pull down to refresh

Editorial Board at the WSJ has been out swinging lately. Day before yesterday this, and an opinion piece on the trillion-dollar fraud at the center of U.S. gov.
Yesterday, some taking stock of mainstream/corporate media nonsense and sandbox play at the top of gov echelons:
Remember when eliminating government waste, fraud and abuse was a bipartisan goal? Well, now that Elon Musk is trying to do that, Democrats and their friends in the press say his Department of Government Efficiency is tilting at windmills. “At Oval Office, Musk Makes Broad Claims of Federal Fraud Without Proof,” said a New York Times headline this week. The White House retorted: “Apparently, the Times and other like-minded outlets lack access to a newfangled research tool called Google.”
A government audit agency itself said last year that there's about half a trillion in fraud.
[The Government Accountability Office] earlier estimated that 11% to 15% of unemployment benefits during the pandemic were fraudulent, totalling between $100 billion and $135 billion. Some went to transnational gangs, prisoners and state-sponsored hackers. The Labor Department inspector general estimated at least $191 billion in improper pandemic unemployment payments.
IRS** improper payments increased under Mr. Biden, no doubt because it’s harder to stop fraud when so much more money is flying out the door.** Biden officials also eased income verification for ObamaCare subsidies, Medicaid and other welfare programs. The Health and Human Services Department last year estimated $85 billion in “improper payments” in Medicare and Medicaid.

"The political left’s hostility to Mr. Musk’s antifraud campaign is hard to understand. But the partisan times are such that if Mr. Musk said the sky is blue, liberals would probably also say he has no proof."

Totally.
We live in insane times. (some would say "clownsy" times, #760879).
Democratic Party died with JFK
reply
that's like saying the Bolshevik party died with Lenin
reply
I’m not sure I follow. I heard of Bolshevik and Lenin but my historical knowledge on them and their movement I am ignorant to
reply
i'll chime in on this since I am basically the basic SN russian news and history guy.
Lenin was the father of the Russian revolution, when the board social democrates fell out, a bit like in the block wars, they formed two parties, mensheviks and bolsheviks (loosely meaning minority and majority). Lenin headed the bolsheviks and eventually, they came out on top and established the Soviet Union.
now when Lenin died, the party lived on of course, so he's just saying the death of a leader doesn't mean the death of a movement
reply
I hate the word Russian Revolution
Lenin was the leader of the October Revolution (which happened in November) or the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917
reply
very good summary
Lenin died in 1924 and there was a power struggle between Stalin and Trotsky to succeed him, Stalin won, Trotsky was assassinated in Mexico
Some people say that Stalin deviated from Lenin, that Stalin was a monster but Lenin was not. I disagree. Both were ruthless, by any means necessary, the end justifies anything
reply
they were both shitbags , probably Stalin was worse but then again, we don't know what would have happened if Lenin had lived and didn't die early.
But this was against the Russian monarchy right?
reply
Nyet means nyet...
The Russian czar or tsar was overthrown in March (February Revolution) 1917.
Nicholas abdicated on March 15, 1917
1917 February Revolution end of monarchy 1917 October Revolution
1918 Russian Civil War: Reds vs Whites Romanov family executed in 1918 Bolsheviks prevailed in 1922
they were against the monarchy and capitalism yes. they forced Nicholas the 2nd to abdicate and later, when the bolsheviks were in control, executed him and his whole family, including the kids (it was a secret execution).
Nancy Pelosi purchased Tempus AI call options last month.
The stock is up 183% since her purchase.
WatcherGuru
reply