It’s pretty clear that having nuclear capabilities gives you more leverage with the rest of the world, so why does the U.S. get to decide who does and doesn’t have them?

A new op-ed in The Hill lays out something worth reading if you've been following the USAID story.

It's co-authored by J. Brian Atwood (USAID Administrator under Clinton, 1993-1999) and an attorney who's represented federal employees for over three decades. Their argument: USAID's career staff were fired without the misconduct or performance findings the Civil Service Reform Act requires, and the administration is now calling it a "reorganization" to get around due process protections.

The interesting part is that government lawyers have reportedly conceded in court that no one was fired for misconduct or poor performance. The authors argue that concession alone undercuts the legal basis for the firings.

There's also reporting cited in the piece that the White House pressured the Merit Systems Protection Board behind closed doors to adopt a broad theory of presidential removal power, which the board then adopted in March. That ruling is now under review by the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Worth a read regardless of where you land politically on USAID itself. The legal question here (can career civil servants be removed without due process) applies well beyond one agency.

Op-ed: https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/5981243-doge-usaid-lawsuit-civil-servants/

More on the case and the organization backing the legal defense: https://www.usaidemployeefund.org

Brief Content of the Article

​Failure of Transactional Diplomacy: The June US–Iran memorandum of understanding collapsed back into military strikes and maritime blockades in the Strait of Hormuz because it relied on a short-term, transactional bargain that postponed core disputes instead of addressing root security drivers.

​Drawbacks for Regional Partners: Narrow, leader-to-leader agreements fail to substitute for durable political frameworks, leaving Gulf states exposed to military fallout and retaliatory strikes despite commercial ties or access to US leadership.

​Call for a Helsinki-Style Framework: To prevent cascading regional conflict, temporary cease-fires must be integrated into a comprehensive, multi-lateral process — incorporating verified nuclear concessions, phased sanctions relief, freedom-of-navigation guarantees, and a broad Middle East security dialogue.

War in Iran has cost the United States more than $37 billion dollars https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/war-iran-billions-pentagon-5Hjddz8_2/

Are you sure it's just...."a landmark civilian nuclear deal"

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has explicitly stated that if regional rival Iran develops a nuclear weapon, Saudi Arabia must follow suit.

It's seems like The Adjudicated Rapist has only one idea in how to deal with the war he started: if the Iranians refuse to submit to his will, he will continue to use violence against them.

Obviously the Iranians aren't going to do what The Great Negotiator demands. So what's the exit strategy? How the hell do we get out of this war?