Friends are telling me that Politico received it's suspicious USAID funding as "high tier" subscriptions.
(Nowadays most scientific literature is behind firewalls and require institutions, or individuals, to pay high amounts for access. Although you can buy individual articles. Many older scientists remember the days when you could contact the corresponding author with a post card or e-mail and he would happily send you a copy, a common courtesy to those interested in the work. In academic departments there were always arguments about which journals to subscribe with limited departmental funds).
I'm a cynic, and I worked in government (NIH). There seems a massive migration at present of State Media stenographers to Substack (which was trashed by these same people not so long ago). My guess is many of these propagandists will do well on the "high tier (outrageous) " subscription models supported by our "public servants", elected and bureaucrats, and some academic institutions and libraries. They won't be using their own money from home. They will be using taxpayer money and government working time for the high tier subscription costs. I doubt they will even read the articles, the point will be to keep government agency mouthpieces gainfully employed and their articles at the top of the news. After watching our politicians' vastly over-paid book deals, speeches/ seminars, artwork, charities, business ventures and being paid by lobbyists for favorable legislation and votes, etc, it will be easy for the Establishment to justify massively overpaid subscriptions to so-called journalists.
Isn't academic publishing moving to the public library of science model? ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PLOS ) Re "using taxpayer money and government working time for the high tier (substack) subscription costs", maybe, but it won't happen on a Trump or future Trumpian/America First watch.
It's true that there are a few scientific journals that publish articles without paying "publication costs" and some invite comments on line. It's a great model; generally the best work will be found regardless of where published. However the highest prestige journals, which can determine careers, are usually difficult for submitted articles to be published, the acceptance rate after peer review ranges across journals from 1% to 93% (according to Elsevier); the most exclusive are usually considered the best.
Pre-prints (not peer-reviewed) became popular during Covid since the science was heavily censored and final peer-reviewed articles were stopped if they disagreed with the Official Narratives. Most of the important work on Covid was published in pre-print form. If important, and not reproducible by other scientists, the scientific community will raise objections.
Will be interesting to see how much of this "soft corruption" is stopped. Corruption is often the most profitable approach with the course of least resistance. Largely bipartisan, at least in the past.
It's always been such a racket! The journals get the content for free and sell the same content back to academia at high prices. Now, one hears that even some of the most prestigious medical journals have been captured by big pharma. Maybe RFK Jr. will drain this part of the swamp.
Long before I became a grad student, scientists were paid by the journals for their articles. The owners of the journals eventually accepted advertising, much from Pharma, and later charged the authors to publish their work (making some papers "advertisements".)
Although not covered much by State Media, a clinical study contractor accused Pfizer of fraud with their Covid vaccine trial results. The FDA was not responsive to the whistleblower's complaint, so she eventually wrote to the British Medical Journal (prestigious!) who investigated and agreed with her. State Media attacked the BMJ as a non-credible source, like the National Enquirer (or NY Times).
How heart warming to see these two hardened journalist place so much child-like faith in Elon Musk and Donald Trump. Kirn’s reference to Martin Luther seemed wholly appropriate; if you believe these two, Musk and Trump are doing God’s work. At one point Matt even showed how much he identified with their cause and used the pronoun ‘We,’ so much for journalistic independence. It would be one thing to say let’s get out the popcorn and watch the sh*t show that will ensue from Musk’s nighttime raids— but instead these two really seem to believe that Musk is the second coming of Ralph Nader. And that sunshine and transparency is his ultimate goal. You’d think after selling Musk to us as a free speech maverick at Twitter, and then watching him turn X into his private megaphone / rightwing cudgel, Taibbi would have learned his lesson. Creepy.
If it's not obvious that Musk saved free speech with his purchase of Twitter/X then you don't reside in the real world.. I mean adding that corporation to his already overflowing corporate ownership plate was the last thing he needed, but he understood clearly if he didn't then Free speech was doomed Globally.. all the litigation he was immediately engulfed in from Europe to South America where censorship rained supreme..?! you think the richest man in the world needed that crap?
and now Musk - Trump DOGE performing emergency surgery on probably the most dangerously bloated and corrupt bureaucracy on planet Earth, the USAID - US government.. for which he's donating his time... you view this it's just another cynical right wing ploy?
.. It's certainly not Matt and Walter that are confused here ... it's you Alex...
I often wonder if these people ask themselves a simple question. Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, with a stated goal of making humanity interplanetary is wasting his precious time trying to make government more efficient. Why would he be doing this if he didn't think it was important. Right now the federal government adds $1T of new debt every 100 days, at what point does it become an emergency that we should all hope to be fixed.
They also forget that if not for the judge in delaware, who forced him to complete the twitter purchase. The same judge who also tried to take away his Tesla pay package, last year. Elon probably would've moved on to other things by now. It's their comeuppance for trying to punish a man who has singular focus and is unrelenting when he puts his mind to it.
Seems like you drank the Kool-Aide. He’s a big hypocrite. He immediately started to deplatform anyone who crossed him, including, very ironically, Matt Taibbi. And then there were journalists whose accounts were closed simply for criticizing Musk or because he dislikes their politics. And he gave the green light to China and India to censor their critics. Meet the new boss, much worse than the old!
All major social media platforms allow the nations in which they operate to dictate the censorship rules. While I do not view Elon as a "free speech absolutist," he did shake up the system a bit by allowing some previously silenced voices back on X. Unfortunately, he is still banning, or suspending people with whom he disagrees.
Thanks for the clarification. But I would say he didn’t shake up the system a bit, he bought the damn system. And he has an agenda and is a vindictive man who thinks the rules of mere mortals don’t apply to him. This just in, Elon’s company ready to bag $400 million contract from State Dept.
Get those hip boots on Elon and pull that swampy rope until the truth comes out of the muck.
It's "Oy Vey" time for the grifters!
I feel like writing a version of Modern Major General in honor of their plight. But frankly that would be a bit time consuming and getting the scan right can be tricky.
I am the very model of a modern U.S. liberal
My mind's become a vegetable, and I am now an animal,
I watch my news on cable and recite Trump's crimes historical
From Pee Tapes to the Russia hoax, in order categorical.
I'm not at all acquainted, though, with matters international,
I always favor bombing over efforts diplomatical,
Diversity and equity and gender color all my views,
But ask me where the money goes, well honest, I don't have a clue.
Here’s a clue … Elon isn’t interested in protecting your money… just advancing his personal politics. Witness what he did w Twitter— he immediately deplatformed people on right who disagreed w his immigration policy
Today Townhall has a story about local county prosecutor of Presidents of the US of A, Fanni Willis, hosting an inaugural gala for her second term. Her featured guest is Rep. Jasmine Crockett. "For the Love of Justice" is the theme, and for the minimal price of $500, any of us can go.
But this is the best. There are ascending levels of contribution available, and they are identified by judicial hierarchy. According to Townhall, if you "donate" $2,500" that gets you "Municipal" status. There is "Magistrate," "District," "Circuit," "Superior," and "Supreme Justice" levels. The last one will cost you $25,000.*
The point is. Wow. How imaginative for a prosecutor to use purchasing judgeship levels as a theme for your gala.
There is absolutely NO self-awareness with these people. They are not even in the same moral universe.
They will never cooperate on any level.
*Georgia Bar Association. If true, how is this not unethical? "The appearance of impropriety . . .?"
Matt you should look at Fed bulk-buying of X and Substack subscriptions. It’s the same deal as the Politico scam. The First Amendment equivalent of ballot-stuffing.
The high point of yesterday's Super Bowl, at least for me, was having the privilege of listening to Han Solo lecture me about "freedom" & "America" while the dried up old apricot pimped Jeeps to me. There is nothing in the world that I like more than a morality sermon dreamed up by some marketing fuck & delivered by some Hollywood windbag who, just a few months ago, told me that I was a fucking racist Nazi if I didn't vote for the Kamala & Timmy Show.
The only thing that topped the shear wonderfulness of Father Solo's ramblings was the 1/2 time show where some black dude mumbled shit for 20 minutes while a crew of synchronized twitchers attempted something akin to dancing if dancing looked more like a seizure.
Then today I saw that the mumbler won a Grammy & I completely understood how Beyonce won the best country album.
Honestly if you couldn’t understand what Kendrick Lamar was saying you might need your hearing checked. I watched the entire thing, not a coincidence that all the people throwing dog whistles around about
Mumbling happen to also be old, washed up, most likely white dudes who can’t handle the culture shift.
KDot killed it. One of the best halftime shows in a while.
Jesus Christ that was painful to read. In your head, when you thought this out, this sounded like a clever thing to type out? You wrote it out and then were like yeah, this is it… really?
Y'know Little Davey McLurch, the thing I love about shitlib putzes like you is how the lot of you are so cookie cutter in your demeanor.
You all seem to have massive egos that are always in imminent danger of drowning in that equally massive ocean of low self esteem that burbles through your shitlib systems like hot lava.
And anyone who pricks that massive ego balloon is treated to an endless stream of prattling windbag blather.
Now listen Skippy, I don't know if Dad didn't hug you enough or Mom left you wallowing in your own stinky boom boom for too long, on too many occasions & I don't care.
In case you missed the most recent cultural shift, your team got curb stomped by a fat, orange reality show host.
If there's anything more pathetic than that, I can't think of it.
So take some advice Shmoopsie, and burrow back into your own undercarriage & spend the next 4 years tongue cleaning that plopper dispensing orifice clean until it shines. Don't come out until you can see your own reflection.
During the Bush years I was maligned for being a progressive, during the Obama years I was maligned for being a conservative, during trumps first term I was a shit lib, during Biden tenure I was a MAGA degenerate, now it’s back to being a shit lib. The nice thing about you blue and red MAGA folks is your intelligence doesn’t go very far, so it’s the same old tired playbook every time. Anyone who’s different is automatically wrong/the enemy.
I know that ad hominem are all you can conjure up, but at least don’t make it sound like an adult with the education of an 8th grader wrote it. Use ChatGPT for godsake, or, sorry, GROK.
Fuck you’re dumb. This is why America is in the situation it is, because a larger than insignificant percentage of our population went through the same education system as you did and can’t out exactly like this.
I love Walter’s point about how it’s conveniently forgotten how money is earned. The sacrifices people make to earn a living. And then to have 30% go to all sorts of programs they have no interest or stake in. And now to find out how overblown these programs have become. As he said they are obviously afraid of people putting the pieces together.
I've always heard that it would be impossible to significantly cut the cost of government because most governmental expenditures are transfer payments required by law. But, DOGE is showing that this may not be the case. It turns out that people within the Government have been making lots of micro-decisions about what to pay and what not to pay, and those micro-decisions have been made without regard to controlling costs. Examples are the individual decisions to purchase Politico subscriptions, and DOGE's finding that many payments are paid to individuals w/o social security numbers, indicating these payments are not being carefully audited for validity prior to payment. So, the ability to cut overall Federal spending may be much larger than I previously thought, which is good news considering the deficit.
Still not a peep from Matt about Trump's plan for forced displacement of Palestinians from Gaza. Despite saying in the description that they would discuss it. Although I have little faith at this point that Matt and Walter would do anything other than make excuses for the current administration, I was still holding out some hope that Matt would show some courage and speak out against this injustice.
Instead, we got the same tired formula of "look at the bad Democrat censorship"(while avoiding any discussion of Republican censorship); "look at crazy Rachel Maddow/MSNBC" (as if they matter any more); "look at this list of screwed up left-wing programs that were being funded" (without asking the obvious question of whether the list is curated--i.e. what about all the programs that push the agenda supported by the party in power). I mean, no criticism of ANYTHING that has been done in the past month by the current administration. Come on.
I remember a time when Matt would actually speak truth to power irrespective of political orientation. Now he seems completely averse to ANY criticism of the current administration. Maybe its because I defended Matt for years as he was raked over the coals for being critical of the Democrat establishment, but his is honestly one of the most depressing political sell-outs that I have witnessed.
I had cancelled my subscription back in January, because it was clear to me at that point that Matt has become little more than an apologist for the current administration in power. I decided to add an extra month just to give him a chance because I really have respected his work for decades. But the lack of any comment about the current administration openly planning ethnic cleansing is just too much to take.
I get really tired of people dragging Gaza into every single discussion. I think Matt has mentioned before why he doesn't really get into it. He has other things he's focusing on.
I would also love Walter and Matt to start being critical of the current admin. But here is my take, I don't think Matt has sold out, he isn't giving a blanket endorsement of trump. I think he is still grappling with the amount of unanswered questions he has about the previous administration and he wants to get to the bottom of those issues before moving on. Trump hasnt been in office long, give it time.
Not to mention ----- . Today Veep Vance gave a speech at the AI confab in Europe, and included in his remarks that American AI will not limit speech. Trump Zoomed into Davos and spoke up for free speech.
If your interest is 1A and censorship, the last three weeks don't look real bad. And we need to know to what extent censorship was forced upon us by the previous administration. It's not as if there was "no harm done."
I really appreciate your points! I saw a clip of Matt explaining to Sabby Sabs why he does not engage regularly with Israel/Palestine (that it's a toxic subject, it's not his area of expertise, etc.), but I don't think that holds water – for instance, he's astutely covered the U.S. insane support of Ukraine and its destabilizing effect on domestic issues, and although he lived in the area and can cite those experiences, it's not like he can't call up Glenn Greenwald, Jeremy Scahill, Max Blumenthal, or any number of other independent journalists who know this issue inside out. At this point, ignoring the issue is becoming galling.
Yes, exactly! I have been reading Matt for two decades and he has absolutely commented on numerous issues that he is not an "expert" in. Besides, the point I was trying to make isn't so much about Gaza in particular (although I do care very much about that issue), but that it is a litmus test for his willingness to critique the Trump administration as vigorously as he critiques the Biden/Democrat regime.
For example, I saw a tweet from Lee Fang several days ago that said that the CFPB is the only agency that proposed regulations to prevent "debanking", and that the actions of Trump appointee Russ Vought to close down the CFPB will provide the industry with more power to use this means of control. That was news to me and I would love to hear Matt's take on this issue. More broadly, now is when I would really appreciate his insight on the many new appointees for financial positions in the administration. I can't imagine they are all good--they never are. But he seems to have decided to just keep his head down and say the same stuff he was saying months ago.
Apologies for the tardy response! I agree 100 percent with what you wrote, though, and it’s the reason that I’m finally ending my support of Matt’s journalism. With Russiagate and the first Trump term, he really showed poise, courage, and a commitment to journalistic principles – all things that are in woeful short supply this second time around with Trump. He’s covering all these issues in the most surface-level manner possible, and for someone who has read Matt as long as you have, I find it upsetting!
And actually, as I mull this over, Matt HAS addressed the Gaza genocide...way back in Oct. 2023, and he only wrote about the (in hindsight, absurd) controversy about the NYT stating that Israel had bombed the al-Ahli Arab Hospital...and he even stated, outright, that the NYT was mistaken to have reported that. Given Israel's wholesale destruction of the entire Gaza Strip since then (to say nothing of the deliberate assassinations and targeting of journalists), it'd be wonderful if Matt revisited that article and reflected a bit.
Trump said just today that the US will take over Gaza, that the Palestinians have to leave, and they will not be allowed to return. That is forced displacement, which is a clear violation of the Geneva Convention.
Does the Geneva Convention allow you to parade emaciated hostages (not even, POWs) in front of the press and your mobs to be mocked and further abused? As they are on the doorstep of freedom, and part of a "negotiation?" And the Red Cross/Crescent is part of the propaganda?
I have a solution for any Democrats whining about 86ing USAID. Apparently there are some good programs worth salvaging (world health related) that i'm sure the lion's share of us wouldn't object to continuing. So for that to happen, haul Samantha Power's ass to face Joni Ernst's DOGE committee (and Rand Paul if he's not on it) and submit to a grilling. Then toss her out on her tail, and let Ernst and co. choose a new head for a stripped down to necessities agency.
Have i mentioned that i absolutely loathe the likes of Power? The whole henhawk brigade who salivate over using the US military as their personal gladiators - Albright, Hillary, Nuland, Powers. I'm sure i've forgotten a few.
I wonder if all the people up in arms about politico will have the same energy for Elon Musk and the massive debt he owes to the us government and American tax payer for the millions and millions of dollars he has received in grants.
I’m guessing not, because he’s “based” or whatever stupid fucking term people throw around to justify their boot licking for an actual corporatocracy.
Elon Musk to pay record-breaking $12 billion tax bill. CNBC's Robert Frank reports on Elon Musk's tax bill which is the largest in history. Musk will pay a total of $12 billion for 2021.
For now I am ok (for the nothing that is worth) with USAID etc spending being shut down until there's a handle on what is being spent and why. As a former public company CFO I'd be out on my ass in minutes if my org failed one audit, never mind 8 which I think was the number at the DoD, someone can correct me please if need be. As a Country our fiscal bleed is just so bad the tourniquet needs to be tight. Some appendages might fall off as a result and that might be ok. We are at that point where same old same old won't cut it any longer.
One point worth noting for Matt and Walter: the fight over whether the president has to spend the monies appropriated by Congress goes back almost literally to the beginning of the Republic. The first controversy on this front came up when Thomas Jefferson refused to spend the money appropriated by Federalist Congress to build warships. Note that, when Jefferson was refusing to spend the money, the money was specifically appropriated for certain use--build warships. How specific were the goals of the funds appropriated by Congress for USAID, I wonder?
Now, legally, there are some more modern issues here: Nixon and Democratic Congress got into fights over this so often that, in 1974, Congress passed the Impoundment Control Act (typically, after Nixon left the scene.) This led to issues, incidentally, in 2019-20, over funds for military aid to Ukraine, when Trump was allegedly not spending the appropriated money. So this is not exactly a new issue even for Trump.
What is interesting to me is whether Democrats (who don't even control Congress at this point) can pick a fight with the executive over funding unpopular and questionable (not to mention, in many cases likely illegal--would Iran-Contra be any more legal if they were done by USAID employees under false pretenses? Blumenthal (I think) sort of gave the game away when he decried how USAID money being cut off was used to fund "freedom fighters." That reminded me of Ollie North.) projects that are dubious as to whether they serve the intended aims of the appropriated funds. These aren't warships for US Navy. These aren't even javelines or whatever for Ukraine. This is probably not a hill that Democrats (who probably don't even have the standing--they do not control the House) should want to fight and die on. Trump or his spokespeople, presumably, can loudly list to the American public what exactly these things were funding and ask, so are these what Congress authorized the agencies fund? Do the American people approve of these projects? The truism about foreign aid used to be that people didn't like foreign aid in general, until they heard what they were funding. I think this is exactly the opposite--plenty of dubious things are being funded that the more details they know, the more likely they'll be outraged. One might say that many babies may be thrown out with the bathwater, but, if there are worthy projects that the American public would approve of, the defenders of USAID can presumably back themseves up with the specifics when the facts are being thrown into the light of public scrutiny.
"the defenders of USAID can presumably back themse[l]ves up with the specifics when the facts are being thrown into the light of public scrutiny"
The only light I've seen has come from news organizations, not the Trump/Musk team. Completely halting operations based on unsubstantiated tweets is reckless. I support the elimination of waste and corruption, I know that it's widespread, and I agree with criticisms of the Democrats, but the idea that the overhaul can't be done in a more considered and transparent way is not credible. I also think that the notion that the Trump administration will do so with integrity and respect for our Constitution is a pipe dream.
There are clear signs already that the Trump administration is setting things up for billionaires to do what billionaires do without oversight or accountability - removing inspectors general, ignoring statutory requirements, allowing U.S. companies to bribe foreign officials to get business (1), etc.
In this ATW episode, Matt Taibbi started to express some mild concerns about these things, but Walter Kirn interrupted him (as usual) to straighten him out.
A lot of dubious projects funded by USAID have come to the light, including many listed by Taibbi and Kirn. I actually have some personal connections to USAID to know the particulars of a few worthwhile projects that it, at least, used to fund in 1990s and 2000s, the kind of projects promoting public health and literacy in the developing world that the American public would probably feel are good things. I found it odd that the defenders of USAID are NOT talking about these much, which makes me wonder what the priorities of the USAID defenders are nowadays.
I mentioned some of the good things USAID has done in other comments, though I wouldn't be surprised if all their projects were ultimately aimed at increasing U.S. corporate access to resources and markets in foreign countries.
I just read an article by Lee Fang (1) that refers to an article in The Guardian from September, 2024 (2), about the U.S. government's involvement with an organization that compiles personal data on opponents of pesticides in order to help smear them. USAID was indirectly involved.
As the wrecking ball continues to hammer the deep state, I can't help thinking how long
before people start to notice that, although the hammering is highly amusing and even soul-satisfying, the day-to-day crap of the last four years (like inflation and joblessness) is not changing at all.
Also, as far as I know, Musk hasn't published any data about the waste and corruption that was supposedly found by his tech-bro squad. I don't doubt that it exists, but the lack of transparency isn't a good sign. They were given complete access to the U.S. Treasury payment system and so far all we've seen is the complete censoring of the USAID website and some snarky tweets from Musk.
Any time a government says "Just trust us!", we should distrust them. In fact, we should always distrust them - that's the basis of the Constitution.
I'm not sure if access to the U.S. Treasury's payment system was paused by a judge - I've lost track of the different court orders. But they had some time to look into it and as I said, I don't know of any concrete information that they've made available to the public (though some news sites have). Maybe they will in time, but effectively shutting down organizations without telling the public any details doesn't inspire my trust.
'Legal challenges to the Department of Government Efficiency. On Saturday, a federal judge blocked the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) staff from accessing the Treasury Department’s payment systems. U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer ruled that only “civil servants with a need for access to perform their job duties” may use the system, while special government employees are explicitly barred. The ruling will remain in place until at least this Friday, when another judge will hear arguments in a case brought by 19 Democratic state attorneys general challenging DOGE’s access to the Treasury’s system.'
You can look up a lot of it for yourself at https://www.usaspending.gov/search. There's a banner at the top that the recipient filter is problematical at the moment (gee, I wonder why) but you can still poke around and see some pretty amazing things.
I believe the point of getting into the payment system was tracking were the money actually went, not just where it was ostensibly intended to go.
Also, they've only been at this for a few days. Hopefully at some point, there will be some sort of reporting by DOGE as a result.
Yes, Matt Taibbi mentioned usaspending.gov, but Musk should be the one providing concrete evidence for the claims he uses to justify his draconian approach. Expecting the public to peruse an immense database to find justification for Musk's approach isn't reasonable.
There don't seem to be many Trump/Musk supporters who are concerned about the "shoot first, provide evidence later" approach.
Speaking of Elon Musk, X just suspended the account of "Going Underground" (1), which said the reason was that they suggested that Trump wants to take over Gaza because of its rich oil and gas resources. The explanation provided by X was the same type of vague explanation that Twitter used to justify canceling accounts. I don't know if Matt has or will commented on this.
I think too many people have a naive view of the presidency: that if they just elect the right person, he/she will wave a magic wand that casts a powerful spell capable of quickly fixing the nation's problems. When more than a few weeks goes by without noticeable improvement, the "honeymoon" sours and the voters become impatient and disappointed. Unfortunately, our politicians, who often treat their constituents (us) as if we were a bunch of ignorant and silly children, tend to encourage this simplistic attitude.
As long as we continue to worship credentialism and “experts”, we’ll always have a Deep State. The individuals may be different, but the power- and rent-seeking will go on.
Friends are telling me that Politico received it's suspicious USAID funding as "high tier" subscriptions.
(Nowadays most scientific literature is behind firewalls and require institutions, or individuals, to pay high amounts for access. Although you can buy individual articles. Many older scientists remember the days when you could contact the corresponding author with a post card or e-mail and he would happily send you a copy, a common courtesy to those interested in the work. In academic departments there were always arguments about which journals to subscribe with limited departmental funds).
I'm a cynic, and I worked in government (NIH). There seems a massive migration at present of State Media stenographers to Substack (which was trashed by these same people not so long ago). My guess is many of these propagandists will do well on the "high tier (outrageous) " subscription models supported by our "public servants", elected and bureaucrats, and some academic institutions and libraries. They won't be using their own money from home. They will be using taxpayer money and government working time for the high tier subscription costs. I doubt they will even read the articles, the point will be to keep government agency mouthpieces gainfully employed and their articles at the top of the news. After watching our politicians' vastly over-paid book deals, speeches/ seminars, artwork, charities, business ventures and being paid by lobbyists for favorable legislation and votes, etc, it will be easy for the Establishment to justify massively overpaid subscriptions to so-called journalists.
Isn't academic publishing moving to the public library of science model? ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PLOS ) Re "using taxpayer money and government working time for the high tier (substack) subscription costs", maybe, but it won't happen on a Trump or future Trumpian/America First watch.
It's true that there are a few scientific journals that publish articles without paying "publication costs" and some invite comments on line. It's a great model; generally the best work will be found regardless of where published. However the highest prestige journals, which can determine careers, are usually difficult for submitted articles to be published, the acceptance rate after peer review ranges across journals from 1% to 93% (according to Elsevier); the most exclusive are usually considered the best.
Pre-prints (not peer-reviewed) became popular during Covid since the science was heavily censored and final peer-reviewed articles were stopped if they disagreed with the Official Narratives. Most of the important work on Covid was published in pre-print form. If important, and not reproducible by other scientists, the scientific community will raise objections.
Will be interesting to see how much of this "soft corruption" is stopped. Corruption is often the most profitable approach with the course of least resistance. Largely bipartisan, at least in the past.
It's always been such a racket! The journals get the content for free and sell the same content back to academia at high prices. Now, one hears that even some of the most prestigious medical journals have been captured by big pharma. Maybe RFK Jr. will drain this part of the swamp.
Long before I became a grad student, scientists were paid by the journals for their articles. The owners of the journals eventually accepted advertising, much from Pharma, and later charged the authors to publish their work (making some papers "advertisements".)
Although not covered much by State Media, a clinical study contractor accused Pfizer of fraud with their Covid vaccine trial results. The FDA was not responsive to the whistleblower's complaint, so she eventually wrote to the British Medical Journal (prestigious!) who investigated and agreed with her. State Media attacked the BMJ as a non-credible source, like the National Enquirer (or NY Times).
bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635
bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635/rapid-responses
How heart warming to see these two hardened journalist place so much child-like faith in Elon Musk and Donald Trump. Kirn’s reference to Martin Luther seemed wholly appropriate; if you believe these two, Musk and Trump are doing God’s work. At one point Matt even showed how much he identified with their cause and used the pronoun ‘We,’ so much for journalistic independence. It would be one thing to say let’s get out the popcorn and watch the sh*t show that will ensue from Musk’s nighttime raids— but instead these two really seem to believe that Musk is the second coming of Ralph Nader. And that sunshine and transparency is his ultimate goal. You’d think after selling Musk to us as a free speech maverick at Twitter, and then watching him turn X into his private megaphone / rightwing cudgel, Taibbi would have learned his lesson. Creepy.
If it's not obvious that Musk saved free speech with his purchase of Twitter/X then you don't reside in the real world.. I mean adding that corporation to his already overflowing corporate ownership plate was the last thing he needed, but he understood clearly if he didn't then Free speech was doomed Globally.. all the litigation he was immediately engulfed in from Europe to South America where censorship rained supreme..?! you think the richest man in the world needed that crap?
and now Musk - Trump DOGE performing emergency surgery on probably the most dangerously bloated and corrupt bureaucracy on planet Earth, the USAID - US government.. for which he's donating his time... you view this it's just another cynical right wing ploy?
.. It's certainly not Matt and Walter that are confused here ... it's you Alex...
I often wonder if these people ask themselves a simple question. Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, with a stated goal of making humanity interplanetary is wasting his precious time trying to make government more efficient. Why would he be doing this if he didn't think it was important. Right now the federal government adds $1T of new debt every 100 days, at what point does it become an emergency that we should all hope to be fixed.
They also forget that if not for the judge in delaware, who forced him to complete the twitter purchase. The same judge who also tried to take away his Tesla pay package, last year. Elon probably would've moved on to other things by now. It's their comeuppance for trying to punish a man who has singular focus and is unrelenting when he puts his mind to it.
Seems like you drank the Kool-Aide. He’s a big hypocrite. He immediately started to deplatform anyone who crossed him, including, very ironically, Matt Taibbi. And then there were journalists whose accounts were closed simply for criticizing Musk or because he dislikes their politics. And he gave the green light to China and India to censor their critics. Meet the new boss, much worse than the old!
All major social media platforms allow the nations in which they operate to dictate the censorship rules. While I do not view Elon as a "free speech absolutist," he did shake up the system a bit by allowing some previously silenced voices back on X. Unfortunately, he is still banning, or suspending people with whom he disagrees.
Thanks for the clarification. But I would say he didn’t shake up the system a bit, he bought the damn system. And he has an agenda and is a vindictive man who thinks the rules of mere mortals don’t apply to him. This just in, Elon’s company ready to bag $400 million contract from State Dept.
You seem to be utterly detached from reality.
Non-responsive
Get those hip boots on Elon and pull that swampy rope until the truth comes out of the muck.
It's "Oy Vey" time for the grifters!
I feel like writing a version of Modern Major General in honor of their plight. But frankly that would be a bit time consuming and getting the scan right can be tricky.
I am the very model of a modern U.S. liberal
My mind's become a vegetable, and I am now an animal,
I watch my news on cable and recite Trump's crimes historical
From Pee Tapes to the Russia hoax, in order categorical.
I'm not at all acquainted, though, with matters international,
I always favor bombing over efforts diplomatical,
Diversity and equity and gender color all my views,
But ask me where the money goes, well honest, I don't have a clue.
etc.
Here’s a clue … Elon isn’t interested in protecting your money… just advancing his personal politics. Witness what he did w Twitter— he immediately deplatformed people on right who disagreed w his immigration policy
Today Townhall has a story about local county prosecutor of Presidents of the US of A, Fanni Willis, hosting an inaugural gala for her second term. Her featured guest is Rep. Jasmine Crockett. "For the Love of Justice" is the theme, and for the minimal price of $500, any of us can go.
But this is the best. There are ascending levels of contribution available, and they are identified by judicial hierarchy. According to Townhall, if you "donate" $2,500" that gets you "Municipal" status. There is "Magistrate," "District," "Circuit," "Superior," and "Supreme Justice" levels. The last one will cost you $25,000.*
The point is. Wow. How imaginative for a prosecutor to use purchasing judgeship levels as a theme for your gala.
There is absolutely NO self-awareness with these people. They are not even in the same moral universe.
They will never cooperate on any level.
*Georgia Bar Association. If true, how is this not unethical? "The appearance of impropriety . . .?"
Matt you should look at Fed bulk-buying of X and Substack subscriptions. It’s the same deal as the Politico scam. The First Amendment equivalent of ballot-stuffing.
The high point of yesterday's Super Bowl, at least for me, was having the privilege of listening to Han Solo lecture me about "freedom" & "America" while the dried up old apricot pimped Jeeps to me. There is nothing in the world that I like more than a morality sermon dreamed up by some marketing fuck & delivered by some Hollywood windbag who, just a few months ago, told me that I was a fucking racist Nazi if I didn't vote for the Kamala & Timmy Show.
The only thing that topped the shear wonderfulness of Father Solo's ramblings was the 1/2 time show where some black dude mumbled shit for 20 minutes while a crew of synchronized twitchers attempted something akin to dancing if dancing looked more like a seizure.
Then today I saw that the mumbler won a Grammy & I completely understood how Beyonce won the best country album.
I like the idea of a Ford selling a Jeep.
Honestly if you couldn’t understand what Kendrick Lamar was saying you might need your hearing checked. I watched the entire thing, not a coincidence that all the people throwing dog whistles around about
Mumbling happen to also be old, washed up, most likely white dudes who can’t handle the culture shift.
KDot killed it. One of the best halftime shows in a while.
O-kee-do-ke Pokey.
Personally Little Davey ,I've never seen a 1/2 time show, white, black or rainbow, that didn't suck ass.
KDot just sucked a little harder.
I suspect that you're quite immune to sucking by this point.
Jesus Christ that was painful to read. In your head, when you thought this out, this sounded like a clever thing to type out? You wrote it out and then were like yeah, this is it… really?
Y'know Little Davey McLurch, the thing I love about shitlib putzes like you is how the lot of you are so cookie cutter in your demeanor.
You all seem to have massive egos that are always in imminent danger of drowning in that equally massive ocean of low self esteem that burbles through your shitlib systems like hot lava.
And anyone who pricks that massive ego balloon is treated to an endless stream of prattling windbag blather.
Now listen Skippy, I don't know if Dad didn't hug you enough or Mom left you wallowing in your own stinky boom boom for too long, on too many occasions & I don't care.
In case you missed the most recent cultural shift, your team got curb stomped by a fat, orange reality show host.
If there's anything more pathetic than that, I can't think of it.
So take some advice Shmoopsie, and burrow back into your own undercarriage & spend the next 4 years tongue cleaning that plopper dispensing orifice clean until it shines. Don't come out until you can see your own reflection.
K?
Kay!
My god. What a fucking dunce you are.
During the Bush years I was maligned for being a progressive, during the Obama years I was maligned for being a conservative, during trumps first term I was a shit lib, during Biden tenure I was a MAGA degenerate, now it’s back to being a shit lib. The nice thing about you blue and red MAGA folks is your intelligence doesn’t go very far, so it’s the same old tired playbook every time. Anyone who’s different is automatically wrong/the enemy.
I know that ad hominem are all you can conjure up, but at least don’t make it sound like an adult with the education of an 8th grader wrote it. Use ChatGPT for godsake, or, sorry, GROK.
You’re literally what’s wrong with America.
Gotta mute you now, it’s like conversing with a 5th grader.
It’s always the anonymous ones who are afraid to stand behind what they say that talk the loudest.
If you really believed what you said or had any conviction you wouldn’t hide.
That’s gotta be one of the worst written, formatted set of words masquerading as English langurs I have ever seen.
Why do anonymous accounts like yours always think that using my name, which is clearly visible, is some sort of power move?
You’re too scared to stand behind what you say on the internet and use an anonymous account. Just sit this one out buddy.
No.
So, I take it you've whined to others?
Fascinating.
Any other personality quirks you'd like to share?
Does Dad stare at you, silently thinking, "Why didn't I buy the goddamn motherfucking condom?"
Also if you're looking for immaculately formatted English langurs you might want to lurk here:
https://www.eprc.asia/langurs/
Toodles McLurch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
By the way sunshine, I suspect that KPoot could release an album comprised entirely of KPoot's Toots & you'd be screaming "Masterpiece."
Fuck you’re dumb. This is why America is in the situation it is, because a larger than insignificant percentage of our population went through the same education system as you did and can’t out exactly like this.
FYI, nobody knows Nazis like Indiana Jones. Are you implying that you didn’t heed his warning?
Yep
Just saw someone say KL won five Grammy awards and a Pulitizer Prize! Don't know if that is true or false, but really ---- who cares.
I'll be listening! I'm really just killing time waiting for the unwinding of Internews though.
Waiting with baited breath as well!!
I love Walter’s point about how it’s conveniently forgotten how money is earned. The sacrifices people make to earn a living. And then to have 30% go to all sorts of programs they have no interest or stake in. And now to find out how overblown these programs have become. As he said they are obviously afraid of people putting the pieces together.
I've always heard that it would be impossible to significantly cut the cost of government because most governmental expenditures are transfer payments required by law. But, DOGE is showing that this may not be the case. It turns out that people within the Government have been making lots of micro-decisions about what to pay and what not to pay, and those micro-decisions have been made without regard to controlling costs. Examples are the individual decisions to purchase Politico subscriptions, and DOGE's finding that many payments are paid to individuals w/o social security numbers, indicating these payments are not being carefully audited for validity prior to payment. So, the ability to cut overall Federal spending may be much larger than I previously thought, which is good news considering the deficit.
How can anyone without an SS# receive federal $$$? Maybe with a storefront that was pictured in this site's last story.
Still not a peep from Matt about Trump's plan for forced displacement of Palestinians from Gaza. Despite saying in the description that they would discuss it. Although I have little faith at this point that Matt and Walter would do anything other than make excuses for the current administration, I was still holding out some hope that Matt would show some courage and speak out against this injustice.
Instead, we got the same tired formula of "look at the bad Democrat censorship"(while avoiding any discussion of Republican censorship); "look at crazy Rachel Maddow/MSNBC" (as if they matter any more); "look at this list of screwed up left-wing programs that were being funded" (without asking the obvious question of whether the list is curated--i.e. what about all the programs that push the agenda supported by the party in power). I mean, no criticism of ANYTHING that has been done in the past month by the current administration. Come on.
I remember a time when Matt would actually speak truth to power irrespective of political orientation. Now he seems completely averse to ANY criticism of the current administration. Maybe its because I defended Matt for years as he was raked over the coals for being critical of the Democrat establishment, but his is honestly one of the most depressing political sell-outs that I have witnessed.
I had cancelled my subscription back in January, because it was clear to me at that point that Matt has become little more than an apologist for the current administration in power. I decided to add an extra month just to give him a chance because I really have respected his work for decades. But the lack of any comment about the current administration openly planning ethnic cleansing is just too much to take.
I get really tired of people dragging Gaza into every single discussion. I think Matt has mentioned before why he doesn't really get into it. He has other things he's focusing on.
Me, too, but in this case, Matt posted Gaza as a subject matter for the Livestream, so was disappointed not to hear it discussed.
Ah, I missed that if so.
I would also love Walter and Matt to start being critical of the current admin. But here is my take, I don't think Matt has sold out, he isn't giving a blanket endorsement of trump. I think he is still grappling with the amount of unanswered questions he has about the previous administration and he wants to get to the bottom of those issues before moving on. Trump hasnt been in office long, give it time.
Not to mention ----- . Today Veep Vance gave a speech at the AI confab in Europe, and included in his remarks that American AI will not limit speech. Trump Zoomed into Davos and spoke up for free speech.
If your interest is 1A and censorship, the last three weeks don't look real bad. And we need to know to what extent censorship was forced upon us by the previous administration. It's not as if there was "no harm done."
Exactly. Whatever your feelings are about Gaza, the Internews story is more relevant for ATW. But it was a misleading intro by Matt.
I have regarded him as one of the few uncorrupted journalists left standing after the last 8 years, so I really hope that you are right!
Good points
I really appreciate your points! I saw a clip of Matt explaining to Sabby Sabs why he does not engage regularly with Israel/Palestine (that it's a toxic subject, it's not his area of expertise, etc.), but I don't think that holds water – for instance, he's astutely covered the U.S. insane support of Ukraine and its destabilizing effect on domestic issues, and although he lived in the area and can cite those experiences, it's not like he can't call up Glenn Greenwald, Jeremy Scahill, Max Blumenthal, or any number of other independent journalists who know this issue inside out. At this point, ignoring the issue is becoming galling.
Yes, exactly! I have been reading Matt for two decades and he has absolutely commented on numerous issues that he is not an "expert" in. Besides, the point I was trying to make isn't so much about Gaza in particular (although I do care very much about that issue), but that it is a litmus test for his willingness to critique the Trump administration as vigorously as he critiques the Biden/Democrat regime.
For example, I saw a tweet from Lee Fang several days ago that said that the CFPB is the only agency that proposed regulations to prevent "debanking", and that the actions of Trump appointee Russ Vought to close down the CFPB will provide the industry with more power to use this means of control. That was news to me and I would love to hear Matt's take on this issue. More broadly, now is when I would really appreciate his insight on the many new appointees for financial positions in the administration. I can't imagine they are all good--they never are. But he seems to have decided to just keep his head down and say the same stuff he was saying months ago.
Apologies for the tardy response! I agree 100 percent with what you wrote, though, and it’s the reason that I’m finally ending my support of Matt’s journalism. With Russiagate and the first Trump term, he really showed poise, courage, and a commitment to journalistic principles – all things that are in woeful short supply this second time around with Trump. He’s covering all these issues in the most surface-level manner possible, and for someone who has read Matt as long as you have, I find it upsetting!
And actually, as I mull this over, Matt HAS addressed the Gaza genocide...way back in Oct. 2023, and he only wrote about the (in hindsight, absurd) controversy about the NYT stating that Israel had bombed the al-Ahli Arab Hospital...and he even stated, outright, that the NYT was mistaken to have reported that. Given Israel's wholesale destruction of the entire Gaza Strip since then (to say nothing of the deliberate assassinations and targeting of journalists), it'd be wonderful if Matt revisited that article and reflected a bit.
Offering people who have been refugees for more than 4 generations isn’t the same as ethnic cleansing
Trump said just today that the US will take over Gaza, that the Palestinians have to leave, and they will not be allowed to return. That is forced displacement, which is a clear violation of the Geneva Convention.
Moving refugees from one camp to another is not a Geneva violation.
Not allowing them to return is the issue.
Does the Geneva Convention allow you to parade emaciated hostages (not even, POWs) in front of the press and your mobs to be mocked and further abused? As they are on the doorstep of freedom, and part of a "negotiation?" And the Red Cross/Crescent is part of the propaganda?
Good advice.
Something refreshing about Trump: I don’t recall him uttering “folks,” that nauseating (OBiden/KJP)-trope that for me auto-suggests “Fatherland.”
I have a solution for any Democrats whining about 86ing USAID. Apparently there are some good programs worth salvaging (world health related) that i'm sure the lion's share of us wouldn't object to continuing. So for that to happen, haul Samantha Power's ass to face Joni Ernst's DOGE committee (and Rand Paul if he's not on it) and submit to a grilling. Then toss her out on her tail, and let Ernst and co. choose a new head for a stripped down to necessities agency.
Have i mentioned that i absolutely loathe the likes of Power? The whole henhawk brigade who salivate over using the US military as their personal gladiators - Albright, Hillary, Nuland, Powers. I'm sure i've forgotten a few.
To sum it up, give Power a fair trial and hang her.
Or at a minimum, explain these non-aid expenditures and why we should have funded them.
I wonder if all the people up in arms about politico will have the same energy for Elon Musk and the massive debt he owes to the us government and American tax payer for the millions and millions of dollars he has received in grants.
I’m guessing not, because he’s “based” or whatever stupid fucking term people throw around to justify their boot licking for an actual corporatocracy.
If the government is stupid enough to provide endless grants to his businesses why wouldn’t he take them?
I think he did believe in the EV nonsense at one time, but likely it’s just become a cash cow to finance other endeavors.
My guess’s is you’ll always have an excuse to justify the exact behavior your deplore from one side when it’s coming from someone you support.
If that’s your opinion why be mad about ANYONE taking federal Money than?
He pays more taxes than anyone
Lmao. 😂
Please, PLEASE read about these things: https://itep.org/tesla-reported-zero-federal-income-tax-in-2024/.
Elon Musk to pay record-breaking $12 billion tax bill. CNBC's Robert Frank reports on Elon Musk's tax bill which is the largest in history. Musk will pay a total of $12 billion for 2021.
https://www.cnbc.com/video/2021/12/15/elon-musk-to-pay-record-high-12-billion-tax-bill.html#:~:text=on%20the%20Street-,Elon%20Musk%20to%20pay%20record%2Dbreaking%20%2412%20billion%20tax%20bill,of%20%2412%20billion%20for%202021.
"...trying to use a fire hydrant as a water fountain. " LOL, I love the analogy!
For now I am ok (for the nothing that is worth) with USAID etc spending being shut down until there's a handle on what is being spent and why. As a former public company CFO I'd be out on my ass in minutes if my org failed one audit, never mind 8 which I think was the number at the DoD, someone can correct me please if need be. As a Country our fiscal bleed is just so bad the tourniquet needs to be tight. Some appendages might fall off as a result and that might be ok. We are at that point where same old same old won't cut it any longer.
One point worth noting for Matt and Walter: the fight over whether the president has to spend the monies appropriated by Congress goes back almost literally to the beginning of the Republic. The first controversy on this front came up when Thomas Jefferson refused to spend the money appropriated by Federalist Congress to build warships. Note that, when Jefferson was refusing to spend the money, the money was specifically appropriated for certain use--build warships. How specific were the goals of the funds appropriated by Congress for USAID, I wonder?
Now, legally, there are some more modern issues here: Nixon and Democratic Congress got into fights over this so often that, in 1974, Congress passed the Impoundment Control Act (typically, after Nixon left the scene.) This led to issues, incidentally, in 2019-20, over funds for military aid to Ukraine, when Trump was allegedly not spending the appropriated money. So this is not exactly a new issue even for Trump.
What is interesting to me is whether Democrats (who don't even control Congress at this point) can pick a fight with the executive over funding unpopular and questionable (not to mention, in many cases likely illegal--would Iran-Contra be any more legal if they were done by USAID employees under false pretenses? Blumenthal (I think) sort of gave the game away when he decried how USAID money being cut off was used to fund "freedom fighters." That reminded me of Ollie North.) projects that are dubious as to whether they serve the intended aims of the appropriated funds. These aren't warships for US Navy. These aren't even javelines or whatever for Ukraine. This is probably not a hill that Democrats (who probably don't even have the standing--they do not control the House) should want to fight and die on. Trump or his spokespeople, presumably, can loudly list to the American public what exactly these things were funding and ask, so are these what Congress authorized the agencies fund? Do the American people approve of these projects? The truism about foreign aid used to be that people didn't like foreign aid in general, until they heard what they were funding. I think this is exactly the opposite--plenty of dubious things are being funded that the more details they know, the more likely they'll be outraged. One might say that many babies may be thrown out with the bathwater, but, if there are worthy projects that the American public would approve of, the defenders of USAID can presumably back themseves up with the specifics when the facts are being thrown into the light of public scrutiny.
"the defenders of USAID can presumably back themse[l]ves up with the specifics when the facts are being thrown into the light of public scrutiny"
The only light I've seen has come from news organizations, not the Trump/Musk team. Completely halting operations based on unsubstantiated tweets is reckless. I support the elimination of waste and corruption, I know that it's widespread, and I agree with criticisms of the Democrats, but the idea that the overhaul can't be done in a more considered and transparent way is not credible. I also think that the notion that the Trump administration will do so with integrity and respect for our Constitution is a pipe dream.
There are clear signs already that the Trump administration is setting things up for billionaires to do what billionaires do without oversight or accountability - removing inspectors general, ignoring statutory requirements, allowing U.S. companies to bribe foreign officials to get business (1), etc.
In this ATW episode, Matt Taibbi started to express some mild concerns about these things, but Walter Kirn interrupted him (as usual) to straighten him out.
[1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/pausing-foreign-corrupt-practices-act-enforcement-to-further-american-economic-and-national-security/
A lot of dubious projects funded by USAID have come to the light, including many listed by Taibbi and Kirn. I actually have some personal connections to USAID to know the particulars of a few worthwhile projects that it, at least, used to fund in 1990s and 2000s, the kind of projects promoting public health and literacy in the developing world that the American public would probably feel are good things. I found it odd that the defenders of USAID are NOT talking about these much, which makes me wonder what the priorities of the USAID defenders are nowadays.
I mentioned some of the good things USAID has done in other comments, though I wouldn't be surprised if all their projects were ultimately aimed at increasing U.S. corporate access to resources and markets in foreign countries.
I just read an article by Lee Fang (1) that refers to an article in The Guardian from September, 2024 (2), about the U.S. government's involvement with an organization that compiles personal data on opponents of pesticides in order to help smear them. USAID was indirectly involved.
[1] https://www.leefang.com/p/usaid-funded-censorship-smears-of
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/sep/26/government-funded-social-network-attacking-pesticide-critics
Well done. I like to read things that don’t have dog whistles, jargon, and clichés embedded in it! And the point is clear, and valid.
As the wrecking ball continues to hammer the deep state, I can't help thinking how long
before people start to notice that, although the hammering is highly amusing and even soul-satisfying, the day-to-day crap of the last four years (like inflation and joblessness) is not changing at all.
Also, as far as I know, Musk hasn't published any data about the waste and corruption that was supposedly found by his tech-bro squad. I don't doubt that it exists, but the lack of transparency isn't a good sign. They were given complete access to the U.S. Treasury payment system and so far all we've seen is the complete censoring of the USAID website and some snarky tweets from Musk.
Any time a government says "Just trust us!", we should distrust them. In fact, we should always distrust them - that's the basis of the Constitution.
Wasn't their deeper access stymied by some court or other?
I'm not sure if access to the U.S. Treasury's payment system was paused by a judge - I've lost track of the different court orders. But they had some time to look into it and as I said, I don't know of any concrete information that they've made available to the public (though some news sites have). Maybe they will in time, but effectively shutting down organizations without telling the public any details doesn't inspire my trust.
Just ran across this:
'Legal challenges to the Department of Government Efficiency. On Saturday, a federal judge blocked the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) staff from accessing the Treasury Department’s payment systems. U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer ruled that only “civil servants with a need for access to perform their job duties” may use the system, while special government employees are explicitly barred. The ruling will remain in place until at least this Friday, when another judge will hear arguments in a case brought by 19 Democratic state attorneys general challenging DOGE’s access to the Treasury’s system.'
https://www.readtangle.com/the-legal-fight-over-doges-budget-cuts/
You can look up a lot of it for yourself at https://www.usaspending.gov/search. There's a banner at the top that the recipient filter is problematical at the moment (gee, I wonder why) but you can still poke around and see some pretty amazing things.
I believe the point of getting into the payment system was tracking were the money actually went, not just where it was ostensibly intended to go.
Also, they've only been at this for a few days. Hopefully at some point, there will be some sort of reporting by DOGE as a result.
Yes, Matt Taibbi mentioned usaspending.gov, but Musk should be the one providing concrete evidence for the claims he uses to justify his draconian approach. Expecting the public to peruse an immense database to find justification for Musk's approach isn't reasonable.
There don't seem to be many Trump/Musk supporters who are concerned about the "shoot first, provide evidence later" approach.
Speaking of Elon Musk, X just suspended the account of "Going Underground" (1), which said the reason was that they suggested that Trump wants to take over Gaza because of its rich oil and gas resources. The explanation provided by X was the same type of vague explanation that Twitter used to justify canceling accounts. I don't know if Matt has or will commented on this.
[1] https://www.rt.com/news/612524-x-suspends-going-underground/
Apparently, there's a report somewhere, but in the two articles in this paper, I did not see a direct link to it. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2025/feb/6/white-house-flags-nearly-200-million-questionable-/
I think too many people have a naive view of the presidency: that if they just elect the right person, he/she will wave a magic wand that casts a powerful spell capable of quickly fixing the nation's problems. When more than a few weeks goes by without noticeable improvement, the "honeymoon" sours and the voters become impatient and disappointed. Unfortunately, our politicians, who often treat their constituents (us) as if we were a bunch of ignorant and silly children, tend to encourage this simplistic attitude.
As long as we continue to worship credentialism and “experts”, we’ll always have a Deep State. The individuals may be different, but the power- and rent-seeking will go on.