Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
40 minutes ago, Roundybout said:


Easily debunked.

 

 


This is the problem with posting data like this. Any chud with an agenda can pick it and people who don’t know what it means will eat it up. 

 

There’s some pushback on the debunking. Seems like a poor use of taxpayer dollars to fund subscriptions to Politico’s Pro editorial product. Maybe that’s just me. 
 

 

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, JDHillFan said:

There’s some pushback on the debunking. Seems like a poor use of taxpayer dollars to fund subscriptions to Politico’s Pro editorial product. Maybe that’s just me. 
 

 


“taxpayer money” is such a tired phrase. Everything is taxpayer money. Get over it. 
 

Do you realize how much trade publication subscriptions cost?

Edited by Roundybout
Posted
2 minutes ago, Roundybout said:


“taxpayer money” is such a tired phrase. Everything is taxpayer money. Get over it. 
 

Do you realize how much trade publication subscriptions cost?

Apparently $12,108 ea. Sounds expensive for Politico. Kind of grifty even. 

4 minutes ago, Roundybout said:


“taxpayer money” is such a tired phrase. Everything is taxpayer money. Get over it. 
 

Do you realize how much trade publication subscriptions cost?

Taxpayer money also pays your salary. Are your fellow citizens getting any value today or did you take another day off to settle on another house?

Posted
Just now, Roundybout said:


“taxpayer money” is such a tired phrase. Everything is taxpayer money. Get over it. 

Any way you look a it, shutting the tap on USAID of "taxpayer money" is going to cause a big increase in unemployment of Democrat political activists.

Posted
3 minutes ago, JDHillFan said:

Apparently $12,108 ea. Sounds expensive for Politico. Kind of grifty even. 


Not really. It cost $8,000 several years ago. It’s not like you’re buying a subscription to Highlights. 
 

https://digiday.com/media/half-politicos-revenue-now-20000-subscribers/

 

https://www.politicopro.com/fact-sheet/pro-plans.pdf

2 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Any way you look a it, shutting the tap on USAID of "taxpayer money" is going to cause a big increase in unemployment of Democrat political activists.


More like a massive increase in deaths worldwide, significant risk to our national security, and an open door for China to extend its influence around the globe. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 


Thats Nazi stuff 


At this point you guys are making up your own reality. They bought subscriptions to policy journals. That’s it. 

Posted
19 minutes ago, Roundybout said:


At this point you guys are making up your own reality. They bought subscriptions to policy journals. That’s it. 


 

 

Posted

Let me guess, Roundy will undoubtedly find someone on X to tell him that this claim is "easily debunked"

 

And that will be good enough for RoundyMao.

 

Case closed!

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Angry 1
Posted

If you're one to listen to long form podcasts, and you're not a useful idiot, then I'd suggest you begin with Benz on Tucker or Rogan.

 

Benz has been sounding the alarm on USAID and other IC cutout orgs for years now.

 

It took Elon poking around to bring it front and center.

 

 

 

Posted
24 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:


 

 


Also easily debunked. While your meltdowns are amusing, you guys should put the computer down and go outside a while. 
 

 

Posted
1 hour ago, Roundybout said:


“taxpayer money” is such a tired phrase. Everything is taxpayer money. Get over it. 
 

Do you realize how much trade publication subscriptions cost?

 

"The 2020 election was rigged/stolen" is ALSO a tired phrase.

 

But it's one we'll be revisiting soon!

 

Get used to it.

Posted
6 minutes ago, JFKjr said:

 

"The 2020 election was rigged/stolen" is ALSO a tired phrase.

 

But it's one we'll be revisiting soon!

 

Get used to it.


If that were true doesn’t that mean Trump is ineligible to be president now?

Posted
1 minute ago, Roundybout said:


If that were true doesn’t that mean Trump is ineligible to be president now?

 

It'll be interesting sorting that out.

 

There are quite a few federal judges who would need to be "unappointed" not to mention that one Supreme Court Justice who doesn't know what a woman is because she isn't a biologist.

 

Posted
6 minutes ago, Roundybout said:


If that were true doesn’t that mean Trump is ineligible to be president now?

Interesting point. Trump certainly didn't "serve" two terms. Common sense tells me we're OK

  • Like (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...