JDHillFan Posted February 6 Posted February 6 5 minutes ago, Roundybout said: They were paid $8 million for Politico Pro. It’s the exact same thing as a Bloomberg Terminal for stock market analysis. Good god man, it’s not healthy to be this angry. Some questions: 1. Do you believe the fortunes of politico pro and politico are tied together? 2. in terms of bias, which way does politico lean? 3. Why do you think politico was first on the story of the bogus Russian disinfo laptop scheme? Because of their reputation for investigative journalism? 4. Do you see any connection in any of the above or is it all just happenstance? earlier today, you painted yourself as a big picture guy. Please look at the big picture here. 1
Roundybout Posted February 6 Posted February 6 15 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: Some questions: 1. Do you believe the fortunes of politico pro and politico are tied together? 2. in terms of bias, which way does politico lean? 3. Why do you think politico was first on the story of the bogus Russian disinfo laptop scheme? Because of their reputation for investigative journalism? 4. Do you see any connection in any of the above or is it all just happenstance? earlier today, you painted yourself as a big picture guy. Please look at the big picture here. Didn’t peg you as one for conspiracy slop. Every day is something new!
ScotSHO Posted February 6 Posted February 6 (edited) 27 minutes ago, Roundybout said: They were paid $8 million for Politico Pro. It’s the exact same thing as a Bloomberg Terminal for stock market analysis. Good god man, it’s not healthy to be this angry. As a taxpayer, I would rather feed the poor vs. paying rubes to further a certain political viewpoint (or way worse). Even with a 35% inefficiency rate of an organization, at least the majority of the funds would get to the end user. This is just junk spending and you know it. Edited February 6 by ScotSHO
JDHillFan Posted February 6 Posted February 6 1 minute ago, Roundybout said: Didn’t peg you as one for conspiracy slop. Every day is something new! Even with them being incredibly easy questions, I didn’t expect an answer. Thank you for not disappointing.
Roundybout Posted February 6 Posted February 6 3 minutes ago, ScotSHO said: As a taxpayer, I would rather feed the poor vs. paying rubes to further a certain political viewpoint (or way worse). Even with a 35% inefficiency rate of an organization, at least the majority of the funds would get to the end user. This is just junk spending and you know it. I think it’s a good thing for government organizations to use tools to keep themselves better informed, actually. Where else are they supposed to get such analysis? 3 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: Even with them being incredibly easy questions, I didn’t expect an answer. Thank you for not disappointing. It is a personal point of mine to never engage with nonsense conspiracies. Do you also believe USAID paid Angelina Jolie $20 million to go to Ukraine?
ScotSHO Posted February 6 Posted February 6 (edited) 26 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: Some questions: 1. Do you believe the fortunes of politico pro and politico are tied together? 2. in terms of bias, which way does politico lean? 3. Why do you think politico was first on the story of the bogus Russian disinfo laptop scheme? Because of their reputation for investigative journalism? 4. Do you see any connection in any of the above or is it all just happenstance? earlier today, you painted yourself as a big picture guy. Please look at the big picture here. "Leans left" - HA! 5 minutes ago, Roundybout said: It is a personal point of mine to never engage with nonsense conspiracies. Do you also believe USAID paid Angelina Jolie $20 million to go to Ukraine? How many steps removed does it take to prevent USA-IDs from being culpable? That is the question that we'll never know. Edited February 6 by ScotSHO
JDHillFan Posted February 6 Posted February 6 11 minutes ago, Roundybout said: It is a personal point of mine to never engage with nonsense conspiracies I remember when you were accusing people of believing in conspiracies relative to Venezuelan gangs. You were all in on that weren’t you? Sadly, you couldn’t have been more wrong and it makes the statement I have quoted above look like absolute horsesh*t. Carry on. 1
Roundybout Posted February 6 Posted February 6 1 minute ago, JDHillFan said: I remember when you were accusing people of believing in conspiracies relative to Venezuelan gangs. You were all in on that weren’t you? Sadly, you couldn’t have been more wrong and it makes the statement I have quoted above look like absolute horsesh*t. Carry on. You’re getting awfully boring. Mix it up once in a while. 17 minutes ago, ScotSHO said: "Leans left" - HA! How many steps removed does it take to prevent USA-IDs from being culpable? That is the question that we'll never know. I have zero issues with government agencies buying tools to help them be more efficient and informed. My office does the same thing.
aristocrat Posted February 6 Posted February 6 12 minutes ago, Roundybout said: You’re getting awfully boring. Mix it up once in a while. I have zero issues with government agencies buying tools to help them be more efficient and informed. My office does the same thing. Can you point to where they were efficient? 1
Roundybout Posted February 6 Posted February 6 2 minutes ago, aristocrat said: Can you point to where they were efficient? Define “efficient.” Are you still on the stupid Pro subscription?
AlBUNDY4TDS Posted February 6 Posted February 6 The real time roundy flailing sure is entertaining. 2
aristocrat Posted February 6 Posted February 6 5 minutes ago, Roundybout said: Define “efficient.” Are you still on the stupid Pro subscription? Why can’t you just answer my question instead of asking for a definition?
wnyguy Posted February 6 Posted February 6 22 minutes ago, aristocrat said: Why can’t you just answer my question instead of asking for a definition? Define "definition".
aristocrat Posted February 6 Posted February 6 4 minutes ago, wnyguy said: Define "definition". Please use it in a sentence
BillsFanNC Posted February 6 Author Posted February 6 🎯 The right people going absolutely unhinged guarantees that DOGE is onto something.
Roundybout Posted February 6 Posted February 6 32 minutes ago, aristocrat said: Why can’t you just answer my question instead of asking for a definition? I have no idea what you or Elon means by “efficient.” If you want to cut USAID, pass a law. Thats how it’s supposed to be.
Orlando Buffalo Posted February 6 Posted February 6 2 minutes ago, Roundybout said: I have no idea what you or Elon means by “efficient.” If you want to cut USAID, pass a law. Thats how it’s supposed to be. Why is USAID subject to laws now when it has never been before? https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/02/05/media/politico-usaid-subscription-government CNN is just trying to make sure they will be first in line for government funds when Trump is out of office
Roundybout Posted February 6 Posted February 6 2 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: Why is USAID subject to laws now when it has never been before? https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/02/05/media/politico-usaid-subscription-government CNN is just trying to make sure they will be first in line for government funds when Trump is out of office USAID is allocated funding through Congress. Your conspiracy-poisoned brains have won again, unfortunately. What a loss for the USAID employees. Now they will lose access to top-notch policy analysis and data.
Orlando Buffalo Posted February 6 Posted February 6 1 minute ago, Roundybout said: USAID is allocated funding through Congress. Your conspiracy-poisoned brains have won again, unfortunately. What a loss for the USAID employees. Now they will lose access to top-notch policy analysis and data. USAID was formed by EO and is a line item on the congressional budget. Or are you so dumb you believe Congress discussed paying for Iraqi sesame Street? As for "top notch" people there, they will be absorbed by the State Dept
Roundybout Posted February 6 Posted February 6 Just now, Orlando Buffalo said: USAID was formed by EO and is a line item on the congressional budget. Or are you so dumb you believe Congress discussed paying for Iraqi sesame Street? As for "top notch" people there, they will be absorbed by the State Dept Then tell Congress to reduce its funding. The way these things are supposed to be done, not through President Elon. Why do you support taking away tools to help our government run better? Weird. Concerning.
Recommended Posts