In fact, it costs much more than it even claimed to save, at the end, when it was down to claiming a tiny fraction of what 47's Mini-Me claimed at first.

"DOGE" is pronounced "douche", BTW.

Needles wrote on 05/31/25 at 15:14:00:


Not true. And while harsh, Jog’s comments are correct.

 I would say DOGE has saved money, but minimal and nowhere near what they claimed.  There are some manipulation tactics at work and I will see if I can discuss them without creating a conflict of interest with one of my contractors.




You believe what you want. I'll stick to truth, with evidence.


 I don't think you will.  Here is my evidence with included reference:


Needles: I want the SOB and his sycophants GONE. If I have to lie to get rid of him, so be it.

http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1746048661/180

MAGA is who began the whole "lying abut it is ok as long as it works" idea. Y'all don't like it when others use the same game plan.


 I disagree, I think the double standard in regard to accepting lies from one political party over another has been around much longer.  It is true however that humans will be more accepting of lies that come from sources they prefer and tend to ignore that they are being lied to.

 I have specifically referenced inaccuracies about pro-Trump information, including pointing out when he lied himself, with references to accurate data.

 You can see here that just the other day I clearly indicate that a lying post about how there is no requirement for due process for immigrants is incorrect and provide references for my assessment.  That lie will most likely be ignored by the member that posted it.

http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1748866167/15


 My post was indicating you simply do not check the accuracy of your information and attempt to defend it with zero evidence.  Your defense for this is to say you are lying on purpose instead of just acknowledging a portion of your information is wrong.  This of course eradicates any credibility in your posts.  So how can there really be a discussion (instead of a b!tch session) about DOGE "savings" versus cost?

 Your defense is to now pull the old "But Billy broke TWO windows!" to defend Bobby breaking one window.  

 You are just wrong about some things, we all are, there is no need to try to claim you were lying on purpose then make a feeble attempt to blame that on other people.  

What am I "wrong" about?

 I am addressing the things I have brought up in your posts, not all other things I have not addressed.

 The primary example is your 47's USA thread.  There's multiple discrepancies and some flat out incorrect information, which is bound to happen when we copy/paste information we get online.  I eventually decided I would point out some obvious ones since it was getting more frequent.  For instance the Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum quote that has been proven false and circulated with small changes for over 8 years.

 Another example is your assessment of "Treason" and how it is applied in US law.  

 Another is an incorrect application of the 14th Amendment, saying "47 is in office illegally" except the fact not one Republican legal advisor has brought this up in an actual court document either indicates you know more about the law than all anti-Trump lawyers combined, or your source that you repeated is wrong.

 Another is your incorrect assessment of how the US Senate acts in regard to impeachment of a sitting President.  You insisted there is another process that simply does not exist and there is no reference or examples of, again because it does not exist.  

 Your response to this was to say "If I have to lie to get rid of him, so be it."  Justifying this stance with the very weak "But Billy broke TWO windows" defense of stating Trump lies more than you.  That's your foundation - comparing your amount of lies to Trump?

 Bottom line is instead of just facing the fact that the 14th does not apply in the way you copied from another source, and that you did not understand, or look at, the Senate procedures for impeachment - you just claim you are lying on purpose.  And that it makes sense because Trump lies so much more.  It is unlikely anybody believes you lied on purpose instead of not knowing the accuracy of your argument before making it.  

You can go ahead and bring up more accurate information but none of that will address the inaccurate information you posted and defended.  It's no big deal, nobody will lose any sleep over it. 
 

You keep referencing how Treason is applied in US law--- I maintain that no President has ever been a traitor, as evidenced by the coup attempt, and no known felon has ever held the office, so precedent is worthless.

 There is no need for precedent.  No different set of standards for the POTUS exists.  You just want there to be.  The same standards for Treason and how it is applied to any US citizen is identical to the POTUS.  Or you are right and all other legal experts working for the Democratic party are wrong.


Don Taco has never been "acquitted" of anything. The Senate failed to convict because of the sycophant vote. That's closer to a hung jury than acquittal, and you should know it.

 Incorrect.  A majority vote by the US Senate, according to the US Constitution, is either a guilty verdict or an acquittal.  There is no other option besides Yes or No.  You just want there to be one.  Not liking the outcome does not change how the US Constitution is applied in this case.  


I've never said I'm infallible.  NEITHER ARE YOU, AND YOUR INABILITY TO GRASP THE SUBJECT SHOWS THAT.

All I'm doing is pointing out that the MAJORITY of the US wants Don Taco GONE.  He's an evil b@stard, and should not be let anywhere near a government office.

 I'm just pointing out you are reposting provably false information, or defending, poorly, incorrect assessments of your own.  You want to talk about an inability to grasp the subject, just look at how you still refuse to accept the US Senate's delegated authority and admissible outcomes exist in the US Constitution.

 Your arguments against Trump would go much further if they were truthful.  Saying other people lie more than you do is a tremendously poor argument and you know that.  It's like saying your charting sucks and you falsify patient records, but everyone else has worse charting and lies more than you do.

I post some things for information. I post some things for humor. I post some things just to make someone think. If that distresses you, perhaps you should learn the difference between the three. I understand the MAGA distrust of learning anything is getting in your way. One thing I have learned: ANY MAGA accusation is actually a confession of what they themselves are doing, or would if given the chance. MAGATs also seem to think "precedent" is a legal out, since they do not understand what it is for in the legal world.

37 "spiritual leaders" were arrested for pedophile related charges just in Tennessee last year. ALL were MAGATs. ALL of them are on record condemning "libruls" for attempting to "groom" children.

47 won't release the Epstein files BECAUSE HE IN IN THEM.

The Jack Smith investigation found plenty of evidence 47 had broken multiple laws. 47 was found to have broken several laws, even though his own self-appointed SC tried to shield him for "official acts." He has been impeached twice, even though the sycophants in the GOP Senate refused to admit his guilt.

He's still an elected guilty felon. There is no "precedent" for that. Period.

Unrelated question: Why wasn't JOG's first post on this thread deleted outright for breaking the rules?