DOD's Years of Massive, Unconstitutional Fraud Exposed

Apr 2012
60,930
46,170
Englewood,Ohio
Just listened to a Military Leader being questioned by Elizabeth Warren. He started talking about how programs like Medicare and Social Security was hurting Military funding. That set Wareen off. Are you suggesting we cut those programs to provide more money to the Military??

I have never seen a man back track so fast. He started going on about how we had threats all over the world. If those fools would quit meddling in other countries there would be no problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Babba
May 2016
4,145
1,090
california
Everybody knows that "lost" money went to black projects like making our own UFOs and who wouldn't want that? We just don't want the Russians to get it. Unless that's a CIA cover story for just actually losing the money, but everybody knows they wouldn't lie to the American people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: raj
Feb 2011
17,042
6,084
Boise, ID
Everybody knows that "lost" money went to
Actually the suggestion that money was "lost" means nobody can truly know where it went or why. It's a matter of accounting documentation procedures. If I initiate a budget transfer of $500 from budget line item 1,674 to budget line item 1,398 and don't document why I did it, or who authorized me to do it, then whether or not the appropriate authorization existed to make that transfer, the lack of documented explanation makes the transaction "lost" and it becomes added to this list of transactions for which insufficient documentary explanation exists. If I'm told to reverse course and transfer the $500 back to line item 1,674 from line item 1,398, then I now have $1,000 in untraceable transactions despite the fact that, in the end, nothing changed and no money was even actually spent.

But a lot of people probably read this headline and think "so the Pentagon squandered $21 trillion that could have been better spent on something else."

How open and transparent to the world should the U.S. military's financial transactions and operations be? I realize if there are no controls that it is ripe for corrupt use of DoD money, but what might be the downside to letting the entire world see everything the U.S. military is doing? This hints at why Pentagon officials are just nodding along and saying "yeah everyone understood we would "fail" this audit." It sounds like it was never intended to fully and transparently document all budget transfers and transactions at the Pentagon the way that, say, a municipal government or publicly traded company would be expected to do.
 
May 2016
4,145
1,090
california
Actually the suggestion that money was "lost" means nobody can truly know where it went or why. It's a matter of accounting documentation procedures. If I initiate a budget transfer of $500 from budget line item 1,674 to budget line item 1,398 and don't document why I did it, or who authorized me to do it, then whether or not the appropriate authorization existed to make that transfer, the lack of documented explanation makes the transaction "lost" and it becomes added to this list of transactions for which insufficient documentary explanation exists. If I'm told to reverse course and transfer the $500 back to line item 1,674 from line item 1,398, then I now have $1,000 in untraceable transactions despite the fact that, in the end, nothing changed and no money was even actually spent.

But a lot of people probably read this headline and think "so the Pentagon squandered $21 trillion that could have been better spent on something else."

How open and transparent to the world should the U.S. military's financial transactions and operations be? I realize if there are no controls that it is ripe for corrupt use of DoD money, but what might be the downside to letting the entire world see everything the U.S. military is doing? This hints at why Pentagon officials are just nodding along and saying "yeah everyone understood we would "fail" this audit." It sounds like it was never intended to fully and transparently document all budget transfers and transactions at the Pentagon the way that, say, a municipal government or publicly traded company would be expected to do.
So they just misplaced the proper documentation for 21 trillion, they didn't really lose it? I feel so much better now. But I understand the need for secrecy, I wouldn't them thought of as incompetent.
 
Feb 2011
17,042
6,084
Boise, ID
So they just misplaced the proper documentation for 21 trillion, they didn't really lose it?
My assumption is the backup documentation was never created or saved in the first place. Staff were able to just initiate budget transfers without documenting the "why" or "approved by whom" in the first place, or at least that would be my easy assumption given the quoted amount.

I feel so much better now.
Sarcasm noted.

But understand this, I could turn $100,000 in approved expenditures into $1,200,000 of "unaccounted for" transactions by simply transferring $100,000 back and forth between two internal funds 3 times. Wanna know how that's possible?

Governments usually have fund accounting systems set up with a central treasury/cash fund to manage separate funds' share of cash within the central treasury. This means that a simple transfer of $100,000 from one fund to another creates $400,000 in recorded debits and credits just to execute that transfer. $100,000 of transfer out from originating fund, $100,000 of transfer in to the receiving fund, and $100,000 each in or out of the funds' cash accounts (sometimes referred to as "cash held for/by other fund"). So do that three times and you've inflated $100,000 in a budget line item approved for expenditure into an amount 12 times larger without even actually spending a nickel. They're just inter-fund budget transfers and the cash account transactions just run in the background any time money moves between funds, which is to keep track of each separate fund's share of the cash in the central treasury.

Accounts payable systems similarly result in an inflated volume of dollars transacted because of these cash account entries running in the background of the accounting system, and because accounts payable liabilities are credited when bills are entered and then immediately debited when checks are cut to pay those bills. There are also encumbrances that are created and zeroed out in accounts payable processes. So a single payment of $100,000 can look like many multiples of that amount in accounting system transactions when you a run a full transaction detail.

Total transaction volume lacking documentation the Ernst & Young auditors consider appropriate does not mean that volume of dollars was actually spent.
 
Nov 2013
11,618
11,626
NY
"the Pentagon receives two of every three tax dollars collected"

From your link that started this thread. A lie.

Then you post this pie chart and now have changed the narrative to "discretionary spending" from "total tax dollars collected".

You are a starving dog that can be fed anything when it's about something you don't like politically.

Simpleton!
If you would read through the thread, you would notice that the article - not raj - has changed the narrative after publishing it originally.. in order to align their numbers (2 out of 3 dollars) with the narrative..
And the narrative NOW being largest "discretionary" cost center.. meaning, they're outing that number out there in regards to discretionary spending.

But then, you shoot and miss from the hip most of the time, and no one here really expects you to post from an informed, or logically valid point of view.