We need a general tweet of the day thread
Comments
-
-
Some more America First from the dementia patient.
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2022/04/11/biden-has-given-1-billion-to-taliban-controlled-afghanistan-n1588740
The Taliban quickly took over Afghanistan as Joe Biden rushed U.S. forces out of the country in time for a 9/11 photo op. But just because the terror group is now in control, doesn’t mean the Biden administration has stopped pouring American taxpayers’ treasure into Afghanistan.
According to Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, Joe Biden “has dispatched $1 billion of American taxpayer money to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan” in the six months following America’s botched withdrawal.
“At an aid conference hosted by the UN, the UK, Germany and the Islamic terror state of Qatar, which backs the Taliban, $2.4 billion was raised for Afghanistan,” Greenfield explains. “The hosts had demanded over $4.4 billion, which would have been the largest amount ever raised for any nation.”
The Biden administration contributed another $204 million, which was on top of $782 million in “humanitarian aid” already given to Afghanistan last year after the Taliban took control of the country. “This year, Biden signed an executive order allocating $3.5 billion of the Afghan assets held in the Federal Reserve for the same purpose. But even not counting those funds, Biden has dedicated $986 million to Afghanistan since the Taliban took over.”
Greenfield dismisses the Biden administration’s claims that this money won’t go to the Taliban. “That’s as plausible as its previous claims that the Afghan government wouldn’t collapse, that if it did we would be ready, and that all Americans would be evacuated before Kabul fell to the enemy.” [Translation: I won't come in your mouth]
Related: The Price of Incompetence: State Department Says ‘Dozens’ of Americans Still Stuck in Afghanistan
America has poured a lot of money into Afghanistan over the past twenty years, and the Taliban has managed to get their hands on quite a bit of it. But can anyone explain why our tax dollars are still being sent over there, when we know they will ultimately go toward funding jihad against us? -
Good to see that the state of Oregon worker's chipped in and suffered through the lockdowns like the small business sector.
https://enewspo.oregonlive.com/data/18492/reader/reader.html?t=1649785134550#!preferred/0/package/18492/pub/27816/page/1/alb/849134
-
My guess is they have damning pics, emails and texts.WestlinnDuck said:Some more America First from the dementia patient.
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2022/04/11/biden-has-given-1-billion-to-taliban-controlled-afghanistan-n1588740
The Taliban quickly took over Afghanistan as Joe Biden rushed U.S. forces out of the country in time for a 9/11 photo op. But just because the terror group is now in control, doesn’t mean the Biden administration has stopped pouring American taxpayers’ treasure into Afghanistan.
According to Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, Joe Biden “has dispatched $1 billion of American taxpayer money to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan” in the six months following America’s botched withdrawal.
“At an aid conference hosted by the UN, the UK, Germany and the Islamic terror state of Qatar, which backs the Taliban, $2.4 billion was raised for Afghanistan,” Greenfield explains. “The hosts had demanded over $4.4 billion, which would have been the largest amount ever raised for any nation.”
The Biden administration contributed another $204 million, which was on top of $782 million in “humanitarian aid” already given to Afghanistan last year after the Taliban took control of the country. “This year, Biden signed an executive order allocating $3.5 billion of the Afghan assets held in the Federal Reserve for the same purpose. But even not counting those funds, Biden has dedicated $986 million to Afghanistan since the Taliban took over.”
Greenfield dismisses the Biden administration’s claims that this money won’t go to the Taliban. “That’s as plausible as its previous claims that the Afghan government wouldn’t collapse, that if it did we would be ready, and that all Americans would be evacuated before Kabul fell to the enemy.” [Translation: I won't come in your mouth]
Related: The Price of Incompetence: State Department Says ‘Dozens’ of Americans Still Stuck in Afghanistan
America has poured a lot of money into Afghanistan over the past twenty years, and the Taliban has managed to get their hands on quite a bit of it. But can anyone explain why our tax dollars are still being sent over there, when we know they will ultimately go toward funding jihad against us? -
This is CNN. I've said leftards don't do economics. They don't do real news either. They should have just put the money in a pile and burned it.
https://ace.mu.nu/
CNN Plus Was "Projected" to Garner 2 Million Subscribers In Its First Year;
Actual Current Users Per Day: Ten Thousand.
—Ace
CNN Plus more like CNN Minus am i right
That's 10,000 total users per day.
For comparison, David French's wife has 40,000 users per day and she's totally uncute.
As a friend points out, most of their "subscriptions" at this point are probably free promotional ones.
13 CNN+, the CNN of news networks. Posted by: Dr Spank
They're bracing for layoffs.
And they just started up like a week ago.
Investment and projections for CNN+ are expected to be cut dramatically in response to a low adoption rate, two sources tell Axios.
By the numbers: The news giant was initially planning to invest around $1 billion in the service over the next four years.
Hundreds of millions of dollars are expected to be cut from that original investment total.
To date, around $300 million has been spent on the subscription service, which includes a sizable marketing investment.
The new company's leadership team still has yet to decide the ultimate fate of CNN+. CNN's new boss, Chris Licht, will start May 1.
Details: CNN executives, with help from consulting firm McKinsey, originally expected to bring in around 2 million subscribers in the U.S. in the service's first year and 15-18 million after four years.
They originally planned for the service to break even after four years.
Axios reports that CNN will start offering clips or something on the free channel Roku (for cord-cutters; it's the box I have).
They say that that will drive subscribers to CNN Minus.
Um, why? Why would that happen? Why would someone seeing some clips of CNN on Roku decide to pay money for CNN Minus? People see CNN on regular cable and are not tempted at all to subscribe to CNN Minus.
More from CNBC:
Fewer than 10,000 people are using CNN+ on a daily basis two weeks into its existence, according to people familiar with the matter.
The people spoke with CNBC on the condition of anonymity in order to discuss nonpublic data.
I've got more bad news for CNN Minus: The people leaking this are probably the new management of Discovery/Warner.
They are probably leaking this to justify the brutal layoffs (or complete shut-down) to come. -
-
-
When you print money and make it rain like a pimp at a strip club. I got stories.WestlinnDuck said:Good to see that the state of Oregon worker's chipped in and suffered through the lockdowns like the small business sector.
https://enewspo.oregonlive.com/data/18492/reader/reader.html?t=1649785134550#!preferred/0/package/18492/pub/27816/page/1/alb/849134 -
Chris Wallace. Nice move ya hack.WestlinnDuck said:This is CNN. I've said leftards don't do economics. They don't do real news either. They should have just put the money in a pile and burned it.
https://ace.mu.nu/
CNN Plus Was "Projected" to Garner 2 Million Subscribers In Its First Year;
Actual Current Users Per Day: Ten Thousand.
—Ace
CNN Plus more like CNN Minus am i right
That's 10,000 total users per day.
For comparison, David French's wife has 40,000 users per day and she's totally uncute.
As a friend points out, most of their "subscriptions" at this point are probably free promotional ones.
13 CNN+, the CNN of news networks. Posted by: Dr Spank
They're bracing for layoffs.
And they just started up like a week ago.
Investment and projections for CNN+ are expected to be cut dramatically in response to a low adoption rate, two sources tell Axios.
By the numbers: The news giant was initially planning to invest around $1 billion in the service over the next four years.
Hundreds of millions of dollars are expected to be cut from that original investment total.
To date, around $300 million has been spent on the subscription service, which includes a sizable marketing investment.
The new company's leadership team still has yet to decide the ultimate fate of CNN+. CNN's new boss, Chris Licht, will start May 1.
Details: CNN executives, with help from consulting firm McKinsey, originally expected to bring in around 2 million subscribers in the U.S. in the service's first year and 15-18 million after four years.
They originally planned for the service to break even after four years.
Axios reports that CNN will start offering clips or something on the free channel Roku (for cord-cutters; it's the box I have).
They say that that will drive subscribers to CNN Minus.
Um, why? Why would that happen? Why would someone seeing some clips of CNN on Roku decide to pay money for CNN Minus? People see CNN on regular cable and are not tempted at all to subscribe to CNN Minus.
More from CNBC:
Fewer than 10,000 people are using CNN+ on a daily basis two weeks into its existence, according to people familiar with the matter.
The people spoke with CNBC on the condition of anonymity in order to discuss nonpublic data.
I've got more bad news for CNN Minus: The people leaking this are probably the new management of Discovery/Warner.
They are probably leaking this to justify the brutal layoffs (or complete shut-down) to come. -
-
That had to make @MelloDawg cry. Big meanie interrupting his god Klaus Schwab's address.LoneStarDawg said:
-
-
-
They just need more time to get their liars in there.WestlinnDuck said:This is CNN. I've said leftards don't do economics. They don't do real news either. They should have just put the money in a pile and burned it.
https://ace.mu.nu/
CNN Plus Was "Projected" to Garner 2 Million Subscribers In Its First Year;
Actual Current Users Per Day: Ten Thousand.
—Ace
CNN Plus more like CNN Minus am i right
That's 10,000 total users per day.
For comparison, David French's wife has 40,000 users per day and she's totally uncute.
As a friend points out, most of their "subscriptions" at this point are probably free promotional ones.
13 CNN+, the CNN of news networks. Posted by: Dr Spank
They're bracing for layoffs.
And they just started up like a week ago.
Investment and projections for CNN+ are expected to be cut dramatically in response to a low adoption rate, two sources tell Axios.
By the numbers: The news giant was initially planning to invest around $1 billion in the service over the next four years.
Hundreds of millions of dollars are expected to be cut from that original investment total.
To date, around $300 million has been spent on the subscription service, which includes a sizable marketing investment.
The new company's leadership team still has yet to decide the ultimate fate of CNN+. CNN's new boss, Chris Licht, will start May 1.
Details: CNN executives, with help from consulting firm McKinsey, originally expected to bring in around 2 million subscribers in the U.S. in the service's first year and 15-18 million after four years.
They originally planned for the service to break even after four years.
Axios reports that CNN will start offering clips or something on the free channel Roku (for cord-cutters; it's the box I have).
They say that that will drive subscribers to CNN Minus.
Um, why? Why would that happen? Why would someone seeing some clips of CNN on Roku decide to pay money for CNN Minus? People see CNN on regular cable and are not tempted at all to subscribe to CNN Minus.
More from CNBC:
Fewer than 10,000 people are using CNN+ on a daily basis two weeks into its existence, according to people familiar with the matter.
The people spoke with CNBC on the condition of anonymity in order to discuss nonpublic data.
I've got more bad news for CNN Minus: The people leaking this are probably the new management of Discovery/Warner.
They are probably leaking this to justify the brutal layoffs (or complete shut-down) to come. -
-
-
-
-
-
Chris Wallace may be the biggest faggot in all of North AmericaRaceBannon said: -
-
Anything to keep an eye off Biden
Rage against the machine had it right back in the 90s.
Hell most people did. It went really awry around 2010
Talk about "progress"
Go fuck yourselves leftists. -
The responses are golden. bUt OiL aNd GaS kIlL mOrE!LebamDawg said: -
Replies are priceless.PurpleThrobber said: -
-
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NAAzBArYdw
