Titandan Posted February 24 Report Share Posted February 24 1 minute ago, Starkiller said: Some of it was real, some of it was not, and some was unverified. Regardless, she admitted it wasn’t all true so what’s the problem? I never saw the clip where she admitted it. If that happened to me, I would question everything that the institutionalists at the DNC did from them on. Maddow is still part of the system and a true team player. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titandan Posted February 24 Report Share Posted February 24 9 minutes ago, Justafan said: Trump definitely colluded with Russia. Maddow definitely exaggerated the veracity of the Steele dossier knowing full well what it was. Colluded how? What's your definition of collusion? I don't fault Maddow for using the Dossier if she honestly didn't know. It could happen to anyone if they are misled with bad info. But I'd expect a little more humility if she's been duped. Otherwise she's a disingenuous dirt bag continuing to feed her audience garbage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starkiller Posted February 24 Report Share Posted February 24 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Titandan said: I never saw the clip where she admitted it. If that happened to me, I would question everything that the institutionalists at the DNC did from them on. Maddow is still part of the system and a true team player. You just posted a clip where she said it. I can’t say I’m surprised you don’t even watch what you are posting… Edited February 24 by Starkiller OILERMAN, MadMax, and ctm 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titandan Posted February 24 Report Share Posted February 24 5 minutes ago, Starkiller said: You just posted a clip where she said it. I can’t say I’m surprised you don’t even watch what you are posting… What did she explicitly say? She's just rambling on about veracity of Dossier but didn't hear where she's personally taking any responsibility. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titans279 Posted February 24 Report Share Posted February 24 (edited) 2 hours ago, Titandan said: I posted another more recent one where she blames the Trump admin for buying Tesla cyber trucks with government money (as if it's a crime) as a favor to Elon when, as it turns out, it was actually purchased during the Biden admin. This is, of course, false LOL. The Biden administration did not "purchase" or even approve the purchase of the 400 million dollars for Cybertrucks (or any purchase of armored EVs). The Trump administration were the ones who were moving forward with that. Biden had solicited feedback for armored EVs, only Tesla has responded. Separately there had been ~500k budgeted for purchasing light duty EVs. The Trump admin was going to award 400M to Tesla for armored EVs, got caught, and edited the document and edited it so that it looked like it was released during Biden's admin in December (there is no evidence that it was released then). Normally this would be a pretty huge scandal. Awarding 400M to the chief donor and high level administration official. But in the New America this is just Monday. It appeared as if the State Department was taking steps to award Elon Musk's Tesla a $400 million government contract to buy armored electric vehicles to securely transport diplomats. The move to set in motion a lucrative contract to a company controlled by a high-profile ally of President Trump's seemed so bold it surprised even longtime observers of the norm-busting president. When asked about it, the State Department issued a statement saying the purchase is now on hold with no plans of fulfilling the contract, pointing out that talks with Tesla began during the Biden administration. But NPR has obtained a State Department document detailing that Biden's State Department planned to spend just $483,000 in the 2025 fiscal year on buying electric vehicles and $3 million for supporting equipment, like charging stations. It represented less than 1% of the hundreds of millions of dollars likely destined for Tesla vehicles after the Trump administration quietly revised a State Department procurement document. A former Biden White House official familiar with the State Department's plans told NPR the steps taken to advance $400 million worth of government business to Tesla appear to be intentional. "I don't think this is a clerical error. It was likely someone who is new in [the] State [Department] who decided, 'OK, we're gonna do this with Tesla,'" said the former official, who was not authorized to speak about the matter. The person said the State Department and Tesla had agreed during the Biden administration to conduct research about armoring electric vehicles, but no money had been set aside to purchase armored Teslas for the State Department. A total budget of $483,000 had been approved to buy light-duty EVs as possible State Department vehicles. That plan was moving forward as recently as November 2024. ... After the original procurement document attracted widespread attention, NPR reported that the Trump administration appeared to have quietly edited the document, changing the phrase "armored Tesla" to the more generic "armored electric vehicles" without explanation. Eventually, the item vanished from the State Department's procurement document. The document claims it was originally published in December, at the end of former President Joe Biden's term, but it does not appear in the Internet Archive for that month. https://www.npr.org/2025/02/24/nx-s1-5305269/tesla-state-department-elon-musk-trump Edited February 24 by Titans279 Starkiller, and OILERMAN 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titandan Posted February 24 Report Share Posted February 24 10 minutes ago, Titans279 said: This is, of course, false LOL. The Biden administration did not "purchase" or even approve the purchase of the 400 million dollars for Cybertrucks (or any purchase of armored EVs). The Trump administration were the ones who were moving forward with that. Biden had solicited feedback for armored EVs, only Tesla has responded. Separately there had been ~500k budgeted for purchasing light duty EVs. The Trump admin was going to award 400M to Tesla for armored EVs, got caught, and edited the document and edited it so that it looked like it was released during Biden's admin in December (there is no evidence that it was released then). Normally this would be a pretty huge scandal. Awarding 400M to the chief donor and high level administration official. But in the New America this is just Monday. It appeared as if the State Department was taking steps to award Elon Musk's Tesla a $400 million government contract to buy armored electric vehicles to securely transport diplomats. The move to set in motion a lucrative contract to a company controlled by a high-profile ally of President Trump's seemed so bold it surprised even longtime observers of the norm-busting president. When asked about it, the State Department issued a statement saying the purchase is now on hold with no plans of fulfilling the contract, pointing out that talks with Tesla began during the Biden administration. But NPR has obtained a State Department document detailing that Biden's State Department planned to spend just $483,000 in the 2025 fiscal year on buying electric vehicles and $3 million for supporting equipment, like charging stations. It represented less than 1% of the hundreds of millions of dollars likely destined for Tesla vehicles after the Trump administration quietly revised a State Department procurement document. A former Biden White House official familiar with the State Department's plans told NPR the steps taken to advance $400 million worth of government business to Tesla appear to be intentional. "I don't think this is a clerical error. It was likely someone who is new in [the] State [Department] who decided, 'OK, we're gonna do this with Tesla,'" said the former official, who was not authorized to speak about the matter. The person said the State Department and Tesla had agreed during the Biden administration to conduct research about armoring electric vehicles, but no money had been set aside to purchase armored Teslas for the State Department. A total budget of $483,000 had been approved to buy light-duty EVs as possible State Department vehicles. That plan was moving forward as recently as November 2024. ... After the original procurement document attracted widespread attention, NPR reported that the Trump administration appeared to have quietly edited the document, changing the phrase "armored Tesla" to the more generic "armored electric vehicles" without explanation. Eventually, the item vanished from the State Department's procurement document. The document claims it was originally published in December, at the end of former President Joe Biden's term, but it does not appear in the Internet Archive for that month. https://www.npr.org/2025/02/24/nx-s1-5305269/tesla-state-department-elon-musk-trump According to your own article... "When asked about it, the State Department issued a statement saying the purchase is now on hold with no plans of fulfilling the contract, pointing out that talks with Tesla began during the Biden administration." So where's the scandal? Jamalisms 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titans279 Posted February 24 Report Share Posted February 24 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Titandan said: According to your own article... "When asked about it, the State Department issued a statement saying the purchase is now on hold with no plans of fulfilling the contract, pointing out that talks with Tesla began during the Biden administration." So where's the scandal? That they were going to do it until they got caught? LOL 400M for armored Teslas is insane. Attempting that is a scandal. Potentially editing the evidence to blame it on Biden is another layer on top. Edited February 24 by Titans279 Jamalisms, and No1TitansFan 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titandan Posted February 24 Report Share Posted February 24 1 hour ago, Titans279 said: That they were going to do it until they got caught? LOL 400M for armored Teslas is insane. Attempting that is a scandal. Potentially editing the evidence to blame it on Biden is another layer on top. I think the problem that most of you and Maddow had was intent. If previous administration controlled State Department was intending to build their fleet and Tesla's the only company that replied, then I don't see how you can blame Trump for trying to help his little buddy out. Not that there's anything wrong with that in my book. I think you can have a mutually beneficial transaction with an American car company and the US government. Still I can see how people would have a problem with it. If you think about American EV's you'd be stupid not to consider Tesla's and I'm not even a fan of their designs. I think the proportions are out of whack. I recently saw a BYD bus (I'm assuming electric) in LA. I don't know how the hell our city thinks it's a good idea to fund a Chinese company. But if USAID is any indication, why would I be surprised? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titans279 Posted February 24 Report Share Posted February 24 17 minutes ago, Titandan said: I think the problem that most of you and Maddow had was intent. If previous administration controlled State Department was intending to build their fleet and Tesla's the only company that replied, then I don't see how you can blame Trump for trying to help his little buddy out. Not that there's anything wrong with that in my book. I think you can have a mutually beneficial transaction with an American car company and the US government. Still I can see how people would have a problem with it. Well, you're getting facts wrong again. Their plan was to study the idea of armoring EVs, not to purchase $400M of armored Teslas. The Trump admin (despite being anti-EV in all other areas of their administration) decided to spend $400M on armored Teslas. Why? They are shutting down already installed and functional EV chargers on federal property. Why would they buy these Teslas?? The person said the State Department and Tesla had agreed during the Biden administration to conduct research about armoring electric vehicles, but no money had been set aside to purchase armored Teslas for the State Department. A total budget of $483,000 had been approved to buy light-duty EVs as possible State Department vehicles. That plan was moving forward as recently as November 2024. OILERMAN, and MadMax 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chef Posted February 24 Report Share Posted February 24 (edited) On 2/24/2025 at 9:57 AM, Justafan said: Limbaugh was a raging asshole, a coke addict, and is largely responsible for setting the stage for all the media sensationalism we see today. In many ways he's like Rogan in that they were/are both really good at what they do. And Not (edit)equating their beliefs, their intentions, their audiences, but when you are running a recurring long format radio/podcast you have to have a certain something to connect with people and they both do. Despite all the willingness to push the conspiracy crap, I don't hate Rogan. He may be often (very) wrong but I don't think he's insincere, and that is a large part of his appeal. He does have on some pretty interesting and diverse guests, and when not rabbit holing on conspiracies or elk meat he's mostly a pretty solid interviewer. He comes across like a guy you could meet at a bar and have a nice chat with for the evening regardless if you were on the same page politically or not. And that's his secret sauce to his massive audience. I think a lot of hatred for him is not-very-repressed jealousy from those who wish they had a Joe Rogan to push back against conspiracy, anti-science and the like. But in perceived battle of Populism vs Elitism (unfair labels sure, but how it gets framed), you know who will win the audience 99.9% of the time. Same reason it wins at the ballot box. And that ain't just Trump. Edited February 25 by chef Justafan 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titandan Posted February 24 Report Share Posted February 24 13 minutes ago, Titans279 said: Well, you're getting facts wrong again. Their plan was to study the idea of armoring EVs, not to purchase $400M of armored Teslas. The Trump admin (despite being anti-EV in all other areas of their administration) decided to spend $400M on armored Teslas. Why? They are shutting down already installed and functional EV chargers on federal property. Why would they buy these Teslas?? The person said the State Department and Tesla had agreed during the Biden administration to conduct research about armoring electric vehicles, but no money had been set aside to purchase armored Teslas for the State Department. A total budget of $483,000 had been approved to buy light-duty EVs as possible State Department vehicles. That plan was moving forward as recently as November 2024. No "harm," no foul. What's the problem? https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/state-department-says-tesla-was-not-awarded-400m-contract-produce-armo-rcna192034 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzTitan Posted February 25 Report Share Posted February 25 4 hours ago, Titandan said: I never saw the clip where she admitted it. If that happened to me, I would question everything that the institutionalists at the DNC did from them on. Maddow is still part of the system and a true team player. This is not true, you regularly get informed on something you thought was true but wasn't, and you don't question shit ongoing. No1TitansFan 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titandan Posted February 25 Report Share Posted February 25 13 minutes ago, OzTitan said: This is not true, you regularly get informed on something you thought was true but wasn't, and you don't question shit ongoing. I question almost everything now... That's why I regularly point out corruption from my own party. I'd be stupid to keep getting duped like I used to. The root of my belief in libertarianism is my distrust of most(if not all) institutions. I think you want me to question Trump and I will once he stops doing the things that I like and once he starts doing things that make me question him. And I will stop trusting my sources once they blatantly lie and refuse to address them. The only thing that I can think of that Trump's aiming to do that I have serious problems with is his Gaza plan. The rest are great, good, or uncertain. Feel free to point out something I was uninformed about and ended up being a lie, and I continue to double down on. I regularly make mistakes and I'm definitely not above reproach. Hope you have a good day, mate Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OILERMAN Posted February 25 Report Share Posted February 25 17 minutes ago, Titandan said: I'd be stupid to keep getting duped like I used to. I've got bad news dan Starkiller, Jamalisms, and MadMax 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titandan Posted February 25 Report Share Posted February 25 8 minutes ago, OILERMAN said: I've got bad news dan I'm a little tired of winning. What's the dealio. Daddy-O? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.