How in the world did the government spending get so far off the tracks? In less than a month Elon will and his 20 year olds will pry 1 trillion dollars out of the politicians cold dead hands. will

[Lipdrag]

3 hours ago, red viking said:

He needs congress to do much of what he's doing, per the constitution. They passed budgets and laws that require these agencies. His orders are easily shot down by any judge w a 4th grade education. 

Well, 51% of Congress and 4th grade judges better start lining up and defending/refunding (i.e. funding again) all of these things or get the FBI to start arresting and charging all of the illegals doing illegal things.  Otherwise, they are legal.  Let's call it . . . prosecutorial discretion.  Soros' prosecutors are very good at discretioning what are and are not crimes regardless of the laws passed by legislatures so the new kids on the block can start discretioning constitutional crimes.  Ultimately, the populace passes judgment at the ballot box - unless Russian pee stories and lap top hoaxes sway our electorate again.

[Husker_Du]

this is among the biggest scandals ever imo. the massive amount of fraud, waste, and payouts from taxpayer money.

and USAID is reportedly just 1% of the budget. wait till they drill down into other programs. 

there's a whole thread on here from when the concept of DOGE was started and the lefties mocked it. where they at now? zero intelligence or vision; just partisan ignorance. they're totally ok with govt corruption and crooked politicians as long as it's their side. truly gross.

and the lunacy of their leaders was fully on display in that pitiful chant led by career politicians Schumer and Waters. 

imagine two of the faces of your party staring down clear government corruption and chanting on the steps of congress to stop the audit that exposes it.

the democrat party is scum. 

[Husker_Du]

read this thread

 

 

[Offthemat]

 

[Husker_Du]

an actual insurrection. 

[Husker_Du]

$15m for condoms for the Taliban. sweet. 

[red viking]

Ill agree that DOGE is actually accomplishing something worthwhile when they actually cut the bigger programs like military (like Clinton did) and social security. 

Instead, they'll probably be moving on to NPR next. 

13 hours ago, Scouts Honor said:

 

[jross]

Patience, we are on week 3.

[uncle bernard]

9 hours ago, Husker_Du said:

this is among the biggest scandals ever imo. the massive amount of fraud, waste, and payouts from taxpayer money.

and USAID is reportedly just 1% of the budget. wait till they drill down into other programs. 

there's a whole thread on here from when the concept of DOGE was started and the lefties mocked it. where they at now? zero intelligence or vision; just partisan ignorance. they're totally ok with govt corruption and crooked politicians as long as it's their side. truly gross.

and the lunacy of their leaders was fully on display in that pitiful chant led by career politicians Schumer and Waters. 

imagine two of the faces of your party staring down clear government corruption and chanting on the steps of congress to stop the audit that exposes it.

the democrat party is scum. 

He has yet to find a single example of fraud. He's found plenty of spending he disagrees with ideologically, but that is not fraud.

"Democracy" is when we let a billionaire from another country unilaterally defund government programs he disagrees with. This is very similar to what happened in the Soviet Union post-collapse (and is the origin of the Russian oligarch class).

As for the democrat chanting, 100% cosign. Dems are in total collapse, which is what happens when you don't actually believe in anything other than winning elections for its own sake.

[uncle bernard]

4 hours ago, Husker_Du said:

$15m for condoms for the Taliban. sweet. 

I see you've learned nothing from the "condoms to Gaza" debacle.

Musk has an agenda, Willie. Stop taking everything that comes out of DOGE at face value. He is never giving you the full context. 

I, as one of the forum's top CIA haters, have no love for USAID, but there are some programs within it that are good and worth funding. When a billionaire presents them out of context because he knows people won't actually understand what they actually are, he is taking advantage of you. He is counting on your ignorance.

*taps the sign*

 

 

[Scouts Honor]

2 hours ago, red viking said:

Ill agree that DOGE is actually accomplishing something worthwhile when they actually cut the bigger programs like military (like Clinton did) and social security. 

Instead, they'll probably be moving on to NPR next. 

not a bad thing

[Scouts Honor]

 

they are so close!! 

[Husker_Du]

1 hour ago, uncle bernard said:

He has yet to find a single example of fraud. He's found plenty of spending he disagrees with ideologically, but that is not fraud.

ok, yes, maybe not 'fraud' but it certainly is NOT simply ideological.

it's massively worthless spending. worthless. 

do i really have to list them? or have you seen them? please tell me you've seen them.

1 hour ago, uncle bernard said:

"Democracy" is when we let a billionaire from another country unilaterally defund government programs he disagrees with. This is very similar to what happened in the Soviet Union post-collapse (and is the origin of the Russian oligarch class).

he's not 'unilaterally' doing anything. i am one of millions that voted hoping this stuff would happen, whether it's based on Elon's recommendation or any freakin' one's.

1 hour ago, uncle bernard said:

As for the democrat chanting, 100% cosign. Dems are in total collapse, which is what happens when you don't actually believe in anything other than winning elections for its own sake.

dems allowed all this fraud/waste/garbage/bs to happen and fester out of control.

including people like you. you (and your complicity, stupidity, and naivety) caused this stuff.

but you still don't get it, and are lying and making excuses still till this day. 

[uncle bernard]

5 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

ok, yes, maybe not 'fraud' but it certainly is NOT simply ideological.

it's massively worthless spending. worthless. 

do i really have to list them? or have you seen them? please tell me you've seen them.

he's not 'unilaterally' doing anything. i am one of millions that voted hoping this stuff would happen, whether it's based on Elon's recommendation or any freakin' one's.

dems allowed all this fraud/waste/garbage/bs to happen and fester out of control.

including people like you. you (and your complicity, stupidity, and naivety) caused this stuff.

but you still don't get it, and are lying and making excuses still till this day. 

You think all of this was done under Dems? Did you forget Trump was already president for 4 years?

And it is ideological. Just because you don't understand the purpose of something, doesn't mean it doesn't have a useful purpose. Sending condoms to Afghanistan might seem wasteful to you, but contraception has positive effects on society. For example:

1) Prevention of disease. We live in a global world. Reduction in the spread of communicable diseases makes al of us safer.

2) Reduced birth rates which correlate heavily with the advancement of women's rights.

When Mike Pence was governor, he shut down a needle exchange program in the southern part of the state because he disagreed with it ideologically ("government shouldn't spend money helping people safely use drugs"). It resulted in a massive HIV outbreak, which ultimately cost the government more money than it would have spent on prevention and made everybody less safe.

[mspart]

With all the concern over government paying media sites, NPR is fair game.   NPR represents a minority viewpoint and the government forces everyone to pay for it.   NPR is quite successful on its own and now has paying sponsors, and that is against the law.  They should be defunded.  

https://jonathanturley.org/2025/02/02/this-is-npr-npr-faces-reckoning-on-what-it-is/

Many of us have noticed that NPR has ramped up its sponsor statements with taglines about the products or firm’s clientele. Carr wrote, “I am concerned that NPR and PBS broadcasts could be violating federal law by airing commercials. In particular, it is possible that NPR and PBS member stations are broadcasting underwriting announcements that cross the line into prohibited commercial advertisements.”

The support for noncommercial radio and television stations fell under different regulations. It is hard to see the sponsor acknowledgments not as commercial advertising. It is common for for-profit outlets to have hosts read commercial sponsors.

Noncommercial educational broadcast stations-or NCEs are prohibited under Section399B of the Communications Act from airing commercials or other promotional announcements on behalf of for-profit entities.

NPR claims it gets only 1% funding from the government.  

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/3950550-the-truth-about-nprs-funding-and-its-possible-future/

NPR may receive little direct federal funding, but a good deal of its budget comprises federal funds that flow to it indirectly by federal law. Here’s how it works: Under the terms of the 1967 Public Broadcasting Act, funds are allocated annually to a non-governmental agency, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, overseen by a board of presidential appointees. That corporation, in turn, can choose to support original programming produced by public television or public radio — but, by law, must direct much of its $445 million funding (scheduled to top $500 million next fiscal year) to local  public television and public radio stations across the country, via so-called “community service grants.” 

Here’s where things get tricky. Local stations, if they want to broadcast “All Things Considered,” “Fresh Air” and other programming produced by NPR or competitors such as American Public Radio, must pay for it. Indeed, in its consolidated financial statement for 2021, NPR reported  $90 million in revenue from “contracts from customers,” a significant portion of its $279 million and much more than 1 percent. Such revenue was exceeded only by corporate sponsorships, which totaled $121 million.  One can think of these funds as federal grants that have been sent from Washington — but returned to it.

What’s more, local stations are actually required by law to do so. The 1967 act specifies that, of funds they received from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, “23 percent of such amounts shall be available for distribution among the licensees and permittees of public radio stations solely to be used for acquiring or producing programming that is to be distributed nationally and is designed to serve the needs of a national audience.” 

In other words, if a local public radio station decided it no longer wanted to carry “Morning Edition,” it would not have the discretion to use some portion of its federal grant to support, for example, local newsgathering.

So NPR gets more than 1% of its funding from the government.   So  a cut to PBS funding would impact them greatly.   The law needs to be revisited.   I loved Car Talk, I listened to it most every saturday.  So I listened to NPR usually on a drive to work and back.  However, their coverage of things got increasingly political and leftist.   I stopped listening to NPR years ago when I couldn't stomach their news programming anymore.   The only show that was non political was Car Talk.   All the others news and others were much to leftist.   And that is being funded by the government at least in part.   That is wrong.  So it is a small thing but has a big impact I think.   NPR specifically needs to be defunded.   They can make it on their own. 

mspart

 

[Paul158]

18 minutes ago, mspart said:

With all the concern over government paying media sites, NPR is fair game.   NPR represents a minority viewpoint and the government forces everyone to pay for it.   NPR is quite successful on its own and now has paying sponsors, and that is against the law.  They should be defunded.  

https://jonathanturley.org/2025/02/02/this-is-npr-npr-faces-reckoning-on-what-it-is/

Many of us have noticed that NPR has ramped up its sponsor statements with taglines about the products or firm’s clientele. Carr wrote, “I am concerned that NPR and PBS broadcasts could be violating federal law by airing commercials. In particular, it is possible that NPR and PBS member stations are broadcasting underwriting announcements that cross the line into prohibited commercial advertisements.”

The support for noncommercial radio and television stations fell under different regulations. It is hard to see the sponsor acknowledgments not as commercial advertising. It is common for for-profit outlets to have hosts read commercial sponsors.

Noncommercial educational broadcast stations-or NCEs are prohibited under Section399B of the Communications Act from airing commercials or other promotional announcements on behalf of for-profit entities.

NPR claims it gets only 1% funding from the government.  

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/3950550-the-truth-about-nprs-funding-and-its-possible-future/

NPR may receive little direct federal funding, but a good deal of its budget comprises federal funds that flow to it indirectly by federal law. Here’s how it works: Under the terms of the 1967 Public Broadcasting Act, funds are allocated annually to a non-governmental agency, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, overseen by a board of presidential appointees. That corporation, in turn, can choose to support original programming produced by public television or public radio — but, by law, must direct much of its $445 million funding (scheduled to top $500 million next fiscal year) to local  public television and public radio stations across the country, via so-called “community service grants.” 

Here’s where things get tricky. Local stations, if they want to broadcast “All Things Considered,” “Fresh Air” and other programming produced by NPR or competitors such as American Public Radio, must pay for it. Indeed, in its consolidated financial statement for 2021, NPR reported  $90 million in revenue from “contracts from customers,” a significant portion of its $279 million and much more than 1 percent. Such revenue was exceeded only by corporate sponsorships, which totaled $121 million.  One can think of these funds as federal grants that have been sent from Washington — but returned to it.

What’s more, local stations are actually required by law to do so. The 1967 act specifies that, of funds they received from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, “23 percent of such amounts shall be available for distribution among the licensees and permittees of public radio stations solely to be used for acquiring or producing programming that is to be distributed nationally and is designed to serve the needs of a national audience.” 

In other words, if a local public radio station decided it no longer wanted to carry “Morning Edition,” it would not have the discretion to use some portion of its federal grant to support, for example, local newsgathering.

So NPR gets more than 1% of its funding from the government.   So  a cut to PBS funding would impact them greatly.   The law needs to be revisited.   I loved Car Talk, I listened to it most every saturday.  So I listened to NPR usually on a drive to work and back.  However, their coverage of things got increasingly political and leftist.   I stopped listening to NPR years ago when I couldn't stomach their news programming anymore.   The only show that was non political was Car Talk.   All the others news and others were much to leftist.   And that is being funded by the government at least in part.   That is wrong.  So it is a small thing but has a big impact I think.   NPR specifically needs to be defunded.   They can make it on their own. 

mspart

 

I used listen to Click and Clack the Tappet brothers on Car Talk. I  didn't realize that the one brother (Tom) had passed away and I was just listening to reruns for years. Really sad. Really enjoyed their humor especially when ladies called in and tried to verbally describe the sound the car was making. They would have her repeat several times just for fun.

[Scouts Honor]

2 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

He has yet to find a single example of fraud.

lol

[Scouts Honor]

clicking my heels 

'there is no fraud in govt'

there is no fraud in govt

there is no fraud in govt

[mspart]

Bondi suing sanctuaries.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14370855/attorney-general-pam-bondi-warning-states-illegal-aliens.html

Attorney General Pam Bondi warned sanctuary cities they 'are going to be next' if local officials continue to harbor and protect illegal aliens over the safety of citizens.

Speaking with Fox News' Sean Hannity, Bondi, 59, shared how under her leadership the Justice Department sued the city of Chicago and its mayor Brandon Johnson earlier in the day over its progressive sanctuary policies. 

'Not only did we sue today the city of Chicago, we sued the state of Illinois, we sued the mayor, we sued the governor, and we sued others,' she said.

The Department of Justice also put a pause on all federal funding to sanctuary states and cities and nonprofits, according to a memo Bondi sent out Thursday. 

Will the states win this one?    I don't think so.  Constitutionally, federal law is superior to state or local law.   Period.  

mspart

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

3 hours ago, red viking said:

Ill agree that DOGE is actually accomplishing something worthwhile when they actually cut the bigger programs like military (like Clinton did) and social security. 

Instead, they'll probably be moving on to NPR next. 

Hopefully...

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

3 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

He has yet to find a single example of fraud. He's found plenty of spending he disagrees with ideologically, but that is not fraud.

"Democracy" is when we let a billionaire from another country unilaterally defund government programs he disagrees with. This is very similar to what happened in the Soviet Union post-collapse (and is the origin of the Russian oligarch class).

As for the democrat chanting, 100% cosign. Dems are in total collapse, which is what happens when you don't actually believe in anything other than winning elections for its own sake.

So, we are against legal immigration?

[Scouts Honor]

 

[Paul158]

16 minutes ago, Scouts Honor said:

clicking my heels 

'there is no fraud in govt'

there is no fraud in govt

there is no fraud in govt

I guess the theory is, if you repeat a lie over and over again it becomes true.

[mspart]

The left is against anything that threatens their power.   That is why the left is squealing so loudly about  USAID.   They are supporting funding trans operas in Colombia and LGBT comic books in Peru.   Obviously they are because they are not condemning those expenditures, just saying they are all good and no action should be taken. 

It has been shown the USAID has been behind regime changes.   There are reports that they helped fund the CIA effort to get rid of Trump 1.0.  

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/bombshell-usaid-cia-state-dept-played-role-in-1st-trump-impeachment-top-reporter-in-america/ar-AA1yxvbf?ocid=EMMX&apiversion=v2&noservercache=1&domshim=1&renderwebcomponents=1&wcseo=1&batchservertelemetry=1&noservertelemetry=1

mspart

[PortaJohn]

28 minutes ago, Paul158 said:

I used listen to Click and Clack the Tappet brothers on Car Talk.

You just Ratatouilled me...