Politico has become the latest target in Elon Musk's clampdown on public spending after it emerged taxpayers were footing the bill for pricey subscriptions to the outlet.
Your fact check article you cited has been updated with corrections.
The headline of this piece has been updated to more accurately describe the contents of the fact check. While Politico LLC did receive funds from USAID and other government agencies, the money was not for grants but payment for subscriptions to its publications. Also, the $8.2 million figure cited refers to payments in the 12 months leading up to February 2025, not dating back to 2016.
Yep. It’s also possible this is a distraction from us remembering USAID was investigating Starlink in Ukraine for shutting off satellite access to help Russia.
Your fact check article you cited has been updated with corrections.
Thanks for the update. So it seems to have been legit payments then, neato.
Nothing in the article discusses the legitimacy of the subscriptions. It could simply be a way money was funneled.
Money can be exchanged for goods and services.
If we cannot make a determination of the legitimacy of subscriptions, we equally cannot conclude if it was funneled either.
That’s why I used the word could. In this context it’s used to express possibility.
Yep. It’s also possible this is a distraction from us remembering USAID was investigating Starlink in Ukraine for shutting off satellite access to help Russia.
It is, but it’s far more likely you missed or didn’t understand the word could.
So many possibilities!
There are but the most likely one is you not knowing what could means.