Elon Musk

Jump to Last Post 1-50 of 110 discussions (671 posts)

60
Willowarborposted 2 months ago
Musk needs his own thread...

OPINION

We have an unelected billionaire running the country through a shadow government without formal checks.

Musk is not a cabinet member and has not been subjected to a Senate confirmation process. But he now has an office in the West Wing, along with one in the Eisenhower executive office building. At his direction, a small group of coders and engineers, men primarily between 19 and 25 years old , are fanning out across federal agencies, seizing control of their sensitive data and making proposals for massive cuts. The 19-year old DOGE dude who goes by “big balls” online was fired from his last real gig for leaking company information online....

Musk and his young followers have moved to shut down specific programs that they deem wasteful – including those whose funds have been allocated by Congress – and to close whole departments. He has declared the closure of USAid, America’s foreign aid agency, and is reportedly looking to eliminate much of the Department of Education and the Department of Labor, along with privatizing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. He has seized control of the treasury, and specifically the treasury’s payment system.

He also has gained access to reams of private and sensitive data and has reportedly downloaded much of it on to private servers. He can access bank accounts, medical histories, income and debt records. If he cared to, he could look up your social security number.

No one elected Musk and very little of what he is doing is legal. It is Congress, not some random rich guy, who is granted the power of the purse, because the citizens deserve to have a say, through their elected representatives, in how the government spends their tax dollars. Federal civil servants are protected by law from purges, because the federal bureaucracy is supposed to serve the people of the United States, not to merely function as courtiers and enforcers of whim for some entitled billionaire who nobody has ever voted for.

It may be Trump, that is, who sits in the Oval Office, and it may be Trump who takes to television every few days to sign yet another executive order seeking to punish and humiliate trans people. But it is Musk who controls government operations and federal spending, and so it is Musk who is running the country. The constitutional order, now, is largely window dressing. The reality is that a billionaire who poured 300 million into Trump's campaign is pulling the strings and that his power has no formal check.

Please, use this space for all things Musk and DOGE
reply report
1. 84
  tsmogposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Currently, subject to change, my on - off again direction with Musk is simply the age old adage, "Follow the money."
  reply report
2. 80
  Kyler J Falkposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "...the federal bureaucracy is supposed to serve the people of the United States, not to merely function as courtiers and enforcers of whim for some entitled billionaire who nobody has ever voted for."
  
  Perhaps this is just a sentiment widely accepted by my own and the younger generations as a whole, but my understanding of our system is that for the latter majority of our government's existence that is exactly as they were intended. Our democratic republic was meant to be near-autonomously governed by a conglomerate of private entities as opposed to the majority vote of individuals, and the citizenry was only to be considered as a baseline for workforce morale.
  
  On a personal level, I've grown so exhausted with what seems like radical left initiatives intentionally invading my personal life (I've been told this is almost exclusive to California, and other coastal states) that I'm ready for full-blown federal authoritarianism from either side. I see no course correction occurring, just the paradigm swinging hard left or right, and I'm much more inclined to favor the right. Let the democratric republic burn its own infrastructure to the ground from the top down.
  
  It's about time the rich began to eat their own. However, Musk is a grifting flip-flopper out to serve his own wallet, and it wouldn't surprise me if he was another proverbial, "shabbos goy," as the radical right likes to refer to our elites.
  
  Keeping it short and sweet, I'm excited to see what further extreme measures each side is going to take as our elites act like petulant children on all sides of the aisle. I'll be doing my best to be upwind of the smoke, as always.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "Let the democratric republic burn its own infrastructure to the ground from the top down."
  
  That is the approach that is currently being enacted. But what will be left for us common folk out here after the toddlers finish running through the china shop with hammers? Notice there is no talk of building anything, of mending anything? Just destruction.
  reply report
  80
  Kyler J Falkposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Perhaps that is what is best if those victimized by all of this will not forcibly rip the hammers from the children's hands: A violent rebirth.
  
  I'd rather diplomacy and decorum prevail, but in lieu of anything resembling that, torches and pitchforks, tar and feathers, nooses and guillotines are a welcome sight.
  
  I'm also inclined to side with, "sign tappers," on the whole seeming-charade that's being put on. I see no real action being taken that wasn't already in the works for years on end. The media is simply much louder when it comes to Trump and those who orbit his camp. They can't even fart without it making a sensational headline on the majority of American news networks.
  reply report
3. 76
  abwilliamsposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Give me one Elon Musk at the direction of one Donald Trump dismantling and destroying that which doesn't belong in the People's Government, a deep state, all day every day... til it's done!!!
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  So when Elon Musk says an agency is fraudulent, criminal and probably laundering money... He doesn't need to bring the proof? His word on X is all that is needed?
  reply report
  76
  abwilliamsposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  You will need to be more specific.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Musk described USAID, as “a viper’s nest of radical-left marxists who hate America,” “evil” and “a criminal organization.”. He accused of the agency of laundering money..."The money laundering is done through several intermediaries,” Musk posted on X. He has accused the agency of a lengthy list of what Trump has called fraud. All of which are contained in this thread. Neither of them has produced any evidence to back up any of their claims... Yet they are trying to dismantle a
  The agency. Attempting to reduce its staff from 10,000 to under 300... Essentially putting it out of business.
  reply report
  76
  abwilliamsposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  So you aren’t convinced that these long lists of ridiculous expenditures, recently exposed, have been distributed abroad, as "AID"?
  Either money went to these crazy causes (from Egyptian tourism to a trans comic book) should be easy enough to find out... or, its all bogus, a front! If that's the case, where is all that money (our money) really going? Aren’t you curious?
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I'm not convinced that they are criminal and fraudulent as he has stated. He has also inferred that the agency is laundering money... Also without evidence. Where are the receipts? Just because he doesn't like how the agency has used their Congressional appropriated funds does not mean that the agency needs to be blown up. Have you fact checked that list as far as the claims?
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "So you aren’t convinced that these long lists of ridiculous expenditures, recently exposed, have been distributed abroad, as "AID"?
  Either money went to these crazy causes (from Egyptian tourism to a trans comic book) should be easy enough to find out.."
  
  Did Usaid Spend $6 Million On ‘tourism In Egypt?
  
  No. USAID announced a $6 million payment to Egypt to “increase educational opportunities and strengthen the livelihoods of the people of North Sinai”—not to fund tourism, as the White House claimed. The White House’s fact sheet links to a USAID announcement that does not mention tourism at all and was issued in 2019—during Trump’s first administration....
  
  Yep. Easy enough to find out.
  
  https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurra … read-on-x/
  
  "A ‘Transgender Comic Book’ in Peru.."
  
  In 2021, the U.S. Embassy in Peru introduced a comic book called “The Power of Education,” which it used to promote education and exchange programs in the U.S.
  
  The following year, the embassy commissioned a second volume.
  
  “The Embassy asked us to introduce a gay student in #2 to show his personal struggle coming out to his parents, but that has zero to do with being transgender,” David Campiti, who owns the company that produced the comic book, told us in an email. “The comics were about scholarships and furthering education.”
  
  The series ended up including three comic books, each one showing an aspect of cultural exchange and education
  
  The second one is what was highlighted by the Trump administration as a “transgender comic book.” But volume 2 of “The Power of Education” does not include a transgender character. Rather, as Campiti said, it featured a hero who was gay.
  
  Like the first volume, the second one was used to promote education and exchange programs..
  
  "The funding for this project didn’t come from USAID, either, but, again, from the State Department."
  
  https://www.factcheck.org/2025/02/sorti … -at-usaid/
  
  The comics can actually be viewed through the above link.
  
  Musk and Trump are circulating a lot of false and misleading information.
  
  While they have all of y'all focused on comic books...
  
  Thousands of tons of food aid stuck in Houston warehouses due to Trump's pause on USAID... Farmers are pissed also but you know they always come out on the short end of the stick with Trump... I'm sure we'll be throwing money at them in no time.... Just like his last term. LOOK HERE NOT THERE
  
  Talk to me about waste...
  reply report
4. 84
  tsmogposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I have questions in regard to Musk and his muskrats regarding USAID.
  
  I have yet to see what the cost analysis tally is of all the waste they 'say' has been discovered. There has been a lot announcements of line items that provoked the emotions of Trump's base. One only has to read this forum to understand that. Typical propaganda strategy.
  
  What percent is the so called waste percentage of all foreign aid distributed, not just USAID? USAID is 64% of all Non Dept of Defense foreign aid. What percent is the waste percentage compared to other expenses of the U.S. such as Social Security, Medicare, and others? Will Musk and his muskrats be going after those too? There has been a lot of smoke and mirrors thrown out there using the strategy of look here and not there.
  
  How is all the funds distributed? Which category are the emotional media buzz programs assigned to? Is there more waste in one category over the other? Under what administration was it instituted? What percent of GDP is foreign aid? How does that compare to other nations? I can tell you the U.S. is not on the top of the heap.
  
  For a deep dive see . . .
  
  Trump’s Move to Gut USAID Reveals the Crux of His Foreign Policy by The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (Feb 4, 2025)
  Americans themselves will reap the damage from these reckless decisions.
  https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/ … hy?lang=en
  
  "The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace generates strategic ideas and independent analysis, supports diplomacy, and trains the next generation of scholar-practitioners to help countries and institutions take on the most difficult global problems and advance peace."
  
  "No recent move tells us more about President Donald Trump and his administration’s disdain for America’s global reputation than their reckless (and arguably illegal and unconstitutional) effort to dismantle the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) without legislative approval. The episode reveals the transactional nihilism at the heart of Trump’s foreign policy, which recognizes no positive purpose for the United States in world affairs. Americans themselves will reap the damage from these misguided decisions."
  
  Another deep dive . . .
  
  What the data says about U.S. foreign aid by Pew Research (Feb 6, 2024)
  https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads … reign-aid/
  
  There is much, much more than the loosely put together information shared above. Remember, business class 102 says the fastest way to increase cash flow is eliminate payroll and benefits. Musk eliminated 80% (6,000 employees) of Twitter when he took over.
  
  Supposedly the plan is to roll USAID administration under the 'direct' umbrella of the State Department under Marco Rubio. So, tell me what will change?
  
  As is the case with propaganda the main strategy is disinformation and capitalizing on emotions.
  
  An interesting question is how much are the savings from eliminating personnel from our government compared to the supposed waste discovered. Will Musk cook the books saying he saved X dollars eliminating personnel at USAID while not tell us how many 'new' employees were hired at the State Department with their salaries to do what USAID did? Just curious.
  reply report
60
Willowarborposted 2 months ago
A federal judge early Saturday temporarily restricted access by Elon Musk’s government efficiency program to the Treasury Department’s payment and data systems, saying there was a risk of “irreparable harm.”

The Trump administration’s new policy of allowing political appointees and “special government employees” access to these systems, which contain highly sensitive information such as bank details, heightens the risk of leaks and of the systems becoming more vulnerable than before to hacking, U.S. District Judge Paul A. Engelmayer said in an emergency order.

Judge Engelmayer ordered any such official who had been granted access to the systems since Jan. 20 to “destroy any and all copies of material downloaded from the Treasury Department’s records and systems.” He also restricted the Trump administration from granting access to those categories of officials.
reply report
86
Sharlee01posted 2 months ago
This article is dripping with hyperbole and unsubstantiated claims, and I find it concerning how easily it casts aside journalistic integrity in favor of alarmist rhetoric. The idea that Elon Musk is running a "shadow government" without any formal checks is an extraordinary claim that demands solid evidence, yet none is provided. Instead, the author leans on vague assertions, like Musk having an office in the West Wing, without specifying the nature of his role or whether his presence is even official. In reality, Musk has been appointed as the head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a temporary organization established by President Donald Trump to modernize federal technology and reduce wasteful spending. As a “special government employee,” Musk is permitted to work within the government in an advisory role without compensation. His office space, located in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, facilitates this work, but it does not grant him unchecked authority. The article conveniently omits these details, preferring to paint a picture of conspiracy rather than governance.

The description of a group of young engineers “seizing control” of federal agencies is particularly loaded—what does that even mean? Are they employed by the government, consulting, or merely making suggestions? The article provides no sources to verify these dramatic accusations. Then there’s the outright absurdity of statements like Musk "seizing control of the Treasury" and having access to every American’s financial and medical records. If this were remotely true, it would constitute one of the largest security breaches in history. Yet, there’s no citation, no whistleblower testimony, just a blind appeal to fear, the claim that Musk has unilaterally declared the closure of USAID and is privatizing NOAA is another overreach. Where’s the evidence that such policies are being implemented at his direction, rather than through the normal policymaking process? The Constitution and established federal law don’t allow for one individual, billionaire or not, to dictate sweeping government closures without congressional approval.

Your OP also resorts to personal attacks, such as mocking a 19-year-old coder with an online alias, rather than focusing on actual policy concerns. This kind of writing is meant to enrage rather than inform. And then, there’s the glaring bias: the piece attempts to tie Musk to Trump’s social policies in a way that feels forced. The author abruptly shifts from discussing Musk’s alleged influence over federal agencies to making a wildly out-of-place remark about Trump using executive orders to "punish and humiliate trans people." What does that have to do with Musk? It’s a transparent attempt to lump every supposed villain into the same narrative.

The claim that Musk "poured $300 million into Trump’s campaign" is another serious allegation that demands verification. In reality, according to Federal Election Commission filings, Musk donated approximately $277 million to support Trump and allied Republican candidates. While this is still a massive sum, the article inflates the figure slightly, which is indicative of its tendency to exaggerate details to bolster its narrative. There are campaign finance laws that limit individual contributions to candidates, and while super PAC donations allow for larger sums, the article provides no specifics on how Musk’s money was allocated, leaving readers with a misleading impression of direct control over Trump's campaign.

The creation of DOGE and Musk’s advisory position have been met with controversy. Critics argue that his unprecedented access to government operations and data poses potential conflicts of interest and raises concerns about oversight and accountability. Supporters, however, believe that Musk’s technological expertise and innovative approach can lead to significant improvements in government efficiency. This debate is a necessary one, but the article refuses to engage with it in good faith. Instead, it peddles a dystopian fantasy, twisting reality to fit its preferred narrative. If Musk truly has unchecked power over government operations, where is the evidence? Where are the sources, the leaked documents, the congressional investigations? Instead, we get loaded language, exaggerated claims, and a complete absence of factual support.
reply report
1. 60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "This article is dripping with hyperbole and unsubstantiated claims,"
  
  Like this?
  
  "USAID is a criminal organization. Time for it to die," Musk wrote in one X post... without citing any evidence.
  
  I will add "in my opinion". To my post. But folks are certainly welcome to debunk my opinion. This is not an article from Time.
  
  I do believe that the legality of Elon musk's actions are being considered by multiple courts.
  reply report
85
Readmikenowposted 2 months ago
USAid is one thing I applaud Musk for cutting way down. The abuse and mishandling of taxpayer funds is disgusting.

They spent our tax dollars on this?

WASTE and ABUSE:

$1.5 million to “advance diversity equity and inclusion in Serbia’s workplaces and business communities”
$70,000 for production of a “DEI musical” in Ireland
$2.5 million for electric vehicles for Vietnam
$47,000 for a “transgender opera” in Colombia
$32,000 for a “transgender comic book” in Peru
$2 million for sex changes and “LGBT activism” in Guatemala
$6 million to fund tourism in Egypt
Hundreds of thousands of dollars for a non-profit linked to designated terrorist organizations — even AFTER an inspector general launched an investigation

We can only imagine the number of deaths associated with USAid providing funding for terrorists organizations.

Millions to EcoHealth Alliance — which was involved in research at the Wuhan lab
“Hundreds of thousands of meals that went to al Qaeda-affiliated fighters in Syria”
Funding to print “personalized” contraceptives birth control devices in developing countries
Hundreds of millions of dollars to fund “irrigation canals, farming equipment, and even fertilizer used to support the unprecedented poppy cultivation and heroin production in Afghanistan,” benefiting the Taliban
The list literally goes on and on — and it has all been happening for decades.

I hope Musk's work to discover government waste and fraud continues.

It is surprising to me the left is only concerned that Musk is unelected and has so much power. Guess what? So was Anthony Stephen Fauci. He had a frightening amount of power over the health and well-being of all Americans. NEVER hear the left complain about him.

DOGE is doing a good job and I hope it keeps going. The formation of DOGE was told to the American people when President Donald Trump was running for office. He made no secret of it. The American people gave him a decisive victory.
reply report
1. 80
  Kyler J Falkposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I'll be candid with this one and say I fully support publicly funding the opiate poppy infrastructure within other nations. I prefer they keep that disgusting industry and the type of calamity it attracts outside of our own borders. Most of the fields are west-owned, and it allows us a cheap way to produce the opiates many of our industries thrive on.
  
  I'd rather see them hit our pharma companies based in the states directly as opposed to hitting their production overseas, thus making the cost fall back on us consumers as usual. We need to enable strict cost control on private industries that abuse public resources like price gouging to milk marketplace insurance, not stomp on their toes and scream expecting them not to crash out and retaliate against the consumer.
  
  As for everything else, I'm amazed it has taken this long for the wider public to finally hone in on discussing DEI and other social movements as the psyops they have always been. The government has spent billions over the years pushing, "diversity," in other countries we view as adversaries as a way to destabilize them, while doing the same here and calling it social justice. Hopefully the media rhetoric starts calling these initiatives what they are, hostile social engineering.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  How the budget that is appropriated by Congress to an agency is divided up can certainly be an issue taken up. I draw the line when Elon Musk and others are calling these expenditures "fraud" simply because they do not like them.
  reply report
2. 60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "USAid is one thing I applaud Musk for cutting way down. The abuse and mishandling of taxpayer funds is disgusting."
  
  musk, along with trump have alleged fraud and criminality on the part of USAID...even money laundering with absolutely not a shred of supporting evidence.
  
  "Hundreds of thousands of dollars for a non-profit linked to designated terrorist organizations — even AFTER an inspector general launched an investigation"
  
  Where's the report of the investigation?
  
  "Allegations of links to Pakistani terror groups have never been proved and have been denied as “baseless and defamatory” by the organization, known as Helping Hand for Relief and Development."
  
  https://www.theoaklandpress.com/2025/02 … -spending/
  reply report
  80
  Kyler J Falkposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  The truth is that USAID is inteligencia, nothing more or less. Most of their initiatives are directly supported via the US military and are hostile to the infrastructure within the target nations.
  
  Do some research on how involved the military was in carrying out USAID initiatives. I suggest starting with linking the Army and Marine Corps to the many DEI efforts elsewhere. MOS 37F and 37A in the army, 0521 in the Marines, are great keywords to include in any research you want to do on the topic. It's rare these initiatives remain within the scope they present on the surface, which is why the countries they target actively undermine them at every possible opportunity.
  
  I think the contrived link with our current western social paradigms is what intentionally upsets people the most, and the rhetoric of, "abuse and money laundering," is just testament to the smoke and mirrors used to avoid further undermining our intelligence agencies with the American public.
  
  It would make them look weak and incompetent on the international stage if the public at large, as a majority, was well aware of how global inteligencia functions.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I've yet to read or hear a logical argument in support of obliterating the efforts of usaid. I have also seen absolutely no evidence to support the claims of fraud and criminality, even money laundering made by Musk and Trump. Have you? At what point do their statements become lies?
  
  All I've seen are the lists of expenditures that people keep posting. Hoping that folks will believe expenditures=fraud.
  reply report
  80
  Kyler J Falkposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  If we narrow down the discussion to strictly whether or not there is objective evidence of fraud, no there isn't any. The claims of fraud and criminality by our elites are a smoke screen to protect the reputation of inteligencia.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I think it is an enormous problem that there is no evidence to back up their statements and the administration is acting on those statements.
  
  Not sure what you mean by "intelligencia".
  reply report
  80
  Kyler J Falkposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I see the behavior as typical, modern American politics. It's the status quo on all sides of the field. That's not to defend it, but it is to say there's nothing to be done about it other than discuss the roots as opposed to attacking its face value unless the goal is to muddle constructive discourse....
  
  As for my statement, we would need to blend all of the threads and topics we are discussing. If we can't keep up contextually between the conversations regardless of which whataboutism you've led us into, then I have no interest in continuing. It seems inorganic on your end at this point anyways.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  agree
  reply report
  85
  Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Well, that's just one article from an extremely left wing publication. It's not objective and EVERYTHING in it can be easily challenged.
  
  At least for some of it they're correct.
  
  “$1.5 million to ‘advance diversity equity and inclusion in Serbia’s workplaces and business communities’”
  This is mostly accurate.
  
  There are numerous articles concerning USAid and their funding finding its way to terrorists. This has been going on for years.
  
  "The FBI’s number one priority is to fight terrorism, including identifying and investigating individuals who are enabling terrorist activities through financial support,” said Virmani of the FBI Washington Field Office Counterterrorism Division. “Al Hafyan diverted millions of dollars in USAID funding to support the terrorist organization Al-Nusrah Front, as well as to line his own pockets. Not only was Al Hafyan supporting violent terrorists, but he was stealing money from the U.S. government that was meant for humanitarian efforts.
  
  https://oig.usaid.gov/node/7283
  
  These grants were made to what USAID called “miscellaneous foreign awardees.” You wouldn’t know from the opaque accounting process that beneficiaries included local partners who praised the October 7 onslaught.
  
  A “flash appeal” issued by the United Nations for assistance in Gaza attracted $114 million from Washington, feathering the nests of local non-governmental organizations like Al Awda, a “health and community center” with close ties to the Marxist Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, designated as a terrorist organization, and the Palestinian Medical Relief Society, whose president described the massacres in Israel as “a glorious day for the Palestinian resistance and people.”
  
  https://www.fdd.org/analysis/op_eds/202 … one-right/
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "Well, that's just one article from an extremely left wing publication. It's not objective and EVERYTHING in it can be easily challenged."
  
  They are left wing and biased for everything but the one area you agree with?? Nah.
  
  If the rest is easily challenged, then go ahead and do so rather than dismissing 90% of it as biased...
  
  https://fox59.com/news/national-world/a … -on-facts/
  
  Biased?
  
  https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurra … read-on-x/
  
  Biased?
  reply report
  84
  tsmogposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  the Oakland Press is rated Center by allsides
  https://www.allsides.com/news-source/oakland-press
  
  Media Bias / Fact Check has them rated Least Biased with factual reporting rated high
  https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/oakland-press-bias/
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "Well, that's just one article from an extremely left wing publication. It's not objective and EVERYTHING in it can be easily challenged."
  
  Thank you TSMOG:
  
  the Oakland Press is rated Center by allsides
  https://www.allsides.com/news-source/oakland-press
  
  Media Bias / Fact Check has them rated Least Biased with factual reporting rated high
  https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/oakland-press-bias/
  reply report
3. 60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  $1.5 million to ‘advance diversity equity and inclusion in Serbia’s workplaces and business communities’”
  
  This is mostly accurate. USAID provided $1.5 million to a group called Grupa Izadji, which focuses on creating opportunities for young LGBTQ people. Aleksa Savić, executive director of Grupa Izadji, said in an email that the goal “was to raise the perception among employers and the broader Serbian public that the economic engagement of all individuals, including LGBTQI+ persons, yields positive effects for the economy and creates better conditions for economic growth and development.” Under the terms of the three-year grant, USAID delivers money after certain milestones have been met. The organization has received $1.14 million and on Jan. 24 “submitted additional milestones valued at $755,000, for which we are awaiting payment from USAID,” he said. For many years, USAID has tried to improve civil society in Serbia as interest groups could advocate with the government on reforms. LGBTQ people faced discrimination, so one area of focus was ensuring acceptance of Belgrade Pride, an annual parade that previously was canceled after threats of violence. The 2024 parade was peaceful, and the government is discussing legislation on same-sex partnerships.
  
  https://www.theoaklandpress.com/2025/02 … -spending/
  reply report
4. 60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "$70,000 for production of a ‘DEI musical’ in Ireland”
  
  This is wrong. This was a State Department grant, not USAID. In 2022, the U.S. ambassador hosted an event featuring Grammy-winning folk duo Francesco Turrisi and Rhiannon Giddens, along with other Irish and American musicians.
  
  https://www.theoaklandpress.com/2025/02 … -spending/
  reply report
5. 60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "$2.5 million for electric vehicles for Vietnam”
  
  This is wrong. This was for more than electric vehicles. USAID launched a $2.5 million fund that provided awards up to $100,000 to organizations with promising new products, business models, or financing models in Danang or Ho Chi Minh cities. The fund was part of a larger effort to bring green energy to a country that is one of the world’s fastest-growing per capita greenhouse gas emitters. China has a head start on green energy, but the United States has sought to keep Vietnam out of China’s orbit, so the program was intended to boost the U.S. brand in green energy.
  reply report
6. 60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  “$47,000 for a ‘transgender opera’ in Colombia”
  
  This is wrong. USAID did not fund this. The White House appears to be referring to a $25,000 State Department grant to Universidad De Los Andes in Bogotá to stage an opera, “As One,” composed by Laura Kaminsky, an American. The rest of the money came from other sources, according to Juana Monsalve, the lead actress in the Colombian performances. “This is a well-known opera in the U.S., highly acclaimed by audiences,” Monsalve told a radio show in Spanish. “The last thing I expected was to hear those statements from the White House.”
  
  https://www.theoaklandpress.com/2025/02 … -spending/
  reply report
7. 60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "$32,000 for a ‘transgender comic book’ in Peru”
  
  This is wrong. USAID did not fund this, and it was not specifically transgender. Instead, the grant says the State Department provided $32,000, under the guise of public diplomacy, to Peru’s Education Department “to cover expenses to produce a tailored-made comic, featured an LGBTQ+ hero to address social and mental health issues.”
  reply report
8. 60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "$6 million to fund tourism in Egypt”
  
  This is wrong. This initiative was launched in the first Trump administration to “increase educational opportunities and strengthen the livelihoods of the people of North Sinai,” according to the citation provided by the White House. The money would “provide access to transportation for rural communities and economic livelihood programming for families.” There is no mention of funding tourism.
  reply report
81
Credence2posted 2 months ago
Let's look at complaints, that some of my friends across the pond has against Musk.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tylerroush … sinformed/

Imagine this man has the nerve to refer to the German Chancellor as a "Oaf" and has the unmitigated gall to ask King Charles to dissolve Parliment and ask for new elections? Who asked for his opinion or interference in the politics of other societies?
I never saw such blantant interference from men like Bill Gates.

Who does this fellow think that he is? He may be the world richest man, but he is also the world's most arrogant one. He is also terribly ill mannered.

This Musk, as I understand it, was Trumps emissary reflecting a changed relationship coming between Washington and European Capitals, that by stirring up Europe's most disgusting right wing rabble.
reply report
84
tsmogposted 2 months ago

Elon Musk Aide Is Now Working at VA and Accessing Its Computer Systems by Military.com
https://www.military.com/daily-news/202 … stems.html

"A representative from Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency now works at the Department of Veterans Affairs, where they have been given access to contracting systems as well as information on VA operations and information technology systems.

Rumors began circulating Tuesday that DOGE representatives visited the VA on Tuesday with an intent to mine data on disability compensation and benefits.

But in response to questions from Military.com over DOGE activities at the VA, a VA spokesman said the department has a single DOGE employee who is "specifically focused on identifying wasteful contracts, improving VA operations and strengthening management of the department's IT projects."

"The DOGE employee will be solely focused on improving VA performance and efficiency and will not have access to veterans' or VA beneficiaries' data," VA Press Secretary Pete Kasperowicz said in an email.

Further along the article shares . . .

"Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., issued a press release Wednesday, saying she had heard that DOGE "may have barged into VA today."

"Musk and his associates already have the personal financial information of every veteran receiving disability or education benefits because of their illegal data mining at the Department of Treasury. Will they now look at private health records of veterans? What else will they do that could put the health and safety of our veterans at risk?" Murray, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, said in the statement."

In conclusion the article shares . . .

"Alan Butler, executive director and president of the nonprofit advocacy group Electronic Privacy Information Center, told Military.com that nonetheless, the access is concerning.

"That is still a massive invasion of privacy, first of all, and still imposes significant ongoing risks," Butler said. "Because 'read' includes the ability to exfiltrate data. ... All of this just exponentially increases the odds that this data gets breached, that people's private information is breached, that national security is breached."

The VA maintains that DOGE will not have access to veterans' personal data and the department will help streamline the VA.

"VA looks forward to working with DOGE to improve services to veterans, their families, caregivers and survivors," Kasperowicz said in his statement."
reply report
1. 84
  tsmogposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Secrecy is becoming a defining trait of Elon Musk's DOGE by NBC News (Feb 7, 2025)
  DOGE officials have been active at USAID, Veterans Affairs, Treasury and elsewhere, but little is publicly known about their work.
  
  "On Monday, a team at IBM that is contracted to manage human resources data for more than 500,000 federal employees received an unusual request to provide “read-only” access for the HR records for all 14,000 employees of the General Services Administration, according to a source familiar with the contract.
  
  The email was from IBM’s regular contact at the GSA, the agency that manages federal property. But the request was odd since the agency already had “read and write” access to the data.
  
  The request and the questions it raised were one example of the suspicion and speculation in Washington as President Donald Trump and Elon Musk conduct an unprecedented effort to shrink the federal workforce and slash federal programs that is shrouded in secrecy."
  
  A little bit later . . .
  
  "As of Wednesday, NBC News has confirmed that DOGE officials have been active at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which oversees health care for more than 139 million people; the U.S. Agency for International Development; the Department of Veterans Affairs; and the U.S. Treasury."
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Rumors began circulating Tuesday that DOGE representatives visited the VA on Tuesday with an intent to mine data on disability compensation and benefits. RUMORS
  
  "Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., issued a press release Wednesday, saying she had heard that DOGE "may have barged into VA today." SHE HAD HEARD
  
  "As of Wednesday, NBC News has confirmed that DOGE officials have been active at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which oversees health care for more than 139 million people; the U.S. Agency for International Development; the Department of Veterans Affairs; and the U.S. Treasury." ---What does this indicate? It is pure conjecture.
  
  Only quote with a source ---"The DOGE employee will be solely focused on improving VA performance and efficiency and will not have access to veterans' or VA beneficiaries' data," VA Press Secretary Pete Kasperowicz said in an email.
  
  In my opinion, this post is purely speculative, and lacks any factual basis. While it may appeal to those who favor unverified rumors, does it actually serve a constructive purpose? It presents no concrete evidence and seems more focused on pushing a negative narrative without justification.
  reply report
  84
  tsmogposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "In my opinion, this post is purely speculative, and lacks any factual basis."
  
  Thanks for your opinion whatever weight is given to it. *shrug*
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Hopefully, my perspective will provide some common-sense food for thought. In any political discussion, there’s almost always another side to consider. Healthy debate should be based on facts, not just speculation or partisan narratives. It’s worth asking whether the argument being made is grounded in reality or just an attempt to push a predetermined viewpoint.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I'm expecting the same BS unfounded accusations that were made against usaid to to leveled at every agency musk and his muskrats visit.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I have posted this frequently DOGE posts all their doings openly online almost daily. I think if anyone cares about what they are doing they might want to just have a look... I see many complaining about transparency, and ignoring it. So pleased to see you continue to call others derogatory terms --- Cute. Cough Coug
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  He provides absolutely no data for his accusations... He has provided nothing in the way of evidence for his claims of fraud and criminality. Additionally, the actual purpose of many expenditures of usaid have been greatly misconstrued... As I have already gone through each one on this thread . He needs to put up or shut up in a very substantial manner because it is approaching the point where his statements look like flat out lies
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  All on X for anyone to see... They add documents as well as what they saved... These are tech people they add the necessary and that's all she wrote. One can see they are saving taxpayers cash. Plus they are working quickly. Before long they will be done, gone, and will have saved tons.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Maybe you could provide a link? Because I follow him on x and there is absolutely nothing substantial there. . Just a lot of expenditures for things that he doesn't like or agree with. Certainly nothing that corroborates criminality and fraud. Since these type of accusations are so serious, don't they belong somewhere other than a social media platform?
  
  I want to see what was done in a fraudulent matter, I want to see what actions were criminal. Heck, he alleged money laundering at one point..
  reply report
  85
  GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  By following "him" do you mean Musk, DOGE, or both?
  
  Musk's posts are just as you describe, but DOGE posts (Sharlee's reference?) are more informative than vitriolic.
  
  GA
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I follow Musk & Doge. I have also visited the Doge website and keep up with the White House releases. Yes, Doge on X is more informative but certainly has not provided any corroboration of Musk's claims of fraud . It's worrisome because today we have Trump stating that he believes the Doge team "will help find "hundreds of billions of dollars of fraud" in federal agencies....
  
  So will we ever see some kind of proof of the so-called fraud? Not agreeing with the way in which agencies spend their money appropriated by Congress is quite different than fraud... I think it's misleading the public.
  reply report
  84
  tsmogposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Why is it on 'X'. As computer savvy as he and/or his underlings are you would think they could have set up an official government site by now or at least have requested one with an announcement. They certainly closed them down fast enough.
  
  I don't like government actions being announced on Truth Social and 'X'. Call me old fashioned, I don't care.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  The Doge website is basically EMPTY. It's laughable for "tech people". Pretty much shows you how much they want you to understand or know.... They have a spot for merch though... Tells you all you need to know
  
  "BIG BALLS". EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH
  
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  No evidence of the accusations of fraud or criminality on the White House website either...
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Well guess were good than,
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I like seeing information posted on social media—more eyes on it, and maybe those little media blurbs aren’t the way to go anymore. I mean, it’s genius, in my opinion. People can be held accountable for what they share, and if info gets removed, well, that’s when the real problem becomes glaringly obvious.
  
  The White House has a website, but it’s certainly not updated nearly as regularly as DOGE X seems to be. It’s like DOGE is in fast-forward mode—who knows, maybe they’ll wrap up before we even realize it, and we’ll get a neat little summary of their findings.
  
  What strikes me as odd is that nobody seems all that interested in what they’re uncovering; instead, the focus is just on the fact that they’re even looking. To me, that speaks volumes.
  reply report
  84
  tsmogposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Well you certainly are 'entitled' to your view. As said, perhaps I am old fashioned. I see it as Musk posts on 'X' and then the White House matches it whether true or not. Kind of like let's fudge it for now it's not official, is it?
  
  Yes, I am a skeptic these days.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I suggest you have a better look at the DOGE X... tons have not been reported. Hard to even keep up with. I would think they will do a tally at the end of the month, that's what they did last month. It's not Musk posting on DOGE X... Maybe you are not looking in the right place. I have listed the link.
  
  Department of Government Efficiency Feb 7
  @DOGE
  Great coordination across 35 agencies over the last two days to terminate 199 wasteful contracts saving ~$250mm, including:
  
  -Contract for “Asia Pacific - Sri Lanka climate change mitigation adaption and resilience coordinator services for forest service”
  -Workshop for “Intercultural communication diversity dialogue circle communicating across differences”
  
  Did you know about this? I would not have unless I viewed it on DOGE X
  reply report
  84
  tsmogposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I don't want to open an account with 'X'. I won't open an account with 'X'. I don't want anything to do with 'X'.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Just a suggestion. Great place for anyone who might want to get as close as they can to what DOGE is doing. Straight up what they are doing, no confusion --- short and sweet.
  reply report
  85
  Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Shar,
  
  I would like your input on this idea.
  
  I've come to the conclusion that the left is inherently corrupt. So much so that they are unable to recognize it when it's presented to them. After all the fraud and corruption that has been committed by the left they seem to be angry when it is pointed out and strongly defend it. We are talking about individuals who could rationalize and justify the behavior of Hilary Clinton AND her husband. Individuals who defend the russia hoax, the pee pee take allegation, and the Steele Dossier.
  
  Is it any surprise they are defending the fraud, waste, and corruption that has been discovered within our government? I think the left feels it is their right as citizens to engage in as much fraud, corruption, and waste that benefits them or their causes.
  
  The democrat party is a real mess right now. Just watch the video clips of them choosing their party leaders to see these are individuals who are detached from reality.
  
  I'm just glad that we're now the majority. With the democrats being democrats, this could be something that will last a long time.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "Is it any surprise they are defending the fraud, waste, and corruption that has been discovered within our government?
  
  What fraud? Will the fraud be prosecuted? And with what evidence LOL??
  
  How do you figure you're the majority? I'd love to see that math.
  
  He won the election by the smallest margin in history AND an estimated 89 million Americans, or about 36% of the country’s voting-eligible population, did not vote in the 2024 general election.... Wonder what they're thinking right now?
  report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Mike, I would be happy to share my input.
  
  I understand exactly where you're coming from, and I think there are real psychological and sociological reasons for this kind of behavior. When corruption and deceit are so deeply ingrained in a political movement, those within it often become desensitized or even incapable of recognizing it. Cognitive dissonance plays a huge role—when people are so invested in a particular ideology, they will go to great lengths to justify actions that, if done by the other side, they would condemn.
  
  There’s also the issue of moral relativism, where the left tends to see everything through the lens of “ends justify the means.” If lying, cheating, or manipulating is necessary to maintain their political power or push forward their agenda, many will convince themselves it’s for the greater good. This explains how they can dismiss blatant scandals like the Clinton email cover-up, the Steele Dossier, or even the lies surrounding Trump’s presidency as if they were nothing, while simultaneously manufacturing outrage over anything their opponents do.
  
  Beyond that, groupthink and ideological echo chambers are powerful forces. Many on the left are surrounded by media, academia, and cultural institutions that reinforce their worldview and shield them from contradictory information. When they do encounter opposing perspectives, their first response is often hostility rather than reflection because admitting the truth would mean acknowledging they’ve been deceived. Their second defense is to divert quickly—shifting the conversation to unrelated topics, attacking the character of their opponent, or bringing up past grievances to avoid addressing the immediate issue. It’s easier to double down than to confront the uncomfortable reality that their leaders have been lying to them.
  
  That’s why pointing out corruption to them often results in anger rather than self-examination. They are not only protecting their political side but also their sense of self. To admit that the Russia hoax was a fraud or that Hillary and Bill Clinton are corrupt means admitting they’ve been wrong, and for many, that’s too much to bear.
  
  I too agree. The Democrat Party is in absolute chaos right now, and it’s becoming more obvious by the day. Just watching those clips of them yelling for people to "get out and fight" during their leadership disputes shows how detached from reality they are. This is a ploy they’ve used for years—when they’re cornered, they flounder and resort to calling names, and for protests, and using the word fight literally to make their followers angry.
  
  They frequently accused Trump of misusing the word "fight," twisting his words to claim he was inciting violence. Yet when Trump used the word, it was in a sympathetic tone, offering his supporters hope—not in a call for violence, but in reassurance that while they may have lost the election, the true battle for their values was not over. His tone was empathetic, never angry or demanding. Meanwhile, this week, we’ve watched Democrats literally screaming, their faces twisted with rage, their voices filled with anger. They’ve been cornered, and this kind of outburst was to be expected.
  
  When they use the word fight, the context is entirely different—they actually mean fighting with violence, as we saw during the so-called "Summer of Love." They encouraged riots, destruction, and attacks on anyone who opposed them, all while pretending to stand for peace and democracy. They are desperate, they thought they could get away with just about anything. I mean they dared to keep a confused man in the White House. Thinking they could stick another puppet-like president in.
  They have lost power, and now are dangerous. They see Trump doing just what he said he would do, and he is pulling back the curtain, and showing us all just what is behind the curtain. This is historical, and we are in for a very enlightening few years.
  
  And yes, I’m just glad that we’re now the majority. With the Democrats being Democrats, their hypocrisy and radicalism are only making it easier for people to see through them. If they keep going down this road, this shift could last for a long time, and be very good for America.
  
  It's sort of useless to communicate with people who are not going to even see what is in front of them. The same old same old plays over and over.
  report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "when people are so invested in a particular ideology, they will go to great lengths to justify actions that, if done by the other side, they would condemn."
  
  I'm assuming that this applies to maga also?
  report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I don’t feel that MAGA supporters can be compared to what we’re seeing from leftists. That’s just my view. I don’t think MAGA supporters conduct themselves or even converse in the same manner as those on the left. To me, the approach and tone are just different—MAGA supporters often seem more focused on practical issues rather than ideological battles, and I don’t see the same kind of intensity or aggression in their rhetoric.
  
  I think this forum, in many respects, proves my point. It highlights the difference in how MAGA supporters engage compared to those on the left. MAGAs discussions here seem to reflect a more pragmatic approach rather than the ideological intensity and aggression that often comes from the other side.
  report
  85
  Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Shar,
  
  I agree with you. You watch some of the insane reactions from those on the left and it is obvious they have no concept of the meaning of waste and corruption. It is a shame. I often wonder if the left is capable of a pragmatic and coherent response to a question.
  
  It used to be really fun to watch their insane reactions. It's gotten to the point where it is becoming just, plain, sad.
  report
  72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Every American, every Patriot, and yes that includes Democrats should feel like this gentleman does... if they don't, they are the problem, not Musk:
  
  https://youtu.be/FgmDf0Cq58k?t=559
  timestamped
  report
  76
  abwilliamsposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Hey is that Cred, finally coming around?! I know better, but, wow! This man knows what's up! He has probably been suspect for a long time now, but with what DOGE has uncovered... thus far, it's the final straw in sending this American Patriot on this explosive, insightful rant!
  Thanks for sharing Ken.
  report
  81
  Credence2posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Hello, AB, its me and I have not quite "come around" yet.
  report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Thanks for sharing. I hope all will watch the clip, and here this mans words.
  report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Mike, Yes, it's more sad than funny now. We've seen serious corruption from Democrats in Washington over the years, from two ridiculous impeachments to countless other issues. It's become even more obvious to me that the left and right have fundamentally different mindsets, with very little common ground. I mean, it has all become so very clear regarding the mindsets of the leftists that I feel it would be very unintelligent not to face these differences and also confront the problems that are being caused by their skewed thinking. As I’ve shared with you, my views have developed over time simply by observing. My conservative nature doesn’t allow me to ignore reality—I have to face issues head-on, and I can’t look at anything without applying common sense.
  report
  72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  What they are doing is trying to clean up the nation crippling mess that has been left behind by the most corrupt Administration in our lifetimes...
  
  And the insanity that is prevalent in our government today...
  
  A small example of how bad it can get... watch the short... unrelated, yet totally related... when ideology and insanity are allowed to usurp reason and logic, this is what we get:
  
  https://www.youtube.com/shorts/7VwqPIhI5y4
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Yes, Ken DOGE is doing exactly what they were hired to do. The media is spinning reports with words like “it’s rumored” and all the usual twisted phrases they use to manipulate what DOGE is accomplishing. One thing I really appreciate is that Trump has been very supportive of DOGE, allowing them to do their job, and when questioned, he gives strong, supportive answers. DOGE is working efficiently, moving quickly through the agencies and tackling the overspending as they were asked to do. What I see is Trump doing exactly what he said he would do—I'm not sure why those on the left didn’t take him at his word. He is on a mission, and I honestly believe he feels it’s a mission set by God. Like he said, he’s going to "fight, fight, fight."
  
  Thank you for sharing the YouTube link. I'm a fan of Victor Davis Hanson as well. I hope others here take the time to watch the video—it could really help open their eyes to the rot in their party.
  report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  So he talks about wastefulness and savings in these areas but where is the evaluation of the cost versus benefits, particularly what are the potential consequences of slashing any program? There is just so much missing to take any of his posted information seriously.
  
  Considering the work that usaid , for example, does even in just the health arena, what do people think the consequences of burning this agency to the ground will be in terms of aids and tuberculosis? In a different arena, how about the impacts to our own farmers?
  
  No one's talking about the consequences. The aftermath of when you have let someone run through the china shop with a hammer.
  
  What are the consequences, the real world impacts of smashing everything?
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Exactly, that is important, consequently, it all seems kind of half-assed to me.
  
  This is a job for a surgeon not a chain saw massacre.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  No program has been even done away with --- period. "Consequences" again you have not touched on what is being found by DOGE. The consequence is that many agencies have been misspending taxpayer money. Glad you finally brought up TB --- hope you check out we are having many cases now in America. In the U.S., detailed data for 2024 are not yet fully available. However, in 2023, the country reported 9,633 TB cases, marking a 15.6% increase from 2022 and the highest count since 2013. Nom one burned USAID to the ground, just will be moved under the umbrella of the Stare Department.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "The consequence is that many agencies have been misspending taxpayer money."
  
  Where is the evidence of this? All of these agencies receive their funding through Congress. Doge has not found anything to indicate the fraud and criminality being claimed.
  
  Usaid will be brought down to under 300 employees.... So I guess we can look forward to more TB worldwide. More giveaways to the farmers also because they will be impacted. Has anyone really looked at what usaid does around the world? Doesn't seem like it.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  You go in circles. I share my thoughts. I find it hard to ruminate. Sorry
  report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  He has alleged fraud and criminality. Where is it? Where is the evidence?
  report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Musk's certainly said that the USAID is a "criminal organization" stems from his belief that the agency has been misusing federal funds. He has accused USAID of "money laundering" to support left-wing organizations, but he has not provided specific evidence to substantiate these claims. I have no idea of what he found or where his accusations will lead anywhere. Hopefully, my response will put an end to you asking me this repetitive question.
  report
  78
  wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Where can I find these links to DOGE reports that state there is nothing found? I would really be interested in reading them!
  report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Musk and DOGE offer no evidence to support any of their allegations.
  report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Are you stating that what DOGE is reporting on their X account is being untruthful?
  report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  When Elon Musk and Trump claim that agencies are committing fraud and are criminal, with no supporting evidence, it's a problem.
  
  I'm challenged on this forum regularly to provide basis for my statements. The same applies to doge and Trump or no. I mean I could claim all over this forum, repeatedly and with no support, that musk is actually not a citizen... That would be okay? I could say that he has committed fraud, that he is part of a criminal enterprise... That would be fine? Stating it as fact, not opinion. At what point would my unsubstantiated statements just become dissemination of lies?
  report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Many of us have posted sources. I offered the DOGE X link. GA offered very good information that went on to prove some of what DOGE has done. Oddly, you keep asking for evidence. It is your prerogative to not believe what is being reported and what is posted on DOGEs X.
  
  GA post https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/362 … ost4357113
  
  You're fixated on what Trump and Musk are saying while ignoring the concerns DOGE is raising. This perfectly illustrates the contrast between left and right mindsets. You dwell on words regardless of the actions taking place. Instead of acknowledging what’s being uncovered, you focus on exaggerated rhetoric and let it fuel your outrage.
  
  I don't think anyone here has argued about or denied what Musk and Trump have said.
  report
  85
  Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Shar,
  
  Getting the information is as easy as going to the google search engine, put in "USAid corruption" and see the stories that pop up. There are many.
  
  I guess it's easier to believe something that's false rather than attempt to discover the truth.
  report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Maybe you could post those links that give evidence of fraud or corruption?
  report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  No, you've posted a list of the usaid budget with its expenditures. Most of those have been misconstrued, mischaracterized and I went through and debunked each one... BUT a list of expenditures does not equal fraud, does it? Likewise, GA has not given proof.
  
  So if I would like to trim the waste in Florida, I can simply throw out an expenditure number for a program like the following...
  
  "In 2024, the state allocated $32 million for Cultural Facilities Grants"
  
  and this is "proof" of fraud? I can call the agency that administers this money fraudulent? Even criminal just because I want to trim a budget and I really don't like this program?
  
  And on top of it, anytime anyone asks me for proof that this program is a fraud I just keep posting the name of it and how much money they were allotted in the previously appropriated budget...
  report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  The link to GA's post does not support an accusation of fraud or criminality.
  
  "Instead of acknowledging what’s being uncovered"
  
  What exactly has been uncovered? Not fraud, not criminality as they have been telling the American public but simply the obliteration of programs they don't like. Programs that they have been actually disingenuous in describing.
  
  That's what has been uncovered.
  
  What hasn't been uncovered? The impact of decimating usaid .
  
  What will be the long-term impacts of reducing this agency, formerly 10, 000 working in programs around the world to less than 300?
  
  Did I miss the part where musk posted the cost benefit analysis of the cuts?
  
  ,
  report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  don’t think anyone here has claimed that DOGE found criminal activity. From what I’ve seen, most posts seem more focused on concerns about overspending, which is exactly what DOGE was hired to investigate. That’s what they’re doing. I just read a comment GA posted that raises some concerns about something Musk reposted on X, which did seem hyperbolic.
  
  I’ve been clear about prioritizing actions over words. I have no idea why so many government jobs are being cut, but I trust this administration is making that decision. And let’s not forget—I was fully on board with Trump’s agenda, which is why I voted for him. What did you miss during his campaign? He’s following through on what he said he would do. I’ve wanted a smaller government and support most of what he’s doing with his executive orders. I’ve been unhappy with how the government has been run for a long time, and I’m ready to try something new rather than stick with the failed policies of the past.
  report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  It is incredibly disingenuous and irresponsible to claim fraud and criminality when there is no proof of such. This is really lying to the American people.
  
  Is it necessary to lie in order to make budget cuts? Can the budget be trimmed without the use of lies and misinformation? Seems like it would be possible...
  report
2. 85
  Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  As a veteran and someone who regularly visits and volunteers at the VA I can tell you their computer systems need an overhaul. I'm surprised they do as good of a job as they do with the computer system in place. There IS a lot of waste at the VA so, I'm all for this.
  reply report
60
Willowarborposted 2 months ago
OPINION

Do you remember how folks spent forever babbling on and on about shadowy billionaires trying to implement a totalitarian government and bring about 'a new world order' and such?...Well, here it is. We've arrived.

I mean, the whole “fear of monied elites” has kind of been the mantra for as long as I can remember. Painting George Soros as a puppet master controlling then-President Obama. And Republicans endlessly referring to liberals as “rich coastal elites”

So I guess my question is: Why so quiet right now? I mean, you’ve FINALLY got an actual elitist billionaire taking control of the government... the thing you’ve always predicted and railed against and I’m hearing crickets.

The “DOGE team” is a bunch of Musk’s tech-bro buddies we know virtually nothing about. And it sounds like they’re sitting around in D.C., browsing through your Social Security numbers and deciding what the government will pay for and who will get stiffed.

There’s a billionaire and some billionaire-adjacent doofuses taking hold of the U.S. government...Isn’t this what you’ve been waiting for? Aren’t you supposed to be rising up and doing something?

You can’t tell me you spent the past however many decades saying and writing crazy things about the great elitist takeover and, now that it’s here, you don’t have a plan. You've settled in.

I mean if Biden had brought Soros into the government as an “efficiency expert” and let him have access to federal government data, Republicans would have impeached Biden instantly. They would have set the White House on fire using the flames erupting from the heads of Fox News hosts.

Oooooh yes...I forgot this is what the entire Republican party and the maga fans who voted for trump wanted. They were totally cool, I assume, with the idea of the richest man in the world effectively buying his way into our government then changing it however he wants, while also gaining access to our personal information and routinely saying things that indicate he has no clue what he’s talking about.

That's why trump, at his inauguration, was flanked by billionaires Musk, Zuck and Bezos, and not by regular-guy supporters who devoted all those years to billionaire-related conspiracies.

I get it now, the long-standing fear that wealthy elites were plotting to fundamentally change your way of life was just a bunch of crap. Neat.
reply report
76
abwilliamsposted 2 months ago
Yes. A judge protecting corruption - is corrupt!
The goal here is to get to the root, or tear out the roots altogether. Most of us have had our fill of this alternate world, this alternate government, slithering around, within the confines of the People's Government.
reply report
1. 86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Angie, so much projection going on here.
  reply report
2. 60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  What is the corruption the supposedly corrupt judge is protecting??
  reply report
86
Sharlee01posted 2 months ago
Oh, this is rich—pun fully intended. For years, the left has ranted about the sinister grip of shadowy billionaires, warning of some impending oligarchic nightmare where the ultra-wealthy call the shots. They had a full-blown existential crisis over Koch brothers’ donations, turned Soros into a Bond villain, and screamed about how billionaires shouldn’t exist while sipping oat milk lattes in overpriced coffee shops.

But now, suddenly, the idea of a billionaire influencing government isn’t that big of a deal? No protests? No late-night monologues from Colbert about the horrors of unelected rich guys pulling the strings? That’s weird. Almost like the outrage was never about billionaire influence—it was just about which billionaires were in charge.

And let's talk about Musk for a second. The guy is basically the poster child for the new left’s cognitive dissonance. One minute, he’s a genius when he’s making electric cars and launching rockets, and the next, he’s a right-wing boogeyman because he bought Twitter and stopped banning accounts left and right. Now he’s supposedly the billionaire to fear?

And your big gotcha moment here—“Where’s the outrage from Republicans? If Soros was in charge, you guys would be flipping out!”—is almost too cute. The difference? Republicans never pretended to hate billionaires. They don’t scream about wealth redistribution while wearing $3,000 blazers. They don’t rail against private jets and then take them to climate summits. The left, on the other hand, has built an entire movement around demonizing the rich, only to roll over the second a tech bro they kinda like gets a little power.

Also, let’s be honest—if Soros had been officially brought into the Biden administration, Republicans wouldn’t need to light their hair on fire because the media would be too busy pretending it was the most normal thing in the world. “Soros just wants to help! Why are you guys so obsessed with him?” Meanwhile, Musk sneezes and it’s a three-day think piece about the dangers of “tech billionaires undermining democracy.”

So, yeah. It turns out all those dystopian rants about the billionaire class controlling the government were just performance art. When it’s their guy in charge, the left’s anti-billionaire stance suddenly evaporates. Funny how that works.

Projection seems to be running rampant in your OP.
reply report
84
tsmogposted 2 months ago
Who is helping Elon Musk gut the US government? by the Guardian (Feb 8, 2025)
The billionaire’s cost-cutting ‘Doge’ staff includes wealthy executives, far-right ideologues and young engineers
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 … GTUS_email

Worth a skim looking for this and that and is eye opening in some cases.
reply report
1. 85
  GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Although the article did come across as critical of DOGE members in general, the section describing their qualifications and areas of expertise listed some impressive credentials (minus the new grads).
  
  Relative to the new grads . . . Considering the caliber of the 'credentialed' members, it's probably a safe assumption that the hired (recruited?) grads are exceptional in their areas too.
  
  There may be some ideologues in the mix, but I see the core team as well qualified for their tasks.
  
  GA
  reply report
  84
  tsmogposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Thanks for replying. . .
  reply report
81
Credence2posted 2 months ago
Yes, I have been compelled to counter a “crock” provided by certain “prima Donnas” on this thread.

Creating a chainsaw with more horsepower does not replace the proper use of a scalpel.

I am of the left and I don’t sip latte from crystal chalises. But, I am aware of the danger of oligarchy and this society’s penchant for allowing the wealthy to usurp the functions of government to its own ends, the man of the street be damned.

Billionaires or otherwise the extremely wealthy are to be treated with suspicion as to their motives, whether it be Soros, Musk or Donald Trump. Outside of being able to buy a bigger box of corn flakes than I, I remain suspicious of any motive they may have, particularly as “so called” advisers.

I expect everyone to follow the rules of governance for which I pay taxes and I don’t give carte Blanche to anyone regardless of how much money they have.

In my opinion, Musk is an arrogant pricque in the model of the man on to whose leash he is tied. Who is going to believe that Musk is impartial and does not have an agenda? So, seeing that children get lunches under Head Start is fraud and abuse and it is by the very ideology of these people, is the act of a dirty DOGE. Will he apply the chainsaw to DOD, taking out meat and sinew where he has lucrative government contracts, while he advocates cutting the personnel who administer them?

It is not a matter of Biden bringing Soros in because he has never done it, so speculating about what the other side would do is utter nonsense. Right now, only Trump and the Right are doing it.

So, NO, I don’t trust the wealthy to do anything beyond their own best interests, regardless of the smoke and mirrors of potential impartiality. The holders of wealth in the past were Patrician, Kennedy’s, Roosevelts, etc. These wealthy types today are nothing like them.

I want Congress to grow a pair and challenge every step that Trump and his DOGE are taking.
reply report
1. 86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "Yes, I have been compelled to counter a “crock” provided by certain “prima Donnas” on this thread." Cred
  
  Always great to see you continue to label others... Could respond--- but when THEY go low, I go high.
  reply report
60
Willowarborposted 2 months ago
Feb 9 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump says he expects Elon Musk to find billions of dollars of fraud and abuse at the Pentagon during an audit that the billionaire will lead.
"I'm going to tell him very soon, like maybe in 24 hours, to go check the Department of Education. ... Then I'm going to go, go to the military. Let's check the military," Trump said in a Super Bowl interview with Fox News' Brett Baier, an excerpt of which was aired on Sunday morning.
"We're going to find billions, hundreds of millions of dollars of fraud and abuse," Trump said

Never saw the proof of fraud at usaid before they took an Ax to it.. will we ever see anything to corroborate the fraud Trump expects to find at all of these other agencies? And will anyone even care when they conveniently don't present it?
reply report
1. 86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  The White House posted proof---
  
  "For decades, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has been unaccountable to taxpayers as it funnels massive sums of money to the ridiculous — and, in many cases, malicious — pet projects of entrenched bureaucrats, with next-to-no oversight.
  
  Here are only a few examples of the WASTE and ABUSE:
  
  $1.5 million to “advance diversity equity and inclusion in Serbia’s workplaces and business communities”
  $70,000 for production of a “DEI musical” in Ireland
  $2.5 million for electric vehicles for Vietnam
  $47,000 for a “transgender opera” in Colombia
  $32,000 for a “transgender comic book” in Peru
  $2 million for sex changes and “LGBT activism” in Guatemala
  $6 million to fund tourism in Egypt
  Hundreds of thousands of dollars for a non-profit linked to designated terrorist organizations — even AFTER an inspector general launched an investigation
  Millions to EcoHealth Alliance — which was involved in research at the Wuhan lab
  “Hundreds of thousands of meals that went to al Qaeda-affiliated fighters in Syria”
  Funding to print “personalized” contraceptives birth control devices in developing countries
  Hundreds of millions of dollars to fund “irrigation canals, farming equipment, and even fertilizer used to support the unprecedented poppy cultivation and heroin production in Afghanistan,” benefiting the Taliban
  The list literally goes on and on — and it has all been happening for decades." https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/ … runs-deep/
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I did a fact check of every single one of those earlier on in this thread... Their purposes are certainly misconstrued and many of them are funded by the state department, not usaid...
  
  But what is fraudulent about any of this? What has usaid done that constitutes fraud? Expenditures do not automatically equal fraud
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Here we go again with the list... Have you fact checked the list?
  
  $70,000 for production of a ‘DEI musical’ in Ireland”
  
  This is wrong. This was a State Department grant, not USAID. In 2022, the U.S. ambassador hosted an event featuring Grammy-winning folk duo Francesco Turrisi and Rhiannon Giddens, along with other Irish and American musicians.
  
  https://www.theoaklandpress.com/2025/
  
  The fact checks for everything else on the list continues below once again...
  reply report
60
Willowarborposted 2 months ago
Continuing with "the list"

"$2.5 million for electric vehicles for Vietnam”

This is wrong. This was for more than electric vehicles. USAID launched a $2.5 million fund that provided awards up to $100,000 to organizations with promising new products, business models, or financing models in Danang or Ho Chi Minh cities. The fund was part of a larger effort to bring green energy to a country that is one of the world’s fastest-growing per capita greenhouse gas emitters. China has a head start on green energy, but the United States has sought to keep Vietnam out of China’s orbit, so the program was intended to boost the U.S. brand in green energy.
reply report
60
Willowarborposted 2 months ago
More of "the list"

“$47,000 for a ‘transgender opera’ in Colombia”

This is wrong. USAID did not fund this. The White House appears to be referring to a $25,000 State Department grant to Universidad De Los Andes in Bogotá to stage an opera, “As One,” composed by Laura Kaminsky, an American. The rest of the money came from other sources, according to Juana Monsalve, the lead actress in the Colombian performances. “This is a well-known opera in the U.S., highly acclaimed by audiences,” Monsalve told a radio show in Spanish. “The last thing I expected was to hear those statements from the White House.”
reply report
60
Willowarborposted 2 months ago
And more of "the list"

"$32,000 for a ‘transgender comic book’ in Peru”

This is wrong. USAID did not fund this, and it was not specifically transgender. Instead, the grant says the State Department provided $32,000, under the guise of public diplomacy, to Peru’s Education Department “to cover expenses to produce a tailored-made comic, featured an LGBTQ+ hero to address social and mental health issues.
reply report
60
Willowarborposted 2 months ago
And more...

"$6 million to fund tourism in Egypt”

This is wrong. This initiative was launched in the first Trump administration to “increase educational opportunities and strengthen the livelihoods of the people of North Sinai,” according to the citation provided by the White House. The money would “provide access to transportation for rural communities and economic livelihood programming for families.” There is no mention of funding tourism
reply report
60
Willowarborposted 2 months ago
Someone please tell me why this list of expenditures by usaid that musk doesn't agree with is continually held up as evidence of fraud or criminality???
reply report
84
tsmogposted 2 months ago
Just curious . . . how many accountants are with DOGE?
reply report
1. 85
  GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  47*
  * (with AI assistance 42 of them are classified as Super Accountants)
  
  GA
  reply report
81
Credence2posted 2 months ago
Guess what, the DOGE has come down with a case of distemper. Now this Musk is saying “off with their heads. He gets slapped down over his attempted take over. Helter Skelter begins…

https://thehill.com/homenews/5134752-li … -treasury/

The judge said that:

The President does not have the power to give away our private information to anyone he chooses, and he cannot cut federal payments approved by Congress,”

So, The DOGE, Trump and Trumpers can put THAT in their pipes and smoke it……
reply report
1. 78
  wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I've had a little problem with this quaint idea that because Musk was not elected he cannot see information on us.
  
  Who gave the IRS agent the right? The cop searching your car? The building inspector? The landlord pulling not only a credit report but a criminal history as well?
  
  This country is chock full of people getting private information on whoever they wish. Musk is just another one.
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Are all the other inspectors given access to information on a need to know basis as part of their jobs? If I wanted to rent an apartment, I volunteer information. Doesn’t IRS have a commission to have access to information related to citizens regarding taxes due and liability? That comes from Congress not from Trumps imagination. The cop can only search my car based on reasonable suspicion or probable cause, all of these concepts are part of the rules established and not just the caprice of anyone.
  
  Musk is not going to be one of them who says that he operates in an official capacity. Musk is being shot down because the source of his authority is being questioned to rifle through private information, as it should be.
  reply report
  78
  wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "Are all the other inspectors given access to information on a need to know basis as part of their jobs?"
  
  Are you implying that Musk has no "need to know" where money is spent in order to determine if it is reasonable? That concept doesn't make a lot of sense to me; just more TDS, this time directed at the hated Musk.
  reply report
  76
  abwilliamsposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Exactly. What is the next stage of a syndrome?
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  The problem is that Musk and DOgE are in violation, what is that the judge said? According to the Federal Judge the actions of Musk and DOGE are not legitimate, so the "need to know" is no longer relevant. And that is good enough for me, TDS or no....
  
  Perhaps, you missed the memo?
  
  https://thehill.com/homenews/5134752-li … -treasury/
  
  The judge said that:
  
  The President does not have the power to give away our private information to anyone he chooses, and he cannot cut federal payments approved by Congress,”
  
  THATS is why Musk and DOGE are not just anyone else. That ought to muzzle that DOGE for good...
  reply report
2. 60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Credence, I think we are getting awfully close to this administration actually ignoring court orders.
  
  JD Vance on X...
  
  "If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal.
  
  If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that's also illegal.
  
  Judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power."
  
  And we are not even a month in...
  
  https://x.com/JDVance/status/1888607143030391287
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  He had better not, he will have crossed a line that I am certain he did not plan upon so early in his Presidency.
  
  Vance is just as dumb as Trump if he thinks that either of them have authority to not comply with the court's orders.
  
  Conservatives tend to forget that there is a separation of powers principle for a reason. There is a judicial branch completely independent of the other two. A lesson in middle school level civics seems to be in order.
  
  What I don't understand is how Trump and his handlers did not anticipate this. Anyone with any sense would have realized that this gamble would not work. Instead of asking permission, Trump asks for forgiveness, but it won't work this time.
  reply report
73
Kathleen Cochranposted 2 months ago
Does anybody include sources for their posts any more?
reply report
85
GA Andersonposted 2 months ago
Elon Musk's DOGE young'uns have been busy. Regardless of the 'tiny percentage' arguments, $4 billion per year isn't peanuts. Politicians would plug it into 10-year budget forecasts and claim $40 billion in savings.

This one does check out — with only a little exaggeration:

Harvard
Yale
UNC

And the NIH documentation of the assertions.

GA
reply report
60
Willowarborposted 2 months ago
Will cutting funds for indirect costs be detrimental to research studies?
reply report
1. 85
  GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  It will be detrimental to the sponsoring institutions. As it should be.
  
  How do you justify the private vs government rate difference?
  
  GA
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I don't think I would know the answer to that offhand. Without doing some research, I don't think I could begin to understand the ins and outs of research funding. It seems like yet again we have vague statements posted on X by Elon Musk. As if people understand the intricacies of the funding.
  
  When an institution accepts a grant from a private source with a low percentage allotted for indirect costs, do they generally subsidize that grant with other sources?
  
  Do private foundations have a different set of criteria on what can be considered an indirect cost? Is the criteria reasonable?
  
  Just a quick look around and I can see that indirect costs have risen significantly over the last few decades. Inflation. Also, wouldn't Indirect cost rates vary
  significantly among the research
  institutions?
  
  But I'm thinking the main reason universities accept low indirect rates from private orgs. is that it’s an exception, and they don’t have to accept such low rates from government grants. But in any event it looks like there may be a problem...
  
  "In several appropriations bills (including the most recent one from 2024), Congress specifically banned NIH from doing anything to change how indirect costs are determined."
  
  That is, the federal rules on indirect costs apply to NIH as determined in mid-2017 (you might remember that mid-2017 is exactly the time when the previous Trump administration unsuccessfully tried to limit indirect costs to 10%). Moreover, no funds given to HHS can “develop or implement a modified approach to such provisions.”
  
  This is about as open-and-shut as it gets. If the NIH announcement is challenged in court, I am 99.9% confident that it will immediately be overturned."
  
  This issue is a rat's nest of complexity. Musk's simplistic statements don't even begin to scratch the surface and at worse mislead. There are a plethora of lengthy examinations of the issue to be found. Just one that I found approachable...
  
  https://goodscience.substack.com/p/indi … sts-at-nih
  reply report
  85
  GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  The point is the concept. The details of specific grants, or specific grantors are secondary. It's not complex. Bill Gates can limit indirect costs and institutions accept or don't. The government should have the same criteria: accept our limits or don't accept the grant.
  
  GA
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  So potentially let's say a research university can take on a certain number of private grants that have low indirect cost funding. They absorb the loss. How much loss can be absorbed before research is severely limited? Before labs deteriorate? Before layoffs? Before tuition hikes?
  
  Why can Bill Gates offer a grant with is 0% indirect funding?
  
  "While NIH argues this change aligns with private-sector practices, where foundations typically pay 0-15% overhead, this comparison ignores a crucial reality: universities could only offer those lower rates because federal funding covered the true costs of research infrastructure."
  
  I think there's a lot more to consider here. It is more complex and there are more variables than what Musk and the media have presented..
  
  https://deliprao.substack.com/p/underst … erhead-cap
  reply report
  85
  GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I did read and ponder your link. By the end, I was wondering how to respond without sounding like a 'rightwinger'. I can't. I want a 'divorce' on this one due to irreconcilable differences'. ;-)
  
  Here's why: By the time I reached the last third of the article—the point with the examples, it felt like the author was proving my point instead of yours: 'Charge a private grantor $100,000 to accept their grant and charge the government $690,000 because we need more money and the private donors won't let us charge more.
  
  The rationalizations of higher indirect costs for some grants (the teaching hospital example) may be true (or may be exaggerated or misapplied), but to me (and probably most conservatives) that doesn't justify charging the government more just because it has deeper pockets.
  
  That's nuts. Why should the government pay more? The logic of the article boils down to the same logic used to justify taxing the rich more whenever more money is needed: 'We need it, our cause is just, and they can afford it.'
  
  [EDIT ADDED]
  What do you think of this thought: Make all grants (private and government) the total sum with indirect costs subtracted from that total sum instead of adding to it?
  
  Imagine the publicity, imagine the headlines: Gates gives Harvard $10 million and $9 million goes to research. NIH gives $10 million and research gets $3 million.
  
  GA
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I don't think I'm defending the current reality of indirect cost being absorbed by by the government. It feels as if the government is subsidizing the private sector.
  
  Where will the gap in funding to adequately cover indirect costs come from in the future? Will the private sector make up for the difference? Or will research infrastructure deteriorate to the point that it impacts the actual research? Fewer studies being taken on? More grants rejected due to inability to properly carry out the research?
  
  Not enough attention is being given to the consequences of the slash and burn. Politicizing this issue, in my opinion, we'll have some pretty big negative impacts.
  reply report
  85
  GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I think this edit was added while you were replying:
  
  "[EDIT ADDED]
  What do you think of this thought: Make all grants (private and government) the total sum with indirect costs subtracted from that total sum instead of adding to it?
  
  Imagine the publicity, imagine the headlines: Gates gives Harvard $10 million and $9 million goes to research. NIH gives $10 million and research gets $3 million."
  
  Your rationale (and the article's) could support the higher indirect costs as a reality (or not), but it doesn't justify charging the government more just because the private sector won't pay more.
  
  I don't think I am politicizing this issue, but as I listen to the news guests making the points of your article (ie. the indirect costs)—and all of them are making the same point. I think your 'camp' is politicizing it. The current guest is talking about grants for educating deaf kids who will be hurt by this new rule. 'It's for the kids. etc. etc.'
  
  GA
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Won't all or most of us be hurt by the indirect funding cap? Aren't these actions going to result in shortfalls for research institutions that ultimately will impact the quantity and potentially quality of research going forward? The cap, doesn't seem to consider the consequences. Is this a situation where we just sit back and watch, wait to see what happens and then clean it up afterward? Seems like long term consequences may out weigh any immediate, short-term savings.
  reply report
  85
  GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  By the same logic, aren't we all already being hurt by the government not paying whatever is needed to complete the research? Is the government already costing lives by not giving cancer research all the money it needs to find a cure?
  
  GA
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Yes, 100%. The bull in a china shop approach by DOGE is shortsighted. Look here...."Doge saves millions on indirect funding costs". Not here..."Top research facilities scale back, lay off due to lack of funds"
  reply report
  72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  The government is broken, corrupt.
  
  That is at the core of the problem.
  
  The drug company pays a handsome salary to a brilliant lawyer, after a while that lawyer gets a top spot in the FDA.
  
  Grants, government funding, is given to some experts to test a new drug to verify that it is safe for human use.
  
  The FDA decides what to do with those results. ... the lawyer that will soon go back to his multi million dollar job for the company that put forth that new drug.
  
  There are no real checks and balances.
  
  It needs to be torn down to the studs...
  
  A complete gut job...
  
  That is what Trump, Musk, etc are there to do.
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Do we rip the Constitution to shreads too, Ken, who voted for that?
  reply report
  72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  No, the Democrats did their best to do that, to insert international entities like the WHO and WB to have higher authority over us.
  
  They also wanted to limit the 1st Amendment by curtailing free speech.
  
  This has nothing to do with the Constitution... this has to do with exposing the corruption, the hundreds of billions being stolen or mis-used in direct opposition to our laws and national interests.
  
  The more you defend the criminals and their actions, the less valid your complaints appear.
  
  "My Party right or wrong"... well your party is being proven to be very wrong, very criminal, very corrupt... their actions hurt Americans and hurt our economy. And honestly they don't give to craps about you or your "tribe" thats that sadest thing of all... that you still defend those that have duped you for decades.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "well your party is being proven to be very wrong, very criminal, very corrupt...
  
  Again, where? How? How long can "your party" keep making baseless accusations? When do the rest of us just start calling them lies?
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Conspiracy theories and conjecture Ken,
  
  Anyway you said this:
  
  It needs to be torn down to the studs...
  
  A complete gut job...
  
  That is what Trump, Musk, etc are there to do.
  ---------
  How do you do this without destroying the foundation, You can come clean Ken, you folks dislike Democracy and deep down want an air head like Trump as your leader?
  
  That is OK, I will take my chances with my party rather than take a chance with yours.
  
  Don't mean to rub it in, Ken, but I can't help it. I threw you a softball last fall asking who was going to win the election for President. Understanding America at its fundamentals, the answer for me was obvious. But, it is not only you, but Bill Mauer and Michael Moore who missed it as well.
  
  Yet you could miss that and still have some sort of insight as to how my tribe is being taken advantage of by the Democrats? My tribe votes 85 percent Democrat, and there is a reason for that and yet you know better than they? With your batting record, I am not impressed with your ability to discern this far more difficult matter with any reliability, how would you know?
  reply report
  72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  dude... you are so deep down that 'see everything through the racist prism'
  
  How you feel, your perspective, may be spot on accurate for your generation, you can even throw mine under the bus... but to think the younger generations are saddled with that nonsense, when it is NOT the world they grew up in... at all..
  
  Those kids grew up seeing Michael Jordan or Michael Jackson or Morgan Freeman as respected and idolized by others of ALL racial backgrounds.
  
  And on top of this, there is now a third of the country that has NOTHING to do with the black - white history of the country, they are neither black nor white.
  
  I get the feeling that isn't good enough for you...
  
  So much more going on... but you can't get past that one issue...
  reply report
2. 81
  Credence2posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  As a retired Contracting Officer, indirect cost rates have to be evaluated as part of any proposal. Bureau of Labor standards are used to see if an indirect cost rate is comparable with other institutions, and if it not, what is the justification? It is a valid area to check as you can get an inflated cost proposal with an unreasonable cost to the government without it.
  
  I had to trim fat in my job, I was never after the meat and bones of any research project.
  reply report
85
GA Andersonposted 2 months ago
@elonmusk
To be clear, what the @DOGE team and @USTreasury have jointly agreed makes sense is the following:

- Require that all outgoing government payments have a payment categorization code, which is necessary in order to pass financial audits. This is frequently left blank, making audits almost impossible.

- All payments must also include a rationale for the payment in the comment field, which is currently left blank. Importantly, we are not yet applying ANY judgment to this rationale, but simply requiring that SOME attempt be made to explain the payment more than NOTHING!

- The DO-NOT-PAY list of entities known to be fraudulent or people who are dead or are probable fronts for terrorist organizations or do not match Congressional appropriations must actually be implemented and not ignored. Also, it can currently take up to a year to get on this list, which is far too long. This list should be updated at least weekly, if not daily.

The above super obvious and necessary changes are being implemented by existing, long-time career government employees, not anyone from @DOGE. It is ridiculous that these changes didn’t exist already!
Source: https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1888314848477376744

Sounds believable (it seems logical to me). It's a lot different from the online claims of invading the Treasury.

GA
reply report
1. 86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Thank you for posting this, it is hard to keep up with DODE, they seem to be moving with good speed.
  reply report
86
Sharlee01posted 2 months ago
DOGE
Department of Government Efficiency
@DOGE
In the past 48 hours, HHS canceled 62 contract worth $182 million. These contracts were entirely for administrative expenses – none touched any healthcare programs. This included terminating a $168,000 contract for an Anthony Fauci exhibit at the NIH Museum.

NOTE--- for those that do not post on X DOGE also have a Facebook page where they post updates.
reply report
1. 72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Taxpayer funding for USAID doubled from the beginning of Trump’s first term in 2017 to the end of President Joe Biden’s, rising from $20.5 billion in 2017 to $42.4 billion in 2023.
  
  President Kennedy founded USAID in 1961 via an executive order.
  
  Its stated intention was to be a clearinghouse for disbursing State Department funds. These funds, in turn, were to be used for advancing American interests during the Cold War.
  
  The goal was to raise Third World countries’ economic standards so that they would not fall prey to Soviet depredations.
  
  Indeed, USAID could have been used in the 21st century to help advance US interests to stop Chinese depredations through its Belt & Road initiatives (China’s version of USAID.)
  
  However, that’s not how USAID has been managed. As more information comes out about USAID, we’re learning that it’s been used to advance leftist ideologies, everything from climate change to LGBTQ+ promotion to anti-religion initiatives to antisemitic and anti-Israel attacks to partisan attacks on President Trump.
  
  Large sums of money were disbursed to terrorists, already wealthy people or organizations, geopolitical enemies, and branches of foreign governments.
  
  In other words, the whole thing was a giant leftist grift intended to destabilize the West and all while using your money to do so.
  
  USAID paid $20 million to the hard-left Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors, a 501(c)(3) that manages at least $200 million in annual fund disbursements.
  
  Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors, in turn, funded Bill Kristol, a wealthy man whose mission since 2016 has been to destroy Trump.
  
  It also funded myriad organizations pushing leftist ideologies such as BLM, climate change, DEI, illegal immigration, and LGBTQ+.
  
  In other words, your taxpayer money has not been used to forward American interests so much as it has been used to fight the will of the American people.
  
  What could be worse than that?
  
  Well, how about the DOJ being used as a tool against the American people?
  
  The FBI has some 13,000 agents... during Biden's reign of horrors, over 5,000 of those agents were used to go after concerned American citizens, AKA the Jan 6th crowd... the biggest threat to America, it seems, according to Biden's Administration, were the American people... especially the ones who no longer trusted their government and felt betrayed by it.
  
  Rather than address their concerns... call them traitors and extremists and devote the Justice system and IRS to destroy them... that's freedom and democracy in action, right?
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "Large sums of money were disbursed to terrorists, already wealthy people or organizations, geopolitical enemies, and branches of foreign governments."
  
  Where is the evidence for this claim and the others made??
  reply report
  85
  GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  You make some good points, maybe, but your '5000 FBI agents' thought is an easy target.
  
  Your inference is that 5000 agents worked to get Trump. 40% of the FBI was tasked with getting Trump. That's a bit of hyperbole.
  
  Consider; how many of those were indirectly involved, such as indirect intermediaries that passed on memos or reports, or provided administrative services for agents who were actively investigating Trump, etc. etc.
  
  How many of that 5000 were actively investigating and how many were non-directly-involved peripheral agents/employees?
  
  My understanding is that the 5000 number involves more peripheral investigative contacts than active investigating agents.
  
  Granted, even if that number is only 20% right, that's still 1000 agents. I think that's bad enough to stand on its own without needing exaggeration.
  
  GA
  reply report
85
GA Andersonposted 2 months ago
Oh hell. As quick as I am to jump in and defend Musk, the devil on my shoulder won't let me ignore the indefensible.

Be careful, this could be a trick. ;-)

The message is two-fold. The obvious is that a disaster agency is funding immigrant services, and the inferred is that the money is coming from disaster relief funds.

The details of the who, why, and should they, aren't the point. The point is that Elon reposted this with this comment:

Elon Musk
@elonmusk
"Under Biden, FEMA betrayed the American people by diverting funds meant for natural disasters to pay for luxury hotels for illegal migrants"

Oops, on the surface* there was no diversion. The funds were from a second Congressionally approved fund that FEMA administers separately from their disaster relief funds.
*I have no idea if there are hidden 'machinations' involved

It looks like some of Pres. Trump's hyperbolism might be rubbing off on Musk. He either knows something we don't or he should have known the statement was false.

GA
reply report
1. 72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  No... its spot on.
  
  The American people need to know who the Democrats and Biden Admin prioritized.... migrants... over American citizens.
  
  That is the simple truth of it.
  
  The people who have suffered in TN and NC because funds were not available to help them... but there were hundreds of millions for migrants that didn't belong in this country that the Biden Administration paid hundreds of millions to bring in...
  
  Just like it was a priority to set aside hundreds of billions for a war in Ukraine that could have been avoided... we will never know because they sabotaged every effort to negotiate a peace...
  
  These are corrupt people spending OUR money on THEIR BS... BS the voters never wanted and never supported.
  
  Don't play around with the raw truth of how corrupt and evil things became under Biden's watch... lets not forget they also had no money to provide Kennedy or Trump with the proper protection, which is why they were sitting ducks for anyone who wanted to try and take them out.
  
  Americans can not be angry enough... they should be far more irate than they are... and NO ONE should trust 'liberal' media sources, they have proven to be completely complicit in all of this.
  reply report
  85
  GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  It's possible I misunderstood the "diversion" Musk was speaking of. Probably not, but possible.
  
  What I didn't get wrong or misunderstand was that no money from FEMA's disaster relief fund was diverted to migrants. The migrant money is claimed to come from its own Congressional program.
  
  GA
  reply report
  72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Not even going to try to pretend I know how easily things can be transferred from one resource dedication to another within government programs/budgets... but I know the more important you are, the more probable it becomes that it can happen...
  reply report
  85
  GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Yeah, I spoke to that point in one of my replies. Something about not knowing what "machinations" might be under the surface of the public descriptions and explanations. It's hard to know what you don't know when you don't know what you should know.
  
  GA
  reply report
  72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Exactly...
  
  But I do know what my experiences taught me... while in the Army and while running government funded programs in NY...
  
  I was probably privy to more than one meeting regarding large sums of resources that was well above my paygrade...
  
  EDIT-
  
  Did some research, I feel comfortable now saying they took money from one fund, to fund the migrants...
  
  So it does fall under the "they robbed Peter to pay Paul" charge.
  reply report
  85
  GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Which fund? Hopefully, it wasn't FEMA's Disaster Relief fund.
  
  GA
  reply report
  72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  They said specifically which one... I just don't recall, if I remember I will track it down this evening.
  
  You know, this stuff its just the tip of the iceberg... they will continue to dig and continue to show the American people that trillions now, every year, are being siphoned off to corrupt institutions and individuals, that are intent on doing the exact opposite of what our laws state... like with giving hundreds of millions to organizations helping illegal migrants make their way to our country.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "Did some research, I feel comfortable now saying they took money from one fund, to fund the migrants
  
  This is not true...
  reply report
2. 85
  GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  There might, maybe, possibly be another "Oops", one from me. Maybe.
  
  Looking at more related comments. It's possible, or at least plausible, that the diversion Musk was speaking of was from other programs to the SSP program that FEMA was administering, not a diversion from FEMA's disaster relief fund.
  
  Not sure yet. And that bit of doubt is worrying me. Hopefully, I was wrong and Musk wasn't intentionally lying. *shrug*
  
  GA
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  SSP is funded separately from FEMA's disaster relief funds. Congress appropriates funds. They are a separate line item in the federal budget.
  
  Elon Musk
  @elonmusk
  "Under Biden, FEMA betrayed the American people by diverting funds meant for natural disasters to pay for luxury hotels for illegal migrants"
  
  His statement is not correct. SSP funds can be accessed those waiting for their asylum claim to make its way through the court. And let me remind people that these are not "illegal migrants"
  reply report
86
Sharlee01posted 2 months ago
This is what DOGE was up to today--- DOGE X Feb 10

Department of Government Efficiency
@DOGE 17m
Today, the Department Of Education terminated 89 contracts worth $881mm.
One contractor was paid $1.5mm to “observe mailing and clerical operations” at a mail center.”
Quote

Department of Government Efficiency
@DOGE 48m
Today, the Department of Education terminated 29 DEI training grants totaling $101mm.
One sought to train teachers to “help students understand/interrogate the complex histories involved in oppression, and help students recognize areas of privilege and power on an individual and collective basis.“

Department of Government Efficiency
@DOGE
2h Today, the Department of Agriculture terminated 18 contracts for a total of ~$9mm, including contracts for “Central American gender assessment consultant services”, “Brazil forest and gender consultant services”, and the “women in forest carbon initiative mentorship program.”
reply report
1. 60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  He has made so many false statements, does he provide any evidence of these claims?
  
  Are there fact checks?
  reply report
2. 85
  Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Shar,
  
  I believe they are doing an excellent job.
  
  I'm still stunned that the left is so defensive when it comes to fraud, waste and abuse of federal taxpayer money.
  
  Watching how they behave I shouldn't be surprised, but I am.
  
  FYI - I have Ukrainian friends who read these things DOGE is finding and laugh saying, "And they claim Ukraine is corrupt."
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "I'm still stunned that the left is so defensive when it comes to fraud"
  
  What fraud? Will it be punished legally? Brought to the courts? As fraud is certainly against the law, right?
  
  That would require evidence though....LOL
  reply report
3. 85
  Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Shar,
  
  I think we can agree this is NOT an okay use of American taxpayer money.
  
  'Designated terrorists': Extremist groups raked in millions from USAID, multiyear study reveals
  USAID has doled out millions to groups tied to terrorism and extremism, recent report finds
  
  The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) provided millions of dollars in funding to extremist groups tied to designated terrorist organizations and their allies, according to a report published by Middle East Forum, a U.S. think tank.
  
  "The Middle East Forum’s multi-year study of USAID and State Department spending has uncovered $164 million of approved grants to radical organizations, with at least $122 million going to groups aligned with designated terrorists and their supporters," the conservative think tank wrote in its report published Feb. 4.
  
  "Billions more of federal dollars have been given to leading American aid charities which have consistently failed to vet their terror-tied local partners, and show little interest in improving their practices, to the apparent indifference of the federal government."
  
  The Middle East Forum’s report focuses specifically on funds from USAID and the State Department that wound up in the hands of radical groups and organizations tied to terrorism.
  
  $122 million went to groups aligned with designated terrorists and their supporters.
  
  We need to stop and think about this for a minute.
  
  https://www.foxnews.com/politics/design … dy-reveals
  reply report
  72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Cripes, this on top of the billions and billions the Biden Administration released to Iran or paid to them for hostages or paid to them to slow down their nuclear program.
  
  Its disgusting that anyone defends this criminal Administration and all in it, that did this to America and its citizens. They are traitors to the country and deserve to be treated as such. Criminals, vile despicable people responsible for the deaths and suffering of tens of millions of people.
  
  No wonder the Cheneys worked so hard on their behalf to keep them in power.
  reply report
85
GA Andersonposted 2 months ago
Another morning chuckle . . .

I couldn't find Elon Musk's X account this morning. What the hell, I'm thinking? Has he gone dark? Tried the Search bar multiple times, what the hell?

And then . . . I saw it. Harry Bolz! Musk changed his account name. What a poke in the eye. Classic Musk.

I'm sure the Elon haters, and even the moderate Elon non-likers, won't see the humor in this, but this non-finer-circles deplorable is still chuckling.

GA
reply report
1. 76
  abwilliamsposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  It is a good getting-after-it name (no pun intended) No-nonsense, pulls no punches, steel-edged Detective Harry Bolz (with a dash over the "o") on the job and getting er done!
  I like it!
  reply report
2. 86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Just my take --- I appreciate Musk’s humor and rebellious attitude.
  In short, I see Musk's name change as a funny, deliberate jab at his critics—one that fits his style of trolling and playing with public perception. It must be nice to be so free, and sure of one's self to let something like this fly. Loved it.
  reply report
3. 60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Not sure if it's a poke in the eye or just that he sort of has the way of thinking akin to a 12-year-old.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  A 12-year-old genius not to mention the richest man in the world.
  
  Elon Musk is a liberal’s worst nightmare—an independent thinker who refuses to be boxed in by ideology or group affiliations. His free-spirited, unconventional mindset drives them crazy, leaving them wringing their hands raw and setting their hair on fire.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Nah. But it's funny how others have been roundly criticized for such colloquial and "trolling" speech but when Elon does it it's fantastic and his trolling is praised lol. Noted for the future.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  He is not trolling. He is posting on his own X page. He is not trolling anyone. If someone posts controversial or provocative content on their own X (formerly Twitter) page without targeting others directly by directing a comment to another user, it’s not considered trolling. Trolling usually involves posting inflammatory comments directed at a given comment and engaging with others to provoke a reaction.
  
  Elon is simply using free speech on his own X page. No trolling, or baiting going on. It's up to the taker if they choose to converse with him on his comments. Just like any social media that offers conversation.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "He is not trolling "
  
  Yet, previously posted...
  
  "I see Musk's name change as a funny, deliberate jab at his critics—one that fits his style of trolling and playing with public perception. "
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  It does fit his style when he trolls. If you follow Musk, you know he often adds comments to others’ posts specifically to troll. However, when someone makes a comment on their own page, not directly responding to someone else’s comment, it’s not considered trolling. Anyone who follows Musk knows he actively trolls other people's comments. But in my context, when I say "one that fits his style of trolling and playing with public perception," I’m referring to how this particular move aligns with his usual behavior. Perhaps you missed the nuance of "one that fits."
  
  Musk is a master of trolling.
  reply report
  72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Musk is a Liberal... he is the worst nightmare of Progressives (extremists) and those that want to ruin America, those who are enemies of America...
  
  Unfortunately there are many such people that have wormed their way into the government that need to be identified and removed from impacting spending, policy and law.
  
  This process will take years, just like it took years for our government to become this corrupt.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I don’t see Musk as a liberal. Honestly, I can’t label him or fit him into any one box. He’s unique, and that’s exactly why so many people can’t stand him. It’s tough not to envy someone like him, but unfortunately, envy of someone so distinct can make you feel like you’ve been tossed out of your own box. Easier to hate him, than admit admiration for him.
  
  With all the turmoil around DOGE, and its leader--- take note they have not skipped a beat. Each day, as today, they have entered an agency, sometimes more than one in a given day--- and are doing what they were hired to do. This says something so to me. Yes, we are dealing with a court system a tangled ball of yarn. But, I think you might be surprised by how quickly that ball will become untangled. Yes, this is what has got the nut jobs out and hysterical --- their power is melting right before their beady eyes.
  reply report
  72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  There is nothing wrong with being a Liberal...
  
  The people who want to protect freedoms and the Constitution I consider liberal...
  
  Liberal gets a bad wrap... putting Progressives and people who hate America under the Liberal label is wrong, IMO.
  
  Court Orders Evidence Gathered Be Destroyed
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I63bsLhdd4o
  
  An interesting video.
  reply report
  72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Liberal, liberty, libertarian, and libertine all trace their etymology to liber, a root from Latin that means "free".
  
  One of the first recorded instances of liberal occurred in 1375 when it was used to describe the liberal arts in the context of an education desirable for a free-born man.
  
  On an unrelated side note that is the meaning of my last name, free-born, or/also free-man.
  
  'Liberal' shares a root with 'liberty' and can mean anything from "generous" to "loose" to "broad-minded."
  
  Democrats of today are not liberal... they may be Extreme Progressives (AOC) or Socialists (Sanders) or something that just isn't quite definable and certainly is not Liberal (Omar).
  
  Liberal IS Musk, Gabbard, Kennedy... they are trying to protect Freedoms, they are trying to protect Liberty, the Constitution, and the rights of Citizens to control their government.
  
  Democrats want control, they want to continue the corruption... the Democrats of today have more in common with what the Republicans used to represent (sellouts to Corporations and Financial Institutions) than the Republicans themselves do, or ever did.
  
  EDIT -
  
  So that I don't have someone contradicting me as to what my name means:
  
  Historically, to be a Burgess was to be a 'free man' or 'citizen' of the burgh, who could own land (known as a burgage), contribute to the running of the town and not be under the jurisdiction of any feudal lord.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Thank you for the lesson. The liberals from, let's say, the 60s really fit your description. However, those who label themselves liberals today are nothing like the liberals of the past. I could write a book on the modern liberal, but unfortunately, I’d probably get banned here on HP. Still, I think you’ve got a pretty good grasp of where I stand. I've been blunt—perhaps as blunt as I can be—about my views on today's so-called liberals.
  reply report
  72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Agreed... the meaning of words tends to migrate...
  
  Like the meaning of 'Woke' has changed to mean something different than it did decades ago.
  
  I agree that today's 'liberal' and the entire Left need to be hit hard and often and things need to be pushed further than would be prudent or tolerable in decades past to the Right...
  
  Its the only way we can get things back to the center.
  
  I am more convinced of this now than ever... there is seemingly no concern from those on the Left regarding some of the negligence and expenditures being exposed... and they haven't gotten to the serious stuff yet.
  
  I can only imagine what a dive into the Pentagon might prove.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "prove" being the operative word
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Many people are likely starting to realize that they should have prioritized the concerns of Americans over their extreme ideologies. And yes, those on the left continue to ignore everything being uncovered by DOGE, which, by the way, is desperately trying to divert attention away from the real issue of overspending. At this point, I don't find their mindset just sad, but downright frightening.
  
  The truth is coming out, and I can't even imagine what will be uncovered at the Pentagon.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  At this point I think that most people are finding it more frightening that the Doge boys are making a lot of accusations and providing no proof.
  reply report
60
Willowarborposted 2 months ago

Elon and the co president giving an off the rails press conference today . Yes of course, yet again claiming that they are finding fraud in the government... Not a shred of proof to be given.

When Elon speaks, it's just a word salad...
reply report
1. 86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I recommend you tune in and watch some of your own make complete fools of themselves outside various Washington agencies, screaming, snarling, stamping their feet, tossing their hands in the air, and fogged-up glasses, all while spewing nothing but nonsense. It's like watching a scene from a bad reality show.
  
  Musk was eloquent and appropriate, sharing some of what he's uncovering. Yet, you continue to ignore what's being revealed and do exactly what you always do—divert attention away from the real issue.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Baseless accusations are what is being revealed...Trump again making claims of fraud today. Providing no evidence.
  
  I suppose I could also claim that the money allotted to the doge outfit is being used in a fraudulent manner? I simply need to point to the name of the agency, the expenditure, and what it was used for...that's essentially what folks are calling the nonsense doge is giving as "proof".
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  You are not willing to believe what DOGE has uncovered. That is your problem. I believe what they have reported. Period
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  My problem is that they keep claiming that they are uncovering fraud and corruption. Again repeating it today.
  This is lying. Since when is cost cutting, trimming a budget or the like equal to finding fraud? Absolutely no one has been able to explain this.
  
  The state of Missouri last year, in its budget appropriated 70 million in funds to a program called a "career ladder" program....The program as well as the agency that administers it is fraudulent. corrupt and criminal.
  
  Agree?
  
  Doge has been funded...they are using those funds... Many Americans do not like the agency, should it be labeled as fraudulent and corrupt also?
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  In his oval office press conference, Musk claimed, without offering any evidence, that some at USAID had been taking “kickbacks” and that “quite a few people” in the government had “managed to accrue tens of millions of dollars in net worth while they are in that position”.
  
  True? People believe this?
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I am very sure he is being truthful. I guess we see if any of this ends up with the DOJ, and charges. I certainly feel confident he is being truthful. It's hard to digest that this kind of corruption is being laid before us. But, Musk was hired to do a job, and he is doing it.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I think how it works is, when you make an accusation you have the proof to back it up.... It is not a wait and see type of thing. .
  
  What is the corruption that has been laid before us?
  
  Looks like doge is the only fraud
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  How can you use those words after what we saw from the Biden administration? Oh my God let me count the ways--- Not about to get into a back and forth regarding this subject. Big waste of time.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Biden is not the president. Musk and his sidekick Trump are making a lot of accusations. When an accusation is made, the next sentence should be the proof.... Musk and team are fraudulent.
  
  It is fraud to say that agencies are corrupt without providing evidence.
  
  I noticed the question put forth...'what corruption has been laid before us". Was ignored...
  
  Anyone??
  
  If Musk is finding so much fraud, why won't Trump show the evidence..
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  You're being repetitive, no interest in repeating my views.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  The Doge agency is corrupt and fraudulent.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Okay ---- and that would be your opinion. And that and 7 bucks will get you a coffee at SBs.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Yes, just as it is simply only the unfounded opinions of musk and team that federal agencies have acted in ways that are corrupt, fraudulent and criminal...
  report
  72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  No... your government and much of the media that lies on its behalf, because they are also getting kick-backs and they also work for Big-Pharma and mega-billionaires that own most of the media are corrupt as well.
  
  Its a very big, very harsh pill to swallow, so it is understandable that many people resist... its a very comprehensive immersion into Stockholm Syndrome, and the more immersed into it you are, the more improbable that you can break yourself free from it, to see even the most obvious truths.
  reply report
  72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Musk is brilliant.... that was so savvy.... that was a performance for the ages.
  
  That was candy, delicious... ...you know, I wasn't sure... in the back of my mind there was... I just couldn't decide, was Trump really that smart, was he that good... this couldn't possibly be pulled off by someone that isn't a lot smarter than people give him credit for being...
  
  And then I see the two of them tango like that... the most brilliant mind of our generation, and no one else is close, this guy has revolutionized everything he touches... Paypal, Space X, Tesla ... re-usable rockets... he is launching over 300 rockets a year!!!
  
  Everyone else combined... NASA... Boeing... Blue Origin... might do 3.
  
  This guy is next level brilliant... and Trump is hangin with him...
  
  Dammm... that's gangsta!
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I totally agree—Musk is a genius, and that move was next-level savvy! Watching him and Trump team up is like witnessing two minds at the top of their game. You’re right, Trump doesn’t get enough credit for his strategic brilliance, and Musk’s innovation is in a league of its own. From PayPal to SpaceX, the man is reshaping industries, and when you see them both in action together, it’s clear—they’re playing chess while everyone else is stuck on checkers.
  
  And speaking of the Washington crowd, they’ve backed themselves into such a corner, it’s almost laughable. I mean, they’re done, and they know it. Now they’re resorting to pulling stunts and calling for physical action at their protests, most of which barely see 10 people show up. It’s straight out of their playbook from the Summer of Love—resort to the dirtiest tricks and grifts when they’re cornered. They’re trying to act like they're still in control, but the reality is, they’re just making themselves look pathetic. This game’s over for them, and they know it.
  
  At this point, their protests are so underwhelming, they might as well hand out participation trophies just for showing up. But hey, if they're going to go down, they might as well go down in style—like a slow-motion car crash no one asked to see.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Pure gangsta! It's amazing to see some life finally being breathed back into the White House. The last four years felt more like a funeral home than a place of leadership. But now? I’m fired up—nothing and no one can bring me down at this point!
  
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  the most powerful person in America, and he is running around acting downright gleeful about thousands upon thousands of Americans losing their jobs....is vile, bordering on sadism.
  
  whatever mandate the Musk/Trump administration thinks it may have, we’re still talking about the lives and employment of American people. And those American people don’t deserve to be humiliated, to have the value of the work they’ve done denigrated, or to have the guy firing them running around making "harry balls" jokes like a rich brat.
  
  Musk is a man-child messing with real people's lives.
  It’s one thing to hate big government and believe that Democrats have made it too bloated. It’s another thing altogether to direct that hate toward the people who work in government.
  
  Musk recently posted on social media, without a lick of evidence, of course: “USAID is a criminal organization. Time for it to die.
  
  Thousands upon thousands who work there and many other agencies will likely soon be collecting unemployment. Losing a job is a catastrophe for most families. It’s not a damn joke....
  
  Russell Vought, the new head of the OMB, is infamous for once saying of federal workers: “We want their funding to be shut down. … We want to put them in trauma.”
  
  That is the sadism I referred to. it certainly doesn’t align with any faith teaching I’ve ever come across, and it’s not how any American worker deserves to be treated.
  
  maybe decency isn’t allowed in the highest republican circles.
  
  What do I know? I’m just a big, dumb liberal who refuses to celebrate the suffering and degradation of other Americans at the hands of an unelected rich snot.
  
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I completely disagree with your take. The way you’re framing Musk and Trump’s actions as gleeful or sadistic doesn’t sit well with me. They’re making tough, necessary decisions to overhaul a broken system—decisions that might hurt in the short term but will ultimately benefit the country in the long run. I get that losing a job is tough, but we’ve had a bloated, inefficient system for decades. If we don’t make changes, we’re going to keep seeing the same issues over and over. It’s not about mocking those who lose their jobs; it’s about fixing a system that has been failing them.
  
  Yes, the restructuring is hard for some, but you have to recognize that the real cruelty is letting this inefficient bureaucracy drag on. The rich getting richer is a result of government overreach and regulation, not a side effect of trying to bring about change. Musk is not "messing with people's lives." He’s trying to break down barriers in an outdated system and create something that works for more people.
  
  Keep in mind Trump ran on cutting government overspending. His agenda is bold, like no other president in the past. He won. It’s clear that enough people supported him to vote for him, and we are seeing his agenda unfold today. You need not respect his approach, but at least realize that many do. Your comment leans heavily on the emotional side, but there are many of us who are more focused on fixing what we see as a broken system.
  
  The whole "sadistic" angle feels like an emotional reaction rather than a rational analysis of the situation. What we're seeing here is disruption—something that's necessary to move forward. The government can’t keep holding on to a bloated system while the country suffers. It’s time to make the hard choices, even if it means some discomfort along the way.
  
  In the end, it’s not about celebrating people’s suffering—it’s about cutting through the red tape and inefficiency that keeps them stuck. If we really want to improve things, it’s time for a change in how we do business, and that’s exactly what Trump and Musk are trying to bring about.
  
  Nothing says it better...
  reply report
  76
  abwilliamsposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  My hubby and I were glued to it! Such openness, transparency, matter-of-factness, common sense on steroids...
  No hand-wringing, hesitations or excuses. They are taking a wrecking ball to all of that which doesn't belong, never belonged, and it is a sight to behold! I am loving every moment!
  reply report
85
Miebakagh57posted 2 months ago
I'm an outsider. I'm reading the 'Musk' thread and all the posts being made. This is all about America and their America. How America spent her money is no concern of another country or an outsider. Fraud that's being mentioned that I don't know. When it comes to politics, many things can happen, and that's what's happening. The left-Americans should give both President Trump and tesla's Musk some breath.
reply report
85
Readmikenowposted 2 months ago
The things the left loves more than anything.

1. Illegal aliens
2. Criminals
3. Fraud
4. Corruption

It is the hallmark of the democrat party.

Law abiding citizens are tossed aside as unimportant.
Legal immigrants are treated as a joke.
Corruption is acceptable and encouraged.
Fraud is part of their standard operating procedure.

Is it any wonder they are going absolutely ballistic when there is a focused effort to protect American citizens. Deport illegal aliens. Uncovering their fraud and corruption is something intolerable to the left.

We are speaking of a group of people who rationalized and supported a president who had significant cognitive decline and tried to gaslight the entire nation about it.

So, their desperate and pathetic behavior when it comes to exposing the truth comes as no surprise.
reply report
1. 86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I agree—how did this phenomenon even happen? For lack of a better word, it’s baffling. How can we explain a part of our society seemingly being brainwashed?
  
  Could this be due to something like the Soviets using Psychological Manipulation "ideological subversion" or "Marxist-Leninist indoctrination?"
  reply report
  85
  Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I hate to say this; but I do believe the democrats and the left HATE the United States and everything it stands for as well as the American citizen. It appears their goal is to destroy the country.
  
  It is such a shame.
  reply report
2. 72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  American citizens that think this country belongs to them are the problem.
  
  American citizens that think they have a right to control, in any way, what their government does or how it spends money, are the problem.
  
  If fact, one could say, Americans... period... with their beliefs of free speech and the right to own weapons are THE biggest problem that faces our government, and by extension the world, today.
  
  So the best thing that can happen, for those that want to usher in a New World Order... or a Great Reset... or Agenda 2030... is to bankrupt the nation and its people.
  
  The Biden Admin went a long way to making that happen in 4 short years.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Ken, I am working on praying that in 2026 we grab a great majority in both the House and Senate. I mean if Trump keeps rolling, and pointing out all the BS--- I am betting that more Americans will come out and destroy the Democrats once and for all. Hey, I am hoping, and I see the light peeking through.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "American citizens that think they have a right to control, in any way, what their government does or how it spends money, are the problem.
  
  In terms of the constitution, who does the power of the purse belong to?
  reply report
  85
  Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  In terms of the constitution; who determines who gets to have the power of the purse?
  
  I think that would be the American citizen.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Well maybe indirectly but the power of the purse belongs to the congress, the legislative branch, not the executive branch. The Musk/Trump administration is overreaching in an egregious manner, and unconstitutional manner.
  reply report
  85
  Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Wow...no...NOT indirectly. Directly. The United States is a representative republic. The members of the US Congress are elected to represent the views of those who elected them. NOT their personal views. The Republican party have been voted into the majority of the legislative branch. The majority of people have spoken that Republicans best represent their views and desires.
  
  It's time the left embraces the fact that the government is controlled by the people not the other way around.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Musk and Trump aren't letting the Congress do their job though?
  reply report
  85
  Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  How? The Republicans control Congress.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Lol, Congress has done nothing. Why? Because Trump has taken their power away from them by acting almost solely by executive order.
  
  To freeze trillions of dollars in federal spending is not a power the president has..Congress has the power of the purse. The president cannot shut down agencies, that power belongs to Congress. Most of his executive orders will be invalidated by the courts, because they are functions of Congress.
  
  this is how government is supposed to work. No one is supposed to have absolute authority over the United States, not even the president. This is what should be happening to stave off some of the radical Republican agenda that seems to be getting shoved down our throats without any sense of law.
  
  That's why trump wants to "look at judges". Scary.
  reply report
  85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  America problems if can be export to third world countries, can be resisted these days.
  reply report
  83
  peterstreepposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  So according to you free speech is a problem?
  Criticizing a government is a problem?
  And it is a good thing to bankrupt a nation?
  
  You are advocating a dictatorship here. What a strange reasoning is this?
  reply report
  85
  Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "The Biden Admin went a long way to making that happen in 4 short years."
  reply report
  72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  That isn't my position, it is the position of Democrats in DC and the Judges that are trying to protect their gross negligence and corruption from being exposed.
  reply report
  85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  *****
  reply report
  83
  peterstreepposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Ok, sorry I misread that. I don't know if that's their position but it is good to know it's not yours.
  reply report
3. 60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Things maga loves more... Conspiracy theories and unfounded allegations of corruption and fraud.
  reply report
72
Ken Burgessposted 2 months ago
After Telling Democrats To ‘Feel Good’ About Economy Going Into Election, Politico Now Says Democrats Were ‘Tricked’
https://thefederalist.com/2025/02/12/af … e-tricked/

Voters Were Right About the Economy. The Data Was Wrong (Falsified).
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/ … y-00203464
reply report
86
Sharlee01posted 2 months ago
As I watch the firestorm surrounding Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), I can’t help but be struck by how desperate and irrational the left’s response has been. Instead of addressing the billions in taxpayer funds being wasted—funds that DOGE has undeniably uncovered—Democrats in Washington are doing everything they can to change the subject. They refuse to confront the facts, opting instead for a full-scale attack on Musk himself.

It’s not about corruption, waste, or mismanagement—it’s about silencing the man exposing it. Rather than questioning why FEMA sent $59 million to house illegal migrants in luxury hotels instead of using those funds for American disaster relief, they shout that Musk has “no business in government.” (The program I am referring to is called the "Emergency Food and Shelter Program" (EFSP). Under President Biden's administration, FEMA allocated funding to this program to help with the care and housing of migrants, particularly in cities overwhelmed by large numbers of migrants crossing the southern border. This program was part of the broader effort to address the needs of migrants, including emergency housing, food, and other essential services)

Instead of explaining why taxpayer money is disappearing into bureaucratic black holes, they focus on smearing Musk as some kind of rogue billionaire with too much influence. The media plays right along, shifting the conversation from the damning discoveries DOGE has made to the supposed problem of Musk’s involvement.

This isn’t just deflection—it’s willful denial. Time and time again, we’ve seen that when corruption is exposed, those who benefit from it will fight tooth and nail to keep the truth buried.

Psychology explains it well. People are more likely to engage in or tolerate corruption when they see personal gain, believe consequences are minimal, and operate in an environment where unethical behavior is ignored. This is exactly what we’re seeing from Washington’s entrenched political class. Many of these politicians have built careers on the system as it is, so acknowledging the rampant waste that DOGE is uncovering would not only threaten their grip on power—it would also shatter their carefully crafted illusion that government spending is always for the greater good.

That’s why some Democrats have resorted to even more extreme tactics. They aren’t just dismissing DOGE’s findings—they’re calling for resistance, even violence, to stop it by any means necessary. When a party refuses to engage in debate and instead pushes for aggressive, even dangerous opposition to a transparency effort, it speaks volumes. It tells us that the corruption being exposed is not just incidental—it’s systemic. And they are terrified of what happens when the American people finally see the full extent of it.

So, I ask: Why is the left so afraid of what DOGE is uncovering? Why are they more focused on attacking Musk than on fixing the problems being exposed? The answer is simple—because what he’s revealing is too damning, too damaging, and too dangerous for their control over the system. And they know it. That’s why they’ll do everything in their power to make this about Elon Musk instead of the billions of dollars being wasted right under our noses. But the truth is out, and no amount of screaming, smearing, or threats will make it go away.

source FEMA several funds New York Manhatten received from FEMA SSP program in 2024
https://www.fema.gov/grants/preparednes … ards/ssp-c

NYC Office of Management and Budget Manhattan, NY $22,169,838
NYC Office of Management and Budget Manhattan, NY $20,437,241.07
NYC Office of Management and Budget Manhattan, NY $38,864,884
reply report
1. 60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "Rather than questioning why FEMA sent $59 million to house illegal migrants in luxury hotels
  
  This is not true. This has been fact-checked over and over.
  
  https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil. … es-program
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "This is not true. This has been fact-checked over and over."
  
  So, how much of the rest of her diatribe is also, not true?
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  The claim ..
  
  'Rather than questioning why FEMA sent $59 million to house illegal migrants in luxury hotels"
  
  This is patently false...
  
  The Shelter and Services Program, is funded by Congress and administered by FEMA...The program ensures that communities can stand up short-term shelters for migrants released by border patrol after making asylum claims. I believe most stay for 72 hours. Most shelters are time limited and are FAR from "luxury"
  
  Again, Republicans want to look for cost saving measures? Do it without lying to people
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I think full context is needed to understand my point ---
  
  It’s not about corruption, waste, or mismanagement—it’s about silencing the man exposing it. Rather than questioning why FEMA sent $59 million to house illegal migrants in luxury hotels instead of using those funds for American disaster relief, they shout that Musk has “no business in government.
  
  ( just used one issue DOGEdiscovered to make my point, could have used many)
  
  In my view, you did not comprehend my comment at all... I shared my view. I did add facts regarding the SSP program. Other than that I offered my pure view.
  
  How does one debunk a person's view? Your comment appeared to state that FEMA did not send millions to NYC to house migrants--- I have offered you links to FEMA that offer the exact amounts that the FEMA program SSP gave to NY in 2024.
  
  Actually, in 2024, New York got much more than 59 million from the SSP program According to FEMA RECORDS. For Fiscal Year (FY) 2024, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security provided cash to many states. To be accurate, $640.9 million of available funds were spent to enable non-federal entities to off-set allowable costs incurred for services associated with noncitizen migrant arrivals in their communities
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  You are claiming that FEMA funded illegal immigrants and they did not... I have provided you the information on the shelter program. It is not for illegal immigrants, it is temporary shelter for those released into the country after making asylum claims... Those folks are not illegal.. It is perfectly legal to remain in the country while in asylum claim is being processed.
  
  The claim ...
  "why FEMA sent $59 million to house illegal migrants in luxury hotels"
  
  Is erroneous. One only needs to read the information and description on the shelter program... It is not for illegal immigrants.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  My comment was very clear FEMA via the SSP program did fund Ny. I think I should reread my comment. I certainly did not say it was not legal or that it was not a legitimate program that was under FEMA. FEMA allocated the funds that were provided by Congress.Ya must have missed this entire paragraph.
  
  (The program I am referring to is called the "Emergency Food and Shelter Program" (EFSP). Under President Biden's administration, FEMA allocated funding to this program to help with the care and housing of migrants, particularly in cities overwhelmed by large numbers of migrants crossing the southern border. This program was part of the broader effort to address the needs of migrants, including emergency housing, food, and other essential services) Did to miss this entire paragraph?
  
  Know the time to say done with your trying to spin what I shared, Bye
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  You are claiming that the FEMA shelter program is being used for illegal immigrants. It is not. They do not fund the housing of illegal immigrants as you have stated.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "For Fiscal Year (FY) 2024, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security will provide $640.9 million of available funds to enable non-federal entities to off-set allowable costs incurred for services associated with noncitizen migrant arrivals in their communities." FEMA
  https://www.fema.gov/grants/preparednes … ards/ssp-c
  
  The records are available giving stats to prove what states got funds and how much. It is shocking to see what taxpayers have paid to house and feed migrants. It appears you won't believe even FEMA records... I would say that is a problem. Do you feel that just repeating your comments over and over in some respect makes them magically?
  
  ONce again --- es, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced that she has "clawed back" a $59 million payment that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) had allocated to New York City for housing migrants in hotels. This action followed the dismissal of four FEMA employees who were involved in authorizing the payment without proper approval.Fox news
  
  The New York City mayor's office reported receiving a total of $81 million in reimbursements for expenses related to food, hotel accommodations, security, and other costs incurred from November 2023 to October 2024. This sum included a payment of approximately $59 million.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Please focus on your your use of the word illegal in your posts .
  
  The claims that money is used for ILLEGAL migrants.
  
  Again this claim is false. You have posted it as well as others here.
  
  If people claim that the shelter program is being used for anything other than what it is intended for... Evidence of that needs to be given.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  OMG -- I explained to you that my post was written as an opinion --- I consider migrants who came across the border and were admitted via catch and release to be illegal, as many, Americans do. You don't seem to comprehend that others have the right to form views different from your own. I have not assumed anything. I checked FEMA which I trust has posted accurate information. I consider the expenditures that fall on taxpayers as unacceptable. I would hope more here would have a look, and realize many states are receiving funds from the SSP program. I posted what SSP is funding migrants, and yes I consider a majority illegal.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "I consider migrants who came across the border and were admitted via catch and release to be illegal, as many, Americans do. "
  
  But that is not the reality of the situation though?? Your opinion is that folks who claimed asylum and are released into the country are illegal is not supported by our actual law... Our immigration law allows for people to wait in the country as their asylum claim is processed. They are not categorized as a illegal. That's just the law . Opinion doesn't change the law.
  
  You certainly have the right to your opinion but it is an opinion that is in direct contradiction to the law.
  
  States are receiving SSP funds? Well sure they are because they were appropriated by Congress. No big mystery or hidden agenda there. That's all well documented on their website. As well as the fact that they do not fund people who are here illegally. People who have a problem with the program should maybe go through the proper channels of making changes rather than making wild accusations.
  
  You don't seem to comprehend that others have the right to form views different from your own.
  
  I don't have a problem with anyone's opinion but when folks make erroneous statements, ignore the law, that's where I draw the line
  report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I shared my view-- not at all interested in yours. You have the right to believe anything you please. I have the right not to respect yours. You are trolling.
  report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Baiting over and over...
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Know the time to say done with your trying to spin what I shared,
  
  This is what you shared...
  
  "It’s not about corruption, waste, or mismanagement—it’s about silencing the man exposing it. Rather than questioning why FEMA sent $59 million to house illegal migrants in luxury hotels"
  
  they are not housing illegal immigrants. I'm not trying to spin what you said, only pointing out that it is incorrect.
  reply report
  85
  Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  The ONLY information you provided was a description of the program. It does NOT specifically address the $59 million given to house illegal immigrants at the Roosevelt Hotel in NYC. It does NOT address the fact that employees were told not to do such a thing and did it in defiance of the order.
  
  The Roosevelt Hotel? Have you ever been there? I've stayed there more than once. It's a pretty nice place. So, you have people without jobs, who can't contribute to society, staying at a top hotel being paid for by taxpayer money.
  
  It just isn't right. It is a waste of taxpayer money.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Wow....
  
  Can you tell me where in the description of the shelter program under FEMA that it states it funds accommodations for ILLEGAL immigrants.
  
  The keyword being.... IILEGAL
  
  Lol, the Roosevelt hotel is a dump. But under the shelter program, those who have been released into the country, LEGALLY, by border patrol after making asylum claims can get a couple of days temporary shelter services.
  
  Anyone who says that the program houses ILLEGAL immigrants is misleading and passing on disinformation.
  
  I don't know how to make it anymore clear to y'all.... Stating that FEMA funds ILLEGAL immigrants is wrong, not true, false, erroneous, incorrect.
  
  People may be upset that Congress appropriated funds for a shelter program under FEMA for ASYLUM SEEKERS but the false narrative that these are illegal migrants needs to stop
  reply report
  72
  Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Semantics... people who have applied for asylum...
  
  Because our own government gave out billions to various non-profits, UN funded programs, etc. to instruct and help millions of migrants get to America, by flight or by foot, and say the magic words "I want asylum" when they get here.
  
  I don't blame the people who came for a better life, or a free ride on our government (taxpayer's) expense... I blame our government for doling out these billions of dollars to make a problem (migration) much more serious than it already was... which is exactly what the Biden Administration knowingly and wantonly did.
  
  Which is why Biden joined the Global Compact on Migration on day one, which was Obama's wet-dream program, that Trump firmly rejected.
  
  Personally, I think those billions should be used on improving healthcare going to Americans, particularly our Vets, and housing homeless that have served their country and suffer for it.
  
  The country is on the verge of bankruptcy, thanks to Biden and the Dems, and if you think the 25% inflation Biden gave us is bad... if Trump, Musk, etc. don't get in there and cut out the hundreds of billions in fraud and kickpacks and stupidity our government is paying for, we will all be living lives far worse than most imagine... it could get a lot worse than 25%.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  It is not semantics. It is purposely presenting a program incorrectly.
  
  Folks can hate the program all they want but cannot continue to falsely portray it's purpose.
  report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  No, Kristi Noem, or any other individual state official, cannot outright cancel FEMA's Shelter and Services Program (SSP) since it is a federally funded program managed by the U.S. government. The program is authorized by federal law and overseen by FEMA in coordination with other federal agencies.
  
  However, as Secretary of Homeland Security, she can influence certain aspects of the program, such as reevaluating how funds are distributed or revising specific policies related to its execution. In this case, Noem has already taken action to halt funds that were allocated for specific purposes (like housing migrants in hotels), signaling a shift in how resources are used or prioritizing other needs.
  report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Thank you
  report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I take offense at your comment. Everyone here has the right to share their opinions, and just because you may feel your word is the final say doesn’t make it so. Millions of Americans believe that most migrants here are here illegally, and I, for one, share that view.
  
  Some people feel that migrants are here illegally because they believe that a large number of individuals entering the U.S. have overstayed visas or crossed the border without proper documentation. These concerns are often fueled by reports of rising numbers of people apprehended at the border or living in the country without legal status. Additionally, the lack of comprehensive immigration reform or more visible enforcement of existing laws can contribute to the perception that many migrants are here unlawfully. For some, the idea that people should go through a formal process to enter the country legally reinforces the belief that anyone who bypasses that system is doing so illegally. These views can be shaped by various factors, including political, social, and economic considerations, as well as the way immigration issues are covered in the media.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  You made a statement..."$59 million to luxury New York City hotel to house illegal migrants"
  
  Has been debunked and proven false over and over but you're certainly welcome to your opinion. Yes, folks have a right to ignore the facts. Have a right to believe "alternative facts" Have a right to believe lies.
  
  My opinion may be that paying taxes is an illegally sanctioned requirement of government but that won't change the fact that the law is going to come after me when I don't pay up...
  
  "For some, the idea that people should go through a formal process to enter the country legally"
  
  Yes and asylum is that process. The shelter program and it's funds that were appropriated by Congress are for temp. services for asylum seekers. Asylum is a legal process, codified into our immigration law. An opinion to like it or not, doesn't change it. It is a disingenuous effort by musk and trump to portray these people as illegal... They are not. They have lied. One could say making such statements is fraud on their part.
  
  If musk is in opposition to the shelter program, then make changes in the appropriate manner. Lying to the American people about the legality of these migrants is not needed... The vilification isn't needed
  report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  My comment provides the full context of my point—that most on the left are ignoring what DOGE uncovered and are instead attacking the person who highlighted the outrageous expenditure. FEMA was responsible for allocating the funds. In any case, Kristi reclaimed all the money. Nice going, she is already living up to my expectations.
  reply report
2. 60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I don't think anyone is worried about what they are going to find out or uncover. I don't think anyone is concerned about trimming agencies where applicable. Loads of people are concerned that they are doing it under the claims of fraud and criminality, which they have yet to produce one single shred of evidence.
  
  Also what people are concerned about? That there is no plan for some very important programs that will be impacted by the doge boys running around with hammers and smashing everything. There are actually no published plans for any of these agencies moving forward.
  
  And what else lots of people are concerned about? the constitutionality of musk and his team dismantling agencies and programs established by Congress. Also, funding appropriations are the job of the congress, not musk or trump.
  
  You want to reduce legitimate waste in the government? Do it appropriately, do it transparently.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I see that the real issue upsetting the left is transparency. Trump, Musk, and DOGE X are sharing information daily. If you choose not to believe what’s being uncovered, that’s entirely up to you—that’s your prerogative. Again Musk and his team are the workers, they report their findings to Trump. If any dismantling will be done it will be by Trump, as laws permit..
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  There was no information presented at their hearing today and there is absolutely nothing on the website.. nothing of any value.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I don’t think it’s fair to say there was “no information” at the DOGE hearing today. There were several witnesses who gave detailed testimony under oath about government waste, fraud, and improper payments. Stewart Whitson, a former FBI agent, talked about fraudulent claims and the need for better safeguards. Haywood Talcove, the CEO of LexisNexis Risk Solutions, explained issues with identity verification, and Dawn Royal from the United Council on Welfare Fraud shared ways to improve payment accuracy. I found them very competent, and all offered very pertinent information.
  
  On the other hand, I felt the Democrats added nothing of value to the hearing. They were more or less hyperbolic, and in some cases, not truthful. In my view, they appeared biased and very foolish next to the men who gave testimony. It seems like you’re grasping at defending their stand while overlooking all the many agencies that have been careless in spending taxpayers’ money. I support DOGE and feel they are doing a good job weeding out overspending and discovering over-bloated staffing.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Absolutely none, zero evidence of fraud. Plus with the claims of fraud that they have been making left and right, when is the legal action coming? Certainly fraud should not go unpunished. All of us agree that fraud should meet the consequences of the law. Fraudsters punished and held accountable. Absolutely no one supports letting those who have committed fraud off the hook. I certainly do not want to see fraudsters flout the law. No one does. Where is Bondi? Why would anyone defend letting fraudsters go?
  
  But that would require actual evidence... Hence why none of the claims will ever make it to any courtroom
  reply report
3. 85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Taxe payers money spend for illegal immigrants is not right. Does these foreigners entered the USA, while fleeing from war in their country? In America, they're communities that are broken. Why not spent the billions$$$ on these? The Dem under biden are a drain pipe.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "Taxe payers money spend for illegal immigrants is not right."
  
  Illegal immigrants are not being housed in luxury hotels... This claim is false and has been debunked and fact checked over and over and over
  reply report
  85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Good to noted. But where's the proof of the fact-check? Much thanks.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "What is the Shelter and Services Program?
  At the border, the Shelter and Services Program ensures that communities can stand up short-term shelters for migrants released by Border Patrol, helping limit street releases. Shelters and local governments work directly with Border Patrol and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in coordinating releases in certain communities. Many shelters at the border are intended to be transitory, and some limit the time a migrant can stay to 72 hours. At these shelters, some of which are run by nonprofits and some which are run by local governments, volunteers and staff help migrants arrange transportation, provide beds to sleep, conduct medical evaluations, and prepare meals"
  
  Shelter program funds are also separate from disaster funds.
  
  If musk is claiming that the program is used for ILLEGAL immigrants.... He needs to put up the proof
  reply report
85
Miebakagh57posted 2 months ago
The buttomline is that funds should be used appropriately, which is doing the right thing at the right time.
reply report
60
Willowarborposted 2 months ago
"For Fiscal Year (FY) 2024, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security will provide $640.9 million of available funds to enable non-federal entities to off-set allowable costs incurred for services associated with noncitizen migrant arrivals in their communities." FEMA

These are asylum seekers, not "illegal migrants" as you have claimed... "Non-citizens" does not mean ILLEGAL as you have claimed. You and others here have continually made the claim that the government is housing people who are in the country illegally... That is false.
reply report
1. 78
  wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Screaming "ASYLUM!" as you enter the country illegally does not make the action legal. In my opinion, anyway; training these people to utilize loopholes in the law does not, IMO, make them legal.
  
  It is a matter of intent vs technicality as I see it, and the aliens entering illegally are not suddenly within the intent of the law by mouthing "Asylum!".
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "Screaming "ASYLUM!" as you enter the country illegally does not make the action legal. "
  
  LOL, we have asylum laws... Folks should acquaint themselves. And if people don't like them, they should encourage their representatives in Congress to enact immigration reform. Migrants can claim asylum at the border and they also have the right to wait within the country while the claim is processed. Those are just the facts
  reply report
  78
  wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Unfortunately, our Congress has refused to act for decades now, with the result that we now have; a country full of illegal aliens (and yes, they really ARE "illegal aliens") acting under the guise of being legal.
  
  Perhaps Trump can convince them to plug the loopholes, enforce the intent of the law, and return our country to us rather than those that simply wish an easier life for themselves without the risk or effort of changing their own country.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Yes, come in legally as many do, or turn around and go home..
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Are you saying that an asylum claim at the border is illegal??
  
  "Yes, come in legally as many do or turn around."
  
  In your opinion, what is the legal way to come in? What are the avenues of legal immigration?
  reply report
72
Ken Burgessposted 2 months ago
Can America Handle The TRUTH? Trump USAID Cuts With Eric Weinstein
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwXHXHRTK-M

Good opening.
reply report
1. 86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Ken, it's become pretty clear that the Democrats are playing a "look here, not there" game, but it’s not working this time. There just aren’t that many of their supporters left who haven’t moved on to other things. I mean, it's obvious they’re telling the stragglers to focus on "Hey, go after Musk, cancel him, call him a pseudo-president, say he’s as dangerous as Hitler." Meanwhile, they're ignoring the serious and blatantly horrific issues that DOGE has uncovered and will continue to expose. It must be horrible to have TDS and see so many have been cured and moved on.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  they're ignoring the serious and blatantly horrific issues that DOGE has uncovered
  
  Lol, like what? Can anyone name just one "horrific" issue that they've uncovered?
  
  And let's be even more specific, identify a blatantly horrific issue and let us know if it also existed during Trump's entire first administration... That he chose not to address at that time... I guess because it wasn't important or whatever.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  We have offered what is being reported, and offered links repeatedly-- Seem you ignore posts that offer proof, as well as repeating your disbelief---I can safely say your message is clear.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  There's absolutely nothing, zero in anything you've provided. Saying that programs or expenditures are fraudulent and criminal just because they don't like them? Just because they exist? Your links, simply provide expenditures. As I've stated before I can go on any website and give you expenditures and that really doesn't allow me to conclude that those expenditures are fraudulent, do they?
  
  If my state budget has allowed for so many millions of dollars in free school lunch and I disagree with that, should I call it fraudulent? Should I accuse my federal legislators is being criminal?
  
  This is exactly the premise that Elon is putting forth and hoping people accept...
  
  But what would be the most horrific thing that he has uncovered? Please folks join in.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  https://www.doge.gov/
  reply report
  85
  Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Shar,
  
  I listened to President Donald Trump today.
  
  He believes that the amount of money given to these projects and their bogus uses gives the impression of a kick back going somewhere. He is determined to look into the book even further to determine if kickbacks in these programs occurred.
  
  I believe he is right. It would make sense. You have people who make a few hundred thousands a year for years but are worth over $20 million dollars.
  
  How does this happen?
  
  I think it is worth looking into for the betterment of the country.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I completely agree with you! It's definitely worth investigating how certain individuals, despite earning what would seem to be a modest income, end up amassing significant wealth. If there's any possibility of kickbacks or misuse of funds, it’s crucial to look into it for the sake of transparency and accountability. President Trump is absolutely right to dig deeper into these issues. Ensuring that taxpayer money is being used effectively and responsibly is key to the betterment of the country. He has a great AG that will dig deep.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Does Musk list on his website who has amassed significant wealth?
  
  And yes, makes Pam Bondis job easy right? Since he has gathered all of this evidence, I would expect charges to be filed quickly... Absolutely no reason to pull out the Comer clown car
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Elon Musk is a highly intelligent businessman. He’s not the type to name names to the media—come on, he’s not a Democrat. LOL.
  
  I understand it must be uncomfortable watching the new administration, with so much happening to fix and build. I’m absolutely thrilled—it’s hard to keep up! I just watched the President’s press conference, and he spent an hour answering questions on foreign policy, the economy, and more. He came across as strong and committed, demonstrating transparency and professionalism. I was incredibly impressed to see him openly share as much as he could about his plans.
  
  It’s refreshing to see how well he handles press conferences. Biden, on the other hand, was practically invisible. And when he did speak, I found myself holding my breath as he read from little cards, often appearing so lost that I couldn’t help but feel sorry for him—and fearful for the country.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Not asking president musk to name names. The information on his website is vacant of even the names of programs that he is alleging fraud... He is basically pointing to Dollar figures and calling them criminal at this point. That's what his whole website boils down to oh and some tweets from others... Can't forget the merch also. Folks should get their big balls t-shirts while they last
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  The DOGE site makes no mention of criminals or criminal activity. They provide a daily report on savings. Do you feel these reports are untrue? It's odd how you can't see the facts that are being posted. You do know what DOGE's task is? To find overspending and over-bloated staff. As well as assessing computer systems.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  So it doesn't matter what the head of Doge does on his own x account or when he speaks publicly about fraud, corruption and criminality?
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Oh he and his buddy Trump have already claimed that there is fraud and criminality in all of these agencies... With absolutely no evidence. Hey why not add kickbacks to the list.
  
  You are supportive of a government that makes unfounded accusations?
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Let me repeat for I think the 4 times I am fully aware of the comments you refer to Again my view --. I have not in any respect made mention of the word criminality. I am not responsible for what someone else says. I do not know why Elon Musked used the word criminality. As I shared if he has proof he needs to get together with Pam Bondi. I have no will to have a back-and-forth on why I support the current government. I fully support this new Government. I don't think I could be clearer. I voted for Trump, I support his agenda.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Lol so on the website do you notice that the screenshots he provides don't give any information whatsoever, not even the name of the program? Not what the money was used for?
  
  He said 50 million was given to Hamas for condoms.... Completely debunked, but he chose to spread that lie.... Why should I believe anything he says or posts now? I don't think he has any credibility.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  so you just don't believe these posts? I would then assume you are saying these posts are misinformation.
  
  Department of Government Efficiency
  @DOGE
  Feb 12 contract update:
  
  58 cancellations with savings of >$150M in categories including Media, DEI, and Consulting. This includes $405K at DHS for “resilience, energy, and sustainability management program support services” and ~4M at DOT for “DEIA program and project management support services”.
  
  Department of Government Efficiency
  @DOGE
  ·
  2h
  @epaleezeldin
  Quote
  Lee Zeldin
  
  @epaleezeldin
  ·4h
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  There's absolutely nothing informative on the website. It's all opinion and accusation. The screenshots don't even include the agency or program name whatsoever.... His whole website is basically pointing at a dollar amount and saying "see, look fraud".
  
  Musk has made many, many misleading statements... Some would say lies at this point. He has claimed 50 million dollars were spent on condoms for hamas, he claims that FEMA funds illegal immigrants.
  
  His entire x feed is just a stream of consciousness BS.
  
  How does this prove fraud? What am I missing?
  
  reply report
60
Willowarborposted 2 months ago
Maybe she can break it down for some of y'all a little better..

https://x.com/politicsusa46/status/1889824377249968176
reply report
81
Credence2posted 2 months ago
Excerpt from the Atlantic Monthly

“The Trump administration does not appear to have the authority to unilaterally shut down CFPB. Outright demolishing the agency is “obviously unconstitutional,” Mike Konczal, a former chief economist for the National Economic Council, told me. The CFPB was created by Congress through the Dodd-Frank Act; to fully dismantle it would likewise require congressional action. On Sunday, the union that represents CFPB employees brought two lawsuits against Vought: one seeking to block the stop-work order, the other alleging privacy violations. (Vought did not respond to requests for comment.)”

So, what gives here. This Vought fellow is a radical right wing nut job, who Trump has put in charge of the Office of Management and Budget. Check him out, he is as extreme as it gets.

I just wait for Trump and his DOGE to get far enough out of line, where they will whacked on the head.
reply report
1. 78
  wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I don't know anything at all about this issue, but I will mention an opinion I formed long ago. Anytime someone claims that something is "obvious", or especially "obviously unconstitutional" there is very little truth to be found in what they claim. While not applying to 100% of claims, the concept is very useful in the large majority of such claims.
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I don’t know, read it for yourself. The executive cannot abolish a program created and funded by Congress, there is such a thing as separation of powers and Trump as the Executive is crossing the line, in my opinion.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "The executive cannot abolish a program created and funded by Congress"
  
  Absolutely. Under the Constitution, Congress, not the president, has the "power of the purse,"... the legislature decides what funds should be spent and where, and the executive branch is bound by congressional appropriations.
  
  Similarly, musk and trump cannot just drop bombs on agencies and reduce them to rubble. Neither one of them have the constitutional authority to dissolve government agencies that were created by Congress.
  
  That Doge and musk (with his conflicts of interest) can have this much power over an array of government departments is legally dubious. I believe that is why they have turned to attacking the judiciary.
  reply report
85
Miebakagh57posted 2 months ago
America? God's own country?
reply report
76
abwilliamsposted 2 months ago
Willow, unless you were one of those "tossing gold bars from the Titanic", you should be outraged, not condoning any of this.
The excessive spending, the kickbacks, the fraud, the bogus NGOs etc. etc. etc. has immensely hurt us as a Nation and career politicians (both Republican and Democrat) don't give a damn! They've benefited at every turn and they've lined their pockets at OUR expense! You should be ecstatic that the Calvary has arrived, not throwing rocks at them
reply report
1. 60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I have absolutely no problem with trimming excessive spending. I do not want claims of fraud and criminality being thrown around though without supporting evidence that back up those claims.
  
  I think that I would be quite upset, even outraged if an auditor came to my business and claimed, without supporting evidence, that I was committing fraud...
  reply report
  76
  abwilliamsposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  We are drowning in suppportive evidence! Not sure what more is required.
  reply report
  76
  abwilliamsposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Must watch:
  
  https://youtu.be/XPPc8OVNngg?si=plpuRvPDiOvm1RnI
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Businesses hire pros to audit, and they are given a report, and then up to that company to initiate any changes ---- DOGE- Report to Trump- actions if determined to be necessary.
  
  Got news, it's not up to employees to dictate to a business owner. So, does being "quite upset" really matter?
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  You missed the part about claiming fraud in criminality with no proof.
  
  The point is... You don't make claims of criminality unless you can back it up
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I have not in any respect made mention of the word criminality. I am not responsible for what someone else says. I do not know why Elon Musked used the word criminality. As I shared if he has proof he needs to get together with Pam Bondi.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Well, he's been making these accusations all along. Criminality should be acted upon immediately. If the fraud and criminality that they found is not acted upon very quickly, I will consider Bondi a failure also
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  We have no idea what has been reported to Trump, and what may be happening with the DOJ. It would be up to the DOJ to make any decisions on if someone committed a crime that could be successfully prosecuted. I do know that it would be unethical to offer names of anyone without pure evidence that could be considered a crime. It would open undue lawsuits I trust leaks will not occur at the new DOJ. You can consider Bondi anything you please. Thus far I see her doing her job.
  reply report
72
Ken Burgessposted 2 months ago
We are uncovering what could be the biggest money laundering scandal in American history and the other side of the aisle could care less.
https://oversight.house.gov/release/hea … -on-waste/

White House confirms 'Politico' received $8 million USAID funds: 'DOGE will cancel those payments'
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/wor … 960341.cms
reply report
1. 86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  One would only need to look on the DOGE site to see what they are finding. So glad you posted those links. here is the link to the DOGE website, it is up and working. They are daily posting their findings with evidence of what is being discovered. https://www.doge.gov/ Yesterday they posted some information on what they are finding at the DOE. So, for those that are looking for what they are finding, and what is being reported to the president this link would be one they may want to look at.
  reply report
2. 85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Ken, thanks for the links. Both are wonderful study.
  reply report
60
Willowarborposted 2 months ago
I find this type of statement to be so irresponsible.

"We find it sort of rather odd that there are quite a few people in the bureaucracy who have ostensibly a salary of a few hundred thousand dollars but somehow manage to accrue tens of millions of dollars in net worth while they are in that position,” Musk said.

I think the reality is they’re getting wealthy at taxpayer expense,” he added.

That's quite a conclusion.

Of course he offered no evidence of corruption or improper enrichment that might explain federal employees allegedly getting rich off their government roles, and DOGE did not respond to Fortune’s request for examples...gosh, if he can't put up, he should shut up.
reply report
1. 85
  Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Let's just say some people will have some explaining to do about their finances.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I am anxiously awaiting that.
  reply report
86
Sharlee01posted 2 months ago
More Information on FEMA payments to NY hotels

"Statement from a DHS Spokesperson on Termination of 4 FEMA Employees Who Made Payments to Luxury Hotels for Migrants
Release Date: February 11, 2025
WASHINGTON--Effective immediately, FEMA is terminating the employment of four individuals for circumventing leadership to unilaterally make egregious payments for luxury NYC hotels for migrants. Firings include FEMA’s Chief Financial Officer, two program analysts and a grant specialist.

Under President Trump and Secretary Noem’s leadership, DHS will not sit idly and allow deep-state activists to undermine the will and safety of the American people."
FEMA https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/02/11/sta … hatgpt.com
reply report
1. 60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Is this some sort of scandal? It is a program sanctioned by congress, funds appropriated by Congress...
  reply report
  85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Is it a question of looking here and not there?
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I would say yes. Much of what is being done is an effort to keep people distracted .
  reply report
  85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  The Dem people, I though?
  reply report
60
Willowarborposted 2 months ago
Musk really doesn't understand this? As a tech guy? Or is he purposely trying to mislead people?

Posted Friday.... "Reuters was literally paid by the federal government for Large-Scale Social Deception"

"That's literally what it says on the official government documents!"

So this is the kind of misinformation, disinformation or flat out lie whatever you'd like to call it that he throws out there and folks think wow isn't that great?

I'm sure most on this forum saw this when he posted it. Anyone fact check it?
reply report
1. 85
  GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I think he left a word or two out of the description. "Defense against . . . "?
  
  But what does the corrected description mean? Who's doing the defending and who's being defended from? Government against misinformation, a la the Twitter files, or, the public from the government, a la Snowden?
  
  DOGE is doing what was expected of it. Inserting hyperbole where it isn't needed doesn't help.
  
  GA
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  So he posts a screenshot (as he does daily) of a U.S. government webpage showing a contract between the Defense Department and Thomson Reuters Special Services for “Active Social Engineering Defense” and “Large Scale Social Deception.”
  
  The $9.1 million contract was awarded to Thomson Reuters Special Services...a company that provides “data-driven solutions” to the federal government and other clients, to work on defenses against “social engineering” cyberattacks, which use “social deception” tactics to trick humans.
  
  In a Wednesday social media post that didn’t explain what the contract was actually for, Musk insinuated that the Reuters news agency, which has the same parent company as Thomson Reuters Special Services, was paid by the government to engage in deception.
  
  The contract actually began under Trump.
  
  The nature of the contract? "Seeking to develop technology to “automatically identify, disrupt, and investigate social engineering attacks” – attacks known as “social engineering” because they try to deceive or “engineer” humans into performing certain actions, like clicking on links to malicious software, divulging sensitive information or giving up money."
  
  Musk clearly made an inaccurate representation and continued to do so even after he was fact checked by multiple outlets. Of course Trump amplified the claim also.
  
  Musk has repeatedly described federal spending in misleading or false ways. This is more than "hyperbole" in my opinion.
  reply report
  85
  GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Like your use of "inaccurate statement," I was trying to be charitable.
  
  There have been a lot of examples of stuff that is as crazy as it sounds and misleading statements aren't needed. They hurt more than they help. They may have been thought to be needed during the 'campaign' but that's not the case now.
  
  GA
  reply report
2. 86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Elon Musk has openly criticized Thomson Reuters over its $9 million contract with the U.S. Department of Defense, specifically its Thomson Reuters Special Services (TRSS) division which is a division of Reuters outlet, which he claims was involved in "large-scale social deception." According to Musk, the payment was made for deceptive practices aimed at manipulating public perception or behavior, though his statement hasn't been backed by evidence indicating that the Reuters news division was involved in this contract. I have not seen any further statements from Trump or Musk on the accusations. This needs to be clarified, and soon. I am not going to speculate any further than to say, that if this is not true, this could become very messy regarding lawsuits.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  The nature of the contract?
  
  The $9.1 million contract was awarded to Thomson Reuters Special Services...a company that provides “data-driven solutions” to the federal government and other clients, to work on defenses against “social engineering” cyberattacks, which use “social deception” tactics to trick humans.
  
  "Seeking to develop technology to “automatically identify, disrupt, and investigate social engineering attacks” – attacks known as “social engineering” because they try to deceive or “engineer” humans into performing certain actions, like clicking on links to malicious software, divulging sensitive information or giving up money."
  
  Elon either purposely misled or he just didn't know what he was talking about. This has been fact checked thoroughly . Seems as though he wanted people to believe it was for something nefarious. I guess not enough people are that ill informed.
  
  He doesn't have a leg to stand on with this one... Just like the condom claim . The man is not trustworthy
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Hey, I shared what I think is relevant thus far. I have read the info on the contract. I have [pointed out the facts as we know them, and ---This needs to be clarified, and soon. I am not going to speculate any further than to say, that if this is not true, this could become very messy regarding lawsuits. I never jump in too soon. Hey, I am very sure we will hear more on this either from T. Reuter or Musk and Trump. This seems like Reuter has been baited. Let's see what tomorrow brings to this story.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Why would there be a lawsuit? it is clearly laid out in government contracts and documents....lol which date back to Trump's first administration . This has been was a public record, visible online for many years.
  
  Elon conveniently didn't screenshot and post this though. This kind of deception needs to stop. Either he really isn't that bright or he assumes that most of us out here are stupid.
  
  https://www.highergov.com/contract/FA86 … /#overview
  
  The Truth is out there, if people actually want to find it.
  reply report
  78
  wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  ??? Your picture, and your link, give no indication of what we were actually buying. That we paid someone for R&D in anything but geology and astronomy isn't much of a description.
  
  Was this a black ops or something? Something we needed to keep secret from enemies (or friends)? I don't think so...leaving me to question just how smart it was to give a pile of money to someone without knowing what we were buying.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I have previously posted....
  
  The nature of the contract? "Seeking to develop technology to “automatically identify, disrupt, and investigate social engineering attacks” – attacks known as “social engineering” because they try to deceive or “engineer” humans into performing certain actions, like clicking on links to malicious software, divulging sensitive information or giving up money."
  
  Musk clearly made an inaccurate representation and continued to do so even after he was fact checked by multiple outlets. Of course Trump amplified the claim also.
  
  Musk posted this ...it is inaccurate, misinformation, disinformation, misleading...lying?
  
  https://www.barrons.com/articles/thomso … k-fe691ff5
  
  Have your pick of fact check sources. Musk has been thoroughly debunked.
  
  He is proving himself to have real issues with credibility.
  reply report
69
IslandBitesposted 2 months ago
How Elon Musk is boosting far-right politics across the globe

The world’s richest man is trying to sway politics on six continents.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/elon-musk/ … rcna189505
reply report
1. 78
  wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Good! I'm sure his changes will be of more value to the world and our country than Democrat's would, and they are surely trying to sway politics on six continents!
  reply report
  69
  IslandBitesposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Is that you admitting you're far-right? I suppose it's always a good thing when someone accepts their truth.
  
  So... Good for you! I guess?
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  But they are doing such a poor job.
  reply report
2. 86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Does this surprise you? Musk leans right, he makes no secret about his positions, and oh yes he leans right.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Well today he leans one way, in the past he leaned a different way. So who knows which way the wind will take him. He seems a fickle sort. Either way, the man doesn't have a lot of credibility.
  reply report
  78
  wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "Either way, the man doesn't have a lot of credibility."
  
  For you, he doesn't. Not surprising; anyone even remotely connected to Trump has no credibility with you.
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Honestly. Trump does not have a great deal of credibility either....
  reply report
  76
  abwilliamsposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Au contraire, he is currently the most credible among leaders. He has put the U.S. back on the map of relevancy and credibility!
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Are you bothered by the fact that he often posts misleading and false information?
  reply report
  76
  abwilliamsposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I am bothered by TDS and the harm which has been done to this Country, as a result of it! The "misleading and false information" you speak of, has been corrupting this Nation for decades! I am ecstatic that Trump and his team have the courage to lead, destroy falsehoods, and clean up D.C. once and for all!
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Amen
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  LMFAO and I'm singled out for deflection and diversion....
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Labeling people negatively without factual basis is intellectually lazy and often reveals more about the person making the accusation than the target.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  What is it called when musk and trump continually make claims with no basis in fact? Actually claims that have been proven false. What is that called? Credible is not a word that comes to mind. And my posts here have included support related to musk and trump's false, misleading statements both online and in press conferences.
  
  Do you find it to be "intellectually lazy" when folks post that this administration is finding fraud and fraudsters and they do so without ever providing the evidence, the fact check?
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Hey, I was talking about you --- why divert? In my view--- "Labeling people negatively without factual basis is intellectually lazy and often reveals more about the person accusing the target." Shar
  
  Address my comment, don't bother taking time to divert. You label people unnecessarily. I see that as a form of defamation. I have well addressed your concerns over many of Trump's statements. And I did not excuse them, and I did not divert the conversation to a
  well, he said this"---- I am not having a conversation with Trump. I was having a conversation with you.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  You made a statement and I made a statement back. That's not diversion or deflection. There was actually no question in your statement. I addressed the comment.
  
  I responded to your statement..that "labeling people without factual basis is intellectually lazy".
  
  Who have I labeled without a supporting information?
  
  I think actually, you didn't answer my question.
  
  Do you find it to be "intellectually lazy" when folks post that this administration is finding fraud and fraudsters and they do so without ever providing the evidence, the fact check?
  reply report
  85
  Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Define fraud.
  
  I would say having millions of Americans receiving Social Security that are between 100 - 150 is fraud. There may be a few that reach the age of 100, but there are not millions of them.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  This administration simply has different spending priorities than the last administration. But to label all of it as fraud or corruption is extremely misleading.
  
  Fraud is not the same as waste or abuse. Waste, fraud and abuse are not interchangeable terms.
  
  By definition...
  
  The Government Accountability Office says waste is “using or expending resources carelessly, extravagantly, or to no purpose.” Abuse is “behavior that is deficient or improper.” Fraud “involves obtaining something of value through willful misrepresentation” and is labeled after a legal process."
  
  To qualify as fraud, an activity has to be illegal with evidence of intent.
  
  Elon and Trump need to stop making these statements.
  reply report
  84
  tsmogposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "Fraud is not the same as waste or abuse. Waste, fraud and abuse are not interchangeable terms."
  
  Fact-checking Trump and Musk’s claims that they are cutting government ‘fraud and abuse’ by PBS News (Feb 16, 2025)
  https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/f … -and-abuse
  
  "Fraud is not the same as waste or abuse
  
  Waste, fraud and abuse are not interchangeable terms.
  
  The Government Accountability Office says waste is “using or expending resources carelessly, extravagantly, or to no purpose.” Abuse is “behavior that is deficient or improper.” Fraud “involves obtaining something of value through willful misrepresentation” and is labeled after a legal process.
  
  “Fraud is a very high legal standard,” said David M. Walker, who serves on the federal government’s Defense Business Board, which advises the Defense Department on business management.
  
  To qualify as fraud, an activity has to be illegal with evidence of intent, which is “the most difficult thing to prove,” he said."
  reply report
  85
  Miebakagh57posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Roger that.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I think the Government Accountability Office's definition of fraud is being completely discarded. It's alarming that some don't seem to care.
  reply report
  85
  Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "Fraud “involves obtaining something of value through willful misrepresentation” and is labeled after a legal process."
  
  Yeah, people collecting Social Security that are 150 years old would qualify. I believe people overseas getting Social Security payments without a social security number would qualify as fraud.
  
  Yes, they are finding lots of fraud.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  But they have produced nothing that shows they have found that? Even the administration mouthpiece, Leavit, was careful to not repeat Elon musk's accusations....by adding the qualifier "appears".
  So he needs to prove it already. It's past time for him to appear and testify before Congress in terms of all of the claims he has been making. Do you follow Elon on x? He makes outrageous claims, one after the other.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  The facts are being presented daily on DOGE.gov. I can’t defend or critique his views because I’m not sure what he’s seeing that I’m missing. What I do know is that he needs to be extremely careful about what he shares with the media—he can’t afford to set himself up for lawsuits. In general, I notice that people here share their views and, when presenting facts, often include sources. You've posted statements from Trump and Musk, and I haven’t seen anyone challenging the claims you’ve made about what they said. It would seem you keep repeating these concerns, and perhaps no one is interested in picking up on them. I’ve shared my view that I’m focusing on the deeds, but I just don’t have enough information to comment on Musk’s and Trump’s accusations of fraud.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Agreed, people seem to have more of an interest in repeating baseless claims of fraud.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I can again only share what he has shared--- He has done several interviews where he explained why his views changed and attributed why he left the Democratic party.
  
  Elon Musk has stated that he left the Democratic Party because he believes it has become a party of "division and hate." In May 2022, he tweeted:
  
  "In the past I voted Democrat because they were (mostly) the kindness party. But they have become the party of division & hate, so I can no longer support them and will vote Republican."
  
  He has also criticized what he sees as increasing progressive and "woke" policies, arguing that the party has moved too far left and is no longer aligned with his values. Musk has expressed concerns about issues such as government overreach, restrictions on free speech, and economic policies that he believes discourage innovation and entrepreneurship.
  
  In my view, I don't see giving up on something that no longer shares your values or ideologies is fickled. I call it intelligent, unafraid to say--- " I won't just promote something I no longer find suits my mindset." Staying in a group when you no longer believe in what they represent would be very much unintelligent.
  
  How easily you label a man's credibility, that has proven himself a humanitarian, time and again. I don't respect the way you frequently label people unjustly. Perhaps this type of attitude may be one of the reasons Musk jumped ship.
  reply report
  69
  IslandBitesposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Oh, I know he is openly, proudly far-right. That's why I didn't say it was a surprise to me.
  reply report
85
Miebakagh57posted 2 months ago
Musk is no fool. Those who think so are nuts.
reply report
81
Credence2posted 2 months ago
Elon Musk has come around to his boss' way of thinking, trashing CBS' "60 Minutes" and saying that the team behind the program deserves to be jailed.

60 minute piece on USAID dismantling.
---------
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LDOJ0y99mr4

Musk was right only in the fact that those disgruntled employees did not mention the fact that they received severance packages.

But the rest of the interview was spot on.

1. Trump does not have the authority to dismantle a program created by congress.

2. Trump is a con man, he does not have the authority to redirect funds appropriated by Congress for a specific purpose, funds allocated to compensate federal employees. It was a dirty trick creating unnecessary pandemonium

3. Neither Musk nor the President chose to provide any imput to the story. While I didnt expect the president to appear, Musk certainly should have. I say to hell with them both.

4. I used to, in my former employment, had to go to a regional solocitor every time my agency was prepared to award a grant or cooperative agreement. This to make sure that the grant was legally within the intent of the public Law as legislated by Congress. Trump and company are just engaged in more trashy superlatives that never tells the whole story.

You damned Trumpers want change? Well, I did not agree for time honored Constitutional provisions to be shred to confetti. Who does this Tyrannosaurus thinks that he is? You are going to have your Constitutional crisis and endless attacks from the Left, if we continue on this course. And as the fellow in the 60 minutes piece says, I don't know what that will lead to.....

I am waiting for principled Republicans and Democrats to stand up in Congress to the impending threat to the design of separations of powers.

That's my opinion....
reply report
1. 85
  GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  60 minutes is taking some heat for that 'employees' segment.
  
  It seems at least one of them, the girl, was not a USAID employee and Musk et al. did not fire her. She was a speechwriter with a company that was contracted(?) for her services.
  
  That may seem a small thing because her loss was indirectly tied to the cuts, but that's not the perception 60 minutes purposely scripted.
  
  As a note, I think the other USAID segments in the program were equally scripted to convey a message rather than news coverage.
  
  GA
  reply report
73
Kathleen Cochranposted 2 months ago
They were warned and voted for him anyway.
reply report
60
Willowarborposted 2 months ago
Seems to me that if Musk has proof that millions of social security checks have gone out illegally to dead people, or a host of other claims, he should be presenting that evidence in front of a grand jury under oath instead of shitposting it on social media. When can we do this under oath?

At least a committee, right? Fire up the clown car...please, a little comic relief is needed these days.

Sorry folks..Time to sh*t or get off the pot with all these accusations
reply report
1. 86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Do you feel he should present the names of people who possibly committed SS fraud?
  
  If Elon Musk (or anyone else) were to publicly release names of individuals suspected of Social Security fraud, it could raise serious legal and ethical concerns. The Social Security Administration (SSA) is bound by privacy laws such as the Privacy Act of 1974, which protects individuals' personal information. Publicly releasing names without due process could violate federal law, lead to lawsuits, and even result in criminal penalties. Additionally, if any of the individuals named turn out to be wrongly accused, they could sue for defamation or false accusations, particularly if their reputation is harmed. Fraud investigations should be handled through proper legal channels, as the government, not a private individual like Musk, has the authority to investigate, prosecute, and disclose findings when appropriate.
  
  Releasing names without context could also create public outrage and potentially endanger individuals, especially if they were misclassified due to errors in the system rather than actual fraud. Rather than publicly naming individuals, a better approach would be for Musk to share his findings with government agencies, such as the SSA’s Office of Inspector General, which is responsible for investigating fraud. If systemic issues exist, congressional hearings or whistleblower reports would be the proper legal route. Would you want to see more investigation into these claims, or do you think this is just another example of government inefficiency?
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  "Releasing names without context could also create public outrage and potentially endanger individuals, "
  
  Lol he released an Excel spreadsheet claiming social security fraud with no context whatsoever... He had no problem with that. At this point, his claims associated with social security have been thoroughly debunked. If his claims had any credibility, we would see Bondi acting. Does a system as large as social security have some flaws? Certainly it does. But is there fraud? That is far from being proven.
  
  Names don't need to be released either.
  reply report
73
Kathleen Cochranposted 2 months ago
"anyone even remotely connected to Trump has no credibility with you."

With a track record like Trump's, no, no one from his orbit has credibility.
reply report
60
Willowarborposted 2 months ago
Another day, another doge screw up..

a contract that DOGE identified as an $8 billion contract was actually an $8 million contract....

"The DOGE website initially included a screenshot from the federal contracting database showing that the contract's value was $8 million, even as the DOGE site listed $8 billion in savings," the Times reporters note. "On Tuesday night, (February 18), around the time this article was published, DOGE removed the screenshot that showed the mismatch, but continued to claim $8 billion in savings. It added a link to the original, outdated version of the contract worth $8 billion."

Do they do this on purpose? Do they think people are that stupid? Or are they just that incompetent?

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/18/upsh … trump.html
reply report
1. 86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Makebe you should help them out.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  They are vigorously and regularly called out on each and every post on X. The fact that Doge misleads so often with information that is so easily fact checked with public sources baffles me.
  reply report
2. 81
  Credence2posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Can we say arithmetically challenged?
  reply report
3. 86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Reply from DOGE On this NYT post
  
  Post
  
  See new posts
  Conversation
  Department of Government Efficiency
  @DOGE
  This is inaccurate.
  In September 2022, the agency contracting officer mistakenly wrote $8B instead of $8M when logging in the FPDS database. DOGE discovered this error in January 2025, and the agency updated FPDS accordingly. DOGE has always used the correct $8M in its calculations.
  
  Ethan Singer
  @ethanpsinger
  ·
  18h
  DOGE claimed $8 billion in savings from a cancelled contract on their new "wall of receipts." It was actually $8 million.
  
  Around the time we published the story, DOGE removed a screenshot that showed the mismatch, but continued to claim 8 bil. in savings.
  
  Ethan Singer
  
  The New York Times
  Ethan Singer
  A reporter for The Upshot section as a member of the 2024-25 New York Times Fellowship class, a program for journalists early in their careers. Wonder if they canned him?
  
  Anybody miss his misinformation --- https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/18/upsh … trump.html
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I have no clue what this even means? doge is trying to say they didn't post what they posted?? They actually deleted their initial post that claimed an 8 billion dollar contract with a screenshot of God knows what that clearly said 8 million also! It just conveniently disappeared.
  
  This is clearly Doge trying to save face. They were caught posting a lie.
  
  Honestly, doge just doesn't have any credibility at this point. They have been caught too many times posting inaccurate and misleading information.
  reply report
  86
  Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this
  I am not here to explain something that DGGE took the time to explain very well --- Hey, check your sources more carefully. In the end, a leftist writer accused DOGE of something that was not correct. Perhaps DOGES explanation went over your head. They kept it short and sweet. The misinformation came from the NYT writer, and you.. because you repeated it. DOGE did nothing but post facts.
  reply report
  60
  Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this
  Millions on X saw what Doge did though?
  
  They were immediately called out for the obvious mistake. They pulled the post down and then made up some nonsense... It is exceedingly simple what they did.
  
  Did you see the original post?
  
  The Doge website initially included a screenshot from the federal contracting database showing that the contract’s value was $8 million, even as the Doge site listed $8 billion in savings. On Tuesday night, after an absolute deluge of users posting the obvious discrepancy, doge removed the screenshot that showed the mismatch, but continued to claim $8 billion in savings.
  
  Someone was dumb enough to post it with the dollar amount clearly showing! Like I said, I think the person posting didn't count the zeros.
  
  They claimed they were saving $8 billion and as evidence of that they put up a screenshot that said 8 million... OOPS
  reply report

Post a Reply

jump to first post

12 3 Next

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

Elon Musk

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

Elon Musk

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies