Reply With Quote
The Dobbs decision was a true story.
...everything Politico has published is suspect. The Associate Press and BBC, as well.
Thank you Elon Musk and DOGE.
The Dobbs decision was a true story.
The leak of the Dobbs decision almost led to the assassination of at least one sitting U. S. Supreme Court Justice.
The point being, would Politico have received the leak or reported it if they weren't on the USAID dole?
I don't think USAID status had anything to do with that leak.
USAID not needed.
yeah, it was the leak that made conservative justices even more unpopular, not their asshat decision.
Everything's a conspiracy when you don't understand anything.
I don't really care Margaret, what you think.
So, why was Politico, the Associate Press, the BBC, and now revealed, the New York Times receiving money from USAID?
You keep trying to make fetch happen.
Not to get one SCOTUS leak.So, why was Politico, the Associate Press, the BBC, and now revealed, the New York Times receiving money from USAID?
If you want to get to the bottom of that leak, demand your Trump investigate his SCOTUS. Send Elon's gang in there to demand access.
Among the agencies who would be impacted by the closure is BBC’s international charity BBC Media Action, which counts USAid as its second largest donor.
In the 2023-24 tax year, the US taxpayer-funded agency gave £2.6 million to the organisation, which trains journalists and helps improve communications in some of the world’s poorest countries.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/news/...usaid-funding/
Politico: PoliticoPro subscriptions. USAID only paid like $45k.
BBC: Donation to BBC's Media Action charity.
I'm going to go ahead and guess the others are just subscriptions and the like.
Looks like you got fooled again.
like $45K
is this the outlet whose owner made his employees pray for Trump last year?
...everything Politico has published is suspect. The Associate Press and BBC, as well.
Thank you Elon Musk and DOGE.
Sorry. Missed a decimal.like $45K
Stull just subscriptions.
Not the AP, BBC, NYT or Politico.
Why do you have to conflate it all?
The other publications (plus others) have already been mentioned in the media as having also received money from USAID...in the form of subscriptions.
And, now, Politico us up to $34 million, instead of the initial $8 million figure.
Why are out tax dollars being spent on subscriptions to private (mostly leftist) publications? You're not curious?
The amount has always been available for you to search.
You were never curious until you were told to be.
Why is that?
First, I wasn't told to be. Second, I was unaware of the grift and corruption of USAID until DOGE went in and started exposing it. I've often wondered how the CIA might be working to undermine foreign regimes, and recently, the U. S. administration but, I had no clue where to look. It was cleverly disguised in a agency whose purpose I always though was altruistic extension of the U. S. Government's compassion on foreign governments. You know, like the Women's Global Development and Prosperity Initiative."
Now, we see where the CIA used USAID funds to effect regime change abroad and to fabricate a pretense for impeaching Trump at home.
I'm now wondering what happened to all the AID that supposedly flowed through USAID to Haiti, after their devastating earthquake. :::I'm looking at you Bill and Hillary:::
It's long been suspected the funds were diverted to non-related interests. Now, with the sunshine of DOGE being scattered all through USAID we find the following:
Research it yourself. Debunk the claims and assertions made in this X post. Why wasn't this reported in the mainstream media? Maybe because of all the USAID being spent on "subscriptions" was just a payoff to keep the quiet or, worse, censor, cancel, deplatform, or discredit any source that tried to expose the grift.
Then there's this:
BOMBS : Michael S enberger Exposes Shocking USAID and CIA Connections to Trump’s Impeachment
Yeah, I know, it's the Gateway Pundit. Not my primary source for news but, if you read the article and watch Michael S enberger's video, embedded therein, the facts presented are have yet to be disputed...
Fact 1: Eric Ciaramella, without any first-hand knowledge, alleged President Donald Trump coerced Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky into probing Joe Biden's criminal enterprise by leveraging military aid. (Kind of rich since Joe Biden admitted on camera to threatening then Ukraine that he would withhold $1 billion dollars in military aid if they didn't fire the prosecutor investigating Burisma.)
Fact 2: Eric Ciaramella was not on President Trump's phone call with Zelensky. He based his whistleblower complaint on hearsay from a 'source' that later turned out to be Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman. (I find it hilarious Vindman's wife is now complaining about not being included in Biden's preemptive pardon bonanza.)
Fact 3: Eric Ciaramella relied heavily on reports by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), an organization operating under the financial and operational oversight of USAID.
This bogus whistleblower became Adam Schiff's principle witness in the mostly secret impeachment hearings he convened at the House.
Hey, more conspiracy theories!First, I wasn't told to be. Second, I was unaware of the grift and corruption of USAID until DOGE went in and started exposing it. I've often wondered how the CIA might be working to undermine foreign regimes, and recently, the U. S. administration but, I had no clue where to look. It was cleverly disguised in a agency whose purpose I always though was altruistic extension of the U. S. Government's compassion on foreign governments. You know, like the Women's Global Development and Prosperity Initiative."
Now, we see where the CIA used USAID funds to effect regime change abroad and to fabricate a pretense for impeaching Trump at home.
I'm now wondering what happened to all the AID that supposedly flowed through USAID to Haiti, after their devastating earthquake. :::I'm looking at you Bill and Hillary:::
It's long been suspected the funds were diverted to non-related interests. Now, with the sunshine of DOGE being scattered all through USAID we find the following:
Research it yourself. Debunk the claims and assertions made in this X post. Why wasn't this reported in the mainstream media? Maybe because of all the USAID being spent on "subscriptions" was just a payoff to keep the quiet or, worse, censor, cancel, deplatform, or discredit any source that tried to expose the grift.
Then there's this:
BOMBS : Michael S enberger Exposes Shocking USAID and CIA Connections to Trump’s Impeachment
Yeah, I know, it's the Gateway Pundit. Not my primary source for news but, if you read the article and watch Michael S enberger's video, embedded therein, the facts presented are have yet to be disputed...
Fact 1: Eric Ciaramella, without any first-hand knowledge, alleged President Donald Trump coerced Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky into probing Joe Biden's criminal enterprise by leveraging military aid. (Kind of rich since Joe Biden admitted on camera to threatening then Ukraine that he would withhold $1 billion dollars in military aid if they didn't fire the prosecutor investigating Burisma.)
Fact 2: Eric Ciaramella was not on President Trump's phone call with Zelensky. He based his whistleblower complaint on hearsay from a 'source' that later turned out to be Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman. (I find it hilarious Vindman's wife is now complaining about not being included in Biden's preemptive pardon bonanza.)
Fact 3: Eric Ciaramella relied heavily on reports by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), an organization operating under the financial and operational oversight of USAID.
This bogus whistleblower became Adam Schiff's principle witness in the mostly secret impeachment hearings he convened at the House.
You've been activated, dude.
But OAN and Newsmax good....everything Politico has published is suspect. The Associate Press and BBC, as well.
Thank you Elon Musk and DOGE.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
