an unpopular cut with red states. You could fire every civil servant in the U.S. and not make that saving.

Itll be interesting to see what happens as we get further down the line and cuts start to kick in at home.

This boggles my mind. Even if you hate Trump, surely it was obvious he had at least an even chance of winning.
Unfortunately a lot of the luxury belief class work in the media, politics or academia, and they don't try to understand the world around them, they reflect their class's worldview back to themselves and expect the rest of us to believe it.

This is true DH was convicedTrump had no chance from media he was watching but I actually heard some of the interviews she gave directly not comments on them - and I thought she's weak with no substance and shit I think he stands a chance of getting in.

Biden was clearly ill and old well before anyone admitted it. I think Harris either had too much time - so everyone saw how poor a candiate and inital relief in polls bump drained away she was or not enough - so she had limited time to define who and what she was.

I saw a democratic polster reflecting she said turns out the most important interaction she had was with shop assistant buying celebratory drinks election night - she was insisting they had numbers and would be getting first female president and was met with polite skeptism from the staff.

I think it would be interesting if America audited where some of this USAID money ended up to see how much was fraud.

I remember reading about money via charity and NGOs for Haiti that just didn’t get to the people who needed it. USAID was criticised for Haiti many times - 2019 Article. Its long but worth reading.

www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/11/haiti-and-the-failed-promise-of-us-aid

Similar to putting a disclaimer on horoscopes saying "this service is provided for entertainment purposes only"

It was an absolute given in certain left-wing quarters that Harris was going to win and they were horrified when she didn't. I can absolutely see why she didn't. Biden was always presented as a bridging president; one that would hand over to someone else after his first term. But he didn't, he clung on in there despite it being obvious to anyone that he was not at all capable of the job any more. The man needed diagrams as to how to walk on and off a stage, for Christ's sake. Harris was then parachuted in at the last minute, which a lot of people disagreed with.

In addition, a lot of left wing politics are luxury beliefs to many. Net Zero isn't great if you work in in affected industry - parts of America are still heavily industrialised or at least were in the recent past, and that industrialisation is part of the identity of those who live in those areas. Are you going to vote to have your job taken away? They feel left behind, as do huge chunks of the US. Those who don't want boys in girls' sports feel shut out of discussions by dint of being called transphobic. There are those who - rightly or wrongly - want to see immigration controlled. And for the US to be more prosperous. And so it goes on.

The Trump campaign ran a brilliant (in the sense of its effectiveness, regardless of whether I agree with Trumpism or not) that said "Kamala is for they/them. Trump is for you". Absolutely nailed it.

Trump listened to them when the left stuck its fingers in its ears and shouted "La, la, la I can't hear you, bigot". The left only has itself to blame.

Stonewall got away with not being held responsible for Garden Court Chambers' actions in the Alison Bailey case, if I remember rightly.

AFAIK there hasn't yet been an instance of an employer trying to sue Stonewall for giving advice that led to that employer losing an employment tribunal to its financial detriment.

But then, would any employer captured enough to seek advice/approval from Stonewall ever blame them? I expect they'd rather blame the tribunal, the law, anyone really.

It was an absolute given in certain left-wing quarters that Harris was going to win.

I don't know why. The polls were neck-and-neck, but we'd already seen in the 2016 election that many Trump supporters refused to talk to pollsters, skewing the polls in favour of the Democrats. Harris had the disadvantage of having been VP for four years but achieving very little in that time, despite Biden being so feeble. Trump's big advantage is that everyone knew who he was. (Other advantages too, obviously, but having that kind of instant recognition seems to be important.)

I don't think it's clear whether Trump is breaking the constitution or not, there are many lies about him and there seems to be a legal debate over this. I certainly don't believe the many Trump derangement syndrome articles. Usually it's the same people who'll argue 6ft 5 convicted male paedophile K Dolatowski is a woman so I no longer think the majority of the media have moral authority nor believe them.

In many ways his break with Europe could be said to be quite like what the founding fathers did - they were revolutionary in their vision for America and did not accept that their country had to carry on as it always had sending wealth back to English kings.

There was one random poll in a particular state that had Harris ahead and some of the lefty commentators (Rory Stewart I'm looking at you) leapt on that as the gospel truth.

Total wish fulfilment and echo chamber affirmation.

I listened to that as well, I'm getting a bit concerned about the direction the economist's coverage is going. I read the mag and listen to the podcasts because they seemed to be the only news publication that was still trying to be impartial, but since Trump got elected, they're starting to show sign's of TDS.

They did say in the podcast that it's only been a month since DOGE started cleaning house, which I agree with, it's to soon to say whether they're saving money or wasting more.

Given that Stonewall has been very critical of the choice the majority of the USA tax payers made when they voted for Trump, it's only right they lose the funding from the USA's tax payers.

I'm yet to see DOGE proving any waste at all.
Sacking federal employees - 35% of whom are veterans - will not play well.
Yes some of USAID was badly spent
but not all
Some of the documents "shared" by Musk are kindergarten level photoshop

American taxes pay for the world and Americans and America are always talked of as being a horrible country and culture. Some of them obviously had enough. Good for them and hope they dismantle all organisations like Stonewall.

Pretty much. Just look at mn, for the last few years this belief you could deride and get US to pay

What did they think would happen

No and maybe

because they would not be providing legal advice and if an organisation has broken the law and had a financial or reputational loss they cant sue as they picked the wrong provider.

But the Allison Bailey case had a ruling that some of their advice /lobbying could be actionable. But it would be bad PR to sue.

But it would be bad PR to sue. And possibly pointless if they are broke.

There was the budwiser sales drops tracking as polling data ( that is in the States were it was unlikely to have voters buying it for target shooting )

One of the interesting things about USAID is that it was created by executive order under the JFK administration and it was only 37 years later that Congress got round to passing legislation putting it on a statutory basis.

It obviously isn't ideal to have regulations being changed by executive order, with a whiplash back when the next party gets into the White House, but if you've a feckless Congress that's abdicated most of its power to the executive branch since before most of us were born, that's what's going to happen.

It's almost as if Obama didn't say "I have a phone and a pen".

American taxes pay for the world
Remind me again where America gets its money from? You can't go too protectionist, it backfires.
But I'm quite pleased with the current effect on Stonewall.

Well there is that too but first one in would be good for under .5m post windup after that its £7

Just to repeat the money that Stonewall got is NOT all US money.

For some reason a US government body administered what is in fact a global fund of money. Why the US was ever allowed to administer it is mind boggling as they have never had a grasp of the fact that other countries exist and dont share US "values".

So irrespective of Stonewall it is up to the other countries that provide money for this fund to either set up their own fund of challenge (as everybody else is) the legality of an EO that limits how their money is used.

And in fact the more mad Trump is the better it is in the long term, although vulnerable people will suffer in the short term.

It is unacceptable, as it is with Russia that for instance the UK can block decisions in the UN. Not that I am a fan of the UN but it is a daily insult to every other country who are constantly being told they aren't democratic enough and yet on the big issue they are told you dont have a voice.

But there seems to be a blind spot in the US itself. Supposedly celebrating getting rid of being under the control of a monarchy and now apparently adoring a man who wants to make himself supreme leaders unaccountable to anyone and in breach of the US constitution.

So next time the "west" who see themselves as the leaders in democracy set something up, lets hope they reflect on what went wrong with the institutions they thought would stop another Hitler.

Billionaire Elon Musk and President Donald Trump are also ramping up their behavior even as the public is starting to turn against the government cuts that are badly hurting American veterans, American farmers, and U.S. medical research. The courts keep ruling against their efforts and their claims of finding “waste, fraud, and abuse” are being widely debunked. Rather than rethinking their course in the face of opposition, they seem to be becoming more belligerent.

On Saturday, Trump urged Musk to be “more aggressive” in cutting the government, although the White House has told a court that Musk has no authority and is only a presidential advisor. “Will do, Mr. President,” Musk replied. He then posted a command to federal employees: “Consistent with [Trump’s] instructions, all federal employees will shortly receive an email requesting to understand what they got done last week. Failure to respond will be taken as a resignation.” Shortly after, emails went out giving workers 48 hours to list five things they had accomplished in the past week.

This sparked outrage among Americans who noted that Musk has spent 24 hours tweeting more than 220 times and engaged in public fights with two of the mothers of his children while allegedly running companies and overhauling the government, while Trump spent at least 12 nights at Mar-a-Lago in his first 29 days in office. S.V. Date of HuffPost noted on February 18 that Trump has played golf at one of his own properties on 9 of his first 30 days in office and that Trump’s golf outings had already cost the American taxpayer $10.7 million.

https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/february-23-2025

Even if nothing else, anyone who thinks Trump's appointment of Musk is appropriate, can only be someone who thinks its okay for one business man to help another one strengthen their stranglehold over competitors by giving him access to their records, must think that running a country like a greedy corporate is better than sometimes failing attempts at democratic accountability.

Sweeping away DEI is one thing. Sweeping away employment rights is something totally different.

I am delighted. Hope it helps shuts them down. They have moved so far away from the excellent work of their past.

They could have worked to help trans people have a good place in society, but all they have done is massively hindered them with the kowtowing to the extremists in the cohort.

Calling lesbians sexual racists, that alone should have been the end of it.

It is a tainted and poisoned entity.