> GAO is a Congressional agency, it does not fall under the Executive

I don't know that it's accurate to say such things any more, due to the unitary executive decree by the supreme council. The GAO is intrinsically motivated by law - both to carry out its purpose, and simply to pay its employees - and the supreme council has decreed that all execution of the law is subject to the whims of the president. If the president woke up from his afternoon nap and told GAO employees they weren't going to get paid unless they did a certain thing, it's certainly possible that the supreme council might walk back their earlier decree (although good luck with the payment infrastructure already being pwnt and all that). But it's also possible they might not, given how they've already approved other autocratic dynamics.

▲

zdragnar 6 hours ago | parent [-]

They aren't part of the executive branch, period. The president has no control over their pay or performance. Hell, the president doesn't have nearly as much control over the executive branch as you imply, however much he might want it.

▲

autoexec 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> They aren't part of the executive branch, period. The president has no control over their pay or performance.

They are run by the comptroller general who is appointed by the president meaning that the president has total control over who gets paid anything at all. Right now ours is just an "Acting Comptroller General" filling in until the president appoints someone else.

▲

gwerbin 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

But Congress is very comfortable so far just letting the executive branch do whatever. Even if the orders aren't emanating from the oval office directly, there's clearly a coordinated agenda in motion. It's entirely reasonable to suspect that the GAO has been politicized in that environment.

▲

mindslight 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You've just blindly asserted a whole bunch of things without laying out any sort of supporting arguments. What exactly makes the GAO not "part of the executive branch" ? My understanding is that "branches" are merely a framework used for describing government, not a prescriptive org chart. And how do the GAO's employees get paid, if not by a system that is now under the control of the autocratic Executive?

▲

gwerbin 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The branches are explicitly defined in the Constitution.

	▲	mindslight 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		What we consider an the branches are defined in the Constitution, but my point is they are not simply defined as the top-level in a hierarchy of organizations, but rather behaviorally based on what function is being performed.

▲

Jtsummers 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> What exactly makes the GAO not "part of the executive branch" ?

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/31/702

>> (a)The Government Accountability Office is an instrumentality of the United States Government independent of the executive departments.

The law establishing it also establishes it as independent.

	▲	mindslight 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Sure, that is what is written down. But as a necessary part of its operation, there is a whole lot of executive power being exercised as well, which the unitary executive theory says would fall under the authority of the president.

▲

5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]