Yeah, at least we're not racist about it.
The [s]First[/s] [s]Only[/s] Second Trump term
The [s]First[/s] [s]Only[/s] Second Trump term
It's not me, it's someone else.
The [s]First[/s] [s]Only[/s] Second Trump term
Then, and now.
In the late 1930's FDR introduced dozens of spending bills, trying to help poor people get government money, in every way his Brain Trust could think of. The Supreme Court was blocking his programs left and right.
Today, Trump is signing dozens of orders, trying to cut back on spending and get the country on good financial footing, and Elon is helping (note: he slashed Twitter's bloated staff and budget, and the platform still worked fine, and he was right. The current money woes are the crusaders who hate him, pulling advertising. Hey, did you hear about how he's a nazi and salutes?). Federal judges are blocking Trump's orders left and right.
I'm starting to think we don't actually want to fix the massive budget deficit. Peeps are already publicly declaring for the side of illegal immigrant rapists. Call me crazy, but I think peeps just oppose everything Trump does, no matter what.
I hope Trump doesn't sign an order challenging researchers to cure cancer in the next four years. Gonna be some cancer-loving mother fuckers coming out of the woodwork. That on top of the "we love illegal immigrant rapists" could potentially be an unrecoverable position to take.
In the late 1930's FDR introduced dozens of spending bills, trying to help poor people get government money, in every way his Brain Trust could think of. The Supreme Court was blocking his programs left and right.
Today, Trump is signing dozens of orders, trying to cut back on spending and get the country on good financial footing, and Elon is helping (note: he slashed Twitter's bloated staff and budget, and the platform still worked fine, and he was right. The current money woes are the crusaders who hate him, pulling advertising. Hey, did you hear about how he's a nazi and salutes?). Federal judges are blocking Trump's orders left and right.
I'm starting to think we don't actually want to fix the massive budget deficit. Peeps are already publicly declaring for the side of illegal immigrant rapists. Call me crazy, but I think peeps just oppose everything Trump does, no matter what.
I hope Trump doesn't sign an order challenging researchers to cure cancer in the next four years. Gonna be some cancer-loving mother fuckers coming out of the woodwork. That on top of the "we love illegal immigrant rapists" could potentially be an unrecoverable position to take.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
The [s]First[/s] [s]Only[/s] Second Trump term
LOL
99% of people don't want their free puppies taken away.
Good news! so many medical and research trials are done/paused/destroyed by his existing EOs that he may have already done the exact opposite!
It's not me, it's someone else.
The [s]First[/s] [s]Only[/s] Second Trump term
I was thinking of a fun game.... find a ridiculous thing USAid was funding, and see who could successfully defend it.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
The [s]First[/s] [s]Only[/s] Second Trump term
I actually started the game with the relevant sources, but it's all so convoluted it was too much like real work. "USAid funded X, which is actually a mouthpiece for Y, but they used a legitimate money conduit Z so it wouldn't raise flags."
For example, The "$8m paid by USAid to the NY Times" was handwaved away as, "Nah that was the government buying subscriptions." That's 25k subscriptions. They have 10k employees. It's payoff laundering. And even if the numbers are inaccurate to a degree (I don't know they may say that money was over X years that wasn't mentioned in half the links... again, I'm not going to do deep dives on this subject), why does a foreign aid program need them in the first place? Don't they just receive grant requests, then hit google like everyone else? And of the entire department, none of them are administrative, they ALL need the NY Times subscriptions for research in order to make sure the coffee maker is always full?
Too much work for me to make the claim and cite the sources.
But anyone opposed to a government audit is not to be trusted.
For example, The "$8m paid by USAid to the NY Times" was handwaved away as, "Nah that was the government buying subscriptions." That's 25k subscriptions. They have 10k employees. It's payoff laundering. And even if the numbers are inaccurate to a degree (I don't know they may say that money was over X years that wasn't mentioned in half the links... again, I'm not going to do deep dives on this subject), why does a foreign aid program need them in the first place? Don't they just receive grant requests, then hit google like everyone else? And of the entire department, none of them are administrative, they ALL need the NY Times subscriptions for research in order to make sure the coffee maker is always full?
Too much work for me to make the claim and cite the sources.
But anyone opposed to a government audit is not to be trusted.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
The [s]First[/s] [s]Only[/s] Second Trump term
You didn't even get accurate information. The search query was wrong, and it was never $8 million. It was never per year, etc, etc. Just garbage information.
It's not me, it's someone else.
The [s]First[/s] [s]Only[/s] Second Trump term
I still had the link open, the author confused NYT (only $3m) and politico in one paragraph. A different media company doesn't really negate the entire pont as "garbage info." I don't care what billionaire-owned media company is getting the payoff, I just care that it is happening.
I also saw a thing about $40 million to the Clinton Foundation.
"The government spends wastefully!"
~Any time between 1960 and 2020.
"No it doesn't!"
~As soon as an R tries to cut wasteful spending with an obvious nazi.
I also saw a thing about $40 million to the Clinton Foundation.
"The government spends wastefully!"
~Any time between 1960 and 2020.
"No it doesn't!"
~As soon as an R tries to cut wasteful spending with an obvious nazi.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
The [s]First[/s] [s]Only[/s] Second Trump term
BTW, that's $8m in 2024.
Annual subscriptions to politico are $200.
That's 40k subscriptions for the 10k person agency.
https://www.usaspending.gov/recipient/f ... a49e-C/all
I said I wouldn't deeper dive, but I did a little. That $8m comes from all kinds of government departments. Like the Department of Energy, and Department of Agriculture. Why in the hell? I don't think this is any kind of defense. I saw some thing about "Premium subscriptions to whatever are in the thousands." Why? Sounds like nothing more than a handy money laundering bin.
I also saw something about millions to fund LGBTQ awareness in Guatemala, or something. I wonder what the local Guatemala politician named the boat.
Annual subscriptions to politico are $200.
That's 40k subscriptions for the 10k person agency.
https://www.usaspending.gov/recipient/f ... a49e-C/all
I said I wouldn't deeper dive, but I did a little. That $8m comes from all kinds of government departments. Like the Department of Energy, and Department of Agriculture. Why in the hell? I don't think this is any kind of defense. I saw some thing about "Premium subscriptions to whatever are in the thousands." Why? Sounds like nothing more than a handy money laundering bin.
I also saw something about millions to fund LGBTQ awareness in Guatemala, or something. I wonder what the local Guatemala politician named the boat.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
The [s]First[/s] [s]Only[/s] Second Trump term
Your complete dismissal of wasteful government spending is.... i don't know.
Just the wrong guy doing it, I guess. No winning this argument.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
The [s]First[/s] [s]Only[/s] Second Trump term
You haven't explained that's it's wasteful, or why it's wasteful (you haven't even identified where it's going and what products, etc). Often times people do things I disagree with, is that now wasteful? DOGE is operating from a complete lack of trust in people, and putting out bad data (that was already available!) for people to draw poor conclusions.
This isn't how to do it. I've audited lots of budgetary and computer processes. These people aren't trying to save $, o find efficiencies, they're trying to shutdown their "opposition" without understanding anything first. They've put their conclusion out first, then are trying to connect the dots to support their conclusion. They have no desire for truth.
at any rate, your data is bad, and you still don't know (admit?) it:
This isn't how to do it. I've audited lots of budgetary and computer processes. These people aren't trying to save $, o find efficiencies, they're trying to shutdown their "opposition" without understanding anything first. They've put their conclusion out first, then are trying to connect the dots to support their conclusion. They have no desire for truth.
at any rate, your data is bad, and you still don't know (admit?) it:
USAspending.gov can correctly filter specific payments to The New York Times which shows that over the last five years, government agencies spent about $1.6 million, almost entirely on subscriptions. Other payments include ads, legal notices and delivery charges.
It's not me, it's someone else.
The [s]First[/s] [s]Only[/s] Second Trump term
Of course what's wasteful is a matter of opinion. The German guy who owns Politico probably doesn't feel like the US government at all wasted $8 million dollars on them, last year.
But at least 53% of voters would think that
https://apnews.com/article/usaid-foreig ... c1645e78aa
I don't have Robert's Rules of Order in front of me. I don't know what "proper procedures" are when unilaterally disbanding a department that was unilaterally started by JFK via Executive Order in 1961. I just know I've already devoted more time to this than I wanted when I originally pointed out a comparison between Trump and FDR in how the courts were hindering what they were trying to do.
But at least 53% of voters would think that
is a waste of money.A program to provide mental health support for LGBTQ+ youth fleeing Venezuela was disbanded.
https://apnews.com/article/usaid-foreig ... c1645e78aa
I don't have Robert's Rules of Order in front of me. I don't know what "proper procedures" are when unilaterally disbanding a department that was unilaterally started by JFK via Executive Order in 1961. I just know I've already devoted more time to this than I wanted when I originally pointed out a comparison between Trump and FDR in how the courts were hindering what they were trying to do.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
The [s]First[/s] [s]Only[/s] Second Trump term
Then look it up, because Congress in the 80s funded and established it as an independent department.
It's not me, it's someone else.
The [s]First[/s] [s]Only[/s] Second Trump term
A judge says Trump administration is not complying with court order to not... stop government spending.
https://www.npr.org/2025/02/10/nx-s1-52 ... ning-order
Which leads me to wonder..... and?
What happens... what can be done... if the Trump administration just ignores the courts? Not starting shit, I hope I'm not called ignorant or told to be better or whatever. I'm honestly curious about what happens if a president ignores a court order and continues to... IDK what they're doing... locking office doors and telling people to go home.
https://www.npr.org/2025/02/10/nx-s1-52 ... ning-order
Which leads me to wonder..... and?
What happens... what can be done... if the Trump administration just ignores the courts? Not starting shit, I hope I'm not called ignorant or told to be better or whatever. I'm honestly curious about what happens if a president ignores a court order and continues to... IDK what they're doing... locking office doors and telling people to go home.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
The [s]First[/s] [s]Only[/s] Second Trump term
Hopefully the death penalty
It's not me, it's someone else.
The [s]First[/s] [s]Only[/s] Second Trump term
Could be an interesting thing if these people with guns trying to shutter a building are met by other people with guns trying to stop them from doing so, and they all work for different branches of government.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
The [s]First[/s] [s]Only[/s] Second Trump term
Time to buy more guns.
It's not me, it's someone else.
The [s]First[/s] [s]Only[/s] Second Trump term
Especially with that threat from Canada.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
The [s]First[/s] [s]Only[/s] Second Trump term
whatever that twitter thing was i didn't get through, a woman talking about how she feels a change up there and they're going to attack america.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."