The Trump Presidency

[Pete]

BREAKING: US Justice Department drops corruption case against NY City mayor Eric Adams

Can’t wait for the spin on this one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx25m165y44o


ON THE CONTRARY! This is JUST like how Kevin Costner and his cowboys used to turn bad guys into useful ranch hands on Yellowstone!!!

[Pete]

Mayor Adams is about to be the most deporting mother rough rider in the United States. He’s going to deport the eff out of people. And good luck getting that pride parade organized and secured this year in NYC.

[chum1]

The decision to abandon the Black engineering event marks a significant shift in military recruiting strategy -- and sparked calls of discrimination.

"It's f---ing racist," one active-duty Army general told Military.com on the condition of anonymity to avoid retaliation. "For the Army now, it's 'Blacks need not apply' and it breaks my heart."

While the services are pulling out of BEYA, a well-established pipeline for high-caliber STEM talent, they remain engaged with other events. Last week, the same Army recruiting unit that would have attended BEYA instead participated in a National Rifle Association-sponsored event in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, a predominantly white gathering that recruiters acknowledge is less likely to yield high-quality applicants.

 

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2025/02/10/military-drops-recruiting-efforts-prestigious-black-engineering-awards-event.html

[star seed 7]

Mayor Adams has been treated very poorly, maybe even more poorly than me. Well maybe not that poorly but pretty bad.

[Stupid Fitz]

Mayor Adams has been treated very poorly, maybe even more poorly than me. Well maybe not that poorly but pretty bad.

This is great. I can literally hear his dumbass voice reading it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pete]

Some of you dude have a lot of experience on matters of university funding and research and stuff, and I’d like your opinions on these NIH cuts on indirect costs. I have read where private grants typically give 0% for indirect, and Gates foundation gives 15%. Then read where the University of Michigan is getting upwards of 60%. I read that the new focus of Doge is to limit it to 15%, like Gates Foundation.

The conservatives allege that universities are using the bucket of indirect to fund expansion of efforts loosely or completely unrelated to the direct research mission of the grants, most notably alleging that they fund DEI hiring. That seems like a lazy accusation to me, because these universities are all very different, their research is different, their missions are different, just loads of variables.

How much bloat and abuse is there really, relative to the benefits that society gets? Clearly there has to be SOME bloat, because we have all existed in the university environment to some degree and have personally witnessed some level of “eff it, it’s grant money” type stuff.  That’s only human. 

On the other hand, it’s tough to have too much sympathy for some of these massively endowed schools.

[Cire]

Some of you dude have a lot of experience on matters of university funding and research and stuff, and I’d like your opinions on these NIH cuts on indirect costs. I have read where private grants typically give 0% for indirect, and Gates foundation gives 15%. Then read where the University of Michigan is getting upwards of 60%. I read that the new focus of Doge is to limit it to 15%, like Gates Foundation.

The conservatives allege that universities are using the bucket of indirect to fund expansion of efforts loosely or completely unrelated to the direct research mission of the grants, most notably alleging that they fund DEI hiring. That seems like a lazy accusation to me, because these universities are all very different, their research is different, their missions are different, just loads of variables.

How much bloat and abuse is there really, relative to the benefits that society gets? Clearly there has to be SOME bloat, because we have all existed in the university environment to some degree and have personally witnessed some level of “eff it, it’s grant money” type stuff.  That’s only human. 

On the other hand, it’s tough to have too much sympathy for some of these massively endowed schools.

They don't want any money to go to anyone doing anything that they don't agree with.

This is not rough ridin hard to figure out.

[Stupid Fitz]

Some of you dude have a lot of experience on matters of university funding and research and stuff, and I’d like your opinions on these NIH cuts on indirect costs. I have read where private grants typically give 0% for indirect, and Gates foundation gives 15%. Then read where the University of Michigan is getting upwards of 60%. I read that the new focus of Doge is to limit it to 15%, like Gates Foundation.

The conservatives allege that universities are using the bucket of indirect to fund expansion of efforts loosely or completely unrelated to the direct research mission of the grants, most notably alleging that they fund DEI hiring. That seems like a lazy accusation to me, because these universities are all very different, their research is different, their missions are different, just loads of variables.

How much bloat and abuse is there really, relative to the benefits that society gets? Clearly there has to be SOME bloat, because we have all existed in the university environment to some degree and have personally witnessed some level of “eff it, it’s grant money” type stuff.  That’s only human. 

On the other hand, it’s tough to have too much sympathy for some of these massively endowed schools.

They don't want any money to go to anyone doing anything that they don't agree with.

This is not rough ridin hard to figure out.

I know right. Are people really thinking there is a plan out side of punish people that follow a liberal ideology and/or opposed Trump?

[cfbandyman]

Some of you dude have a lot of experience on matters of university funding and research and stuff, and I’d like your opinions on these NIH cuts on indirect costs. I have read where private grants typically give 0% for indirect, and Gates foundation gives 15%. Then read where the University of Michigan is getting upwards of 60%. I read that the new focus of Doge is to limit it to 15%, like Gates Foundation.

The conservatives allege that universities are using the bucket of indirect to fund expansion of efforts loosely or completely unrelated to the direct research mission of the grants, most notably alleging that they fund DEI hiring. That seems like a lazy accusation to me, because these universities are all very different, their research is different, their missions are different, just loads of variables.

How much bloat and abuse is there really, relative to the benefits that society gets? Clearly there has to be SOME bloat, because we have all existed in the university environment to some degree and have personally witnessed some level of “eff it, it’s grant money” type stuff.  That’s only human. 

On the other hand, it’s tough to have too much sympathy for some of these massively endowed schools.

They don't want any money to go to anyone doing anything that they don't agree with.

This is not rough ridin hard to figure out.

Right, it has nothing to do with cutting any spending to tighten the belt. It's specifically motived.

All I know we are abdicating our leadership across the board.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Some of you dude have a lot of experience on matters of university funding and research and stuff, and I’d like your opinions on these NIH cuts on indirect costs. I have read where private grants typically give 0% for indirect, and Gates foundation gives 15%. Then read where the University of Michigan is getting upwards of 60%. I read that the new focus of Doge is to limit it to 15%, like Gates Foundation.

The conservatives allege that universities are using the bucket of indirect to fund expansion of efforts loosely or completely unrelated to the direct research mission of the grants, most notably alleging that they fund DEI hiring. That seems like a lazy accusation to me, because these universities are all very different, their research is different, their missions are different, just loads of variables.

How much bloat and abuse is there really, relative to the benefits that society gets? Clearly there has to be SOME bloat, because we have all existed in the university environment to some degree and have personally witnessed some level of “eff it, it’s grant money” type stuff.  That’s only human. 

On the other hand, it’s tough to have too much sympathy for some of these massively endowed schools.

The schools that have the higher rates tend to have med schools. I'm sure the operation and maintenance of a med school facility is very expensive. I'm not really opposed to caps, though. The 15% cap should probably be applied to schools with lower costs and some higher rate (maybe 30%) should be applied to schools with med schools and only be allowed on projects that use those facilities. K-State should probably be allowed to charge a higher rate on projects that utilize the bio-ag facility. What I don't support is changing the rate on existing contracts. Those are projects that have already been budgeted and staffed based on a contracted amount. It's fair to expect universities to adjust how they budget a project with a given rate cap. It's completely unfair to expect them to adjust to losing millions in funding on a project they have already started.

[Justwin]

Some of you dude have a lot of experience on matters of university funding and research and stuff, and I’d like your opinions on these NIH cuts on indirect costs. I have read where private grants typically give 0% for indirect, and Gates foundation gives 15%. Then read where the University of Michigan is getting upwards of 60%. I read that the new focus of Doge is to limit it to 15%, like Gates Foundation.

The conservatives allege that universities are using the bucket of indirect to fund expansion of efforts loosely or completely unrelated to the direct research mission of the grants, most notably alleging that they fund DEI hiring. That seems like a lazy accusation to me, because these universities are all very different, their research is different, their missions are different, just loads of variables.

How much bloat and abuse is there really, relative to the benefits that society gets? Clearly there has to be SOME bloat, because we have all existed in the university environment to some degree and have personally witnessed some level of “eff it, it’s grant money” type stuff.  That’s only human. 

On the other hand, it’s tough to have too much sympathy for some of these massively endowed schools.

K-State is typically 52%.

[Pete]

Some of you dude have a lot of experience on matters of university funding and research and stuff, and I’d like your opinions on these NIH cuts on indirect costs. I have read where private grants typically give 0% for indirect, and Gates foundation gives 15%. Then read where the University of Michigan is getting upwards of 60%. I read that the new focus of Doge is to limit it to 15%, like Gates Foundation.

The conservatives allege that universities are using the bucket of indirect to fund expansion of efforts loosely or completely unrelated to the direct research mission of the grants, most notably alleging that they fund DEI hiring. That seems like a lazy accusation to me, because these universities are all very different, their research is different, their missions are different, just loads of variables.

How much bloat and abuse is there really, relative to the benefits that society gets? Clearly there has to be SOME bloat, because we have all existed in the university environment to some degree and have personally witnessed some level of “eff it, it’s grant money” type stuff.  That’s only human. 

On the other hand, it’s tough to have too much sympathy for some of these massively endowed schools.

They don't want any money to go to anyone doing anything that they don't agree with.

This is not rough ridin hard to figure out.

Right, it has nothing to do with cutting any spending to tighten the belt. It's specifically motived.

All I know we are abdicating our leadership across the board.

Everything in politics is motivated by an agenda. What I’m asking is whether there is merit to the criticism that these indirect costs are alleged to be higher than they should be. It can still be a perfectly legitimate question AND serve their New World order horse crap.

For the purposes of conversation and debate, let’s just assume that everything that they do is always for this New World order horseshit .

And then let’s just also ask “do they have a point yes or no.” I’m guessing there’s a pretty good reason why the gates foundation sets it at 15%. Epstein molestation list aside, Gates knows what the eff he is doing when it comes to philanthropy, and he is a very outspoken critic of Elon Musk.

[LickNeckey]

"You know, it's supposed to be negotiated. You're supposed to cajole, get people in a room, you have Republicans, Democrats, you're supposed to get together and pass a law. He doesn't want to do that because it's too much work. So he doesn't want to work too hard. He wants to go back and play golf."

[Stupid Fitz]

"You know, it's supposed to be negotiated. You're supposed to cajole, get people in a room, you have Republicans, Democrats, you're supposed to get together and pass a law. He doesn't want to do that because it's too much work. So he doesn't want to work too hard. He wants to go back and play golf."

Is golfing 22% of his time in office so far a lot? Good thing President Elon has it all covered.

https://trumpgolftrack.com

[sonofdaxjones]

The previous sock puppet president spent more time on vacation then any other president in modern American history . . . Trump Deranged hardcore #blueanongE'r Stupid Fitz said nothing.

Reporters now joke that they actually have to work at the White House now . . . it was always sleepy time with Joe under his term.

[LickNeckey]

sorry to confuse you Dax that was a Trump quote about Obama

[sonofdaxjones]

sorry to confuse you Dax that was a Trump quote about Obama

I wasn't responding to you 

[Stupid Fitz]

 

[LickNeckey]

The previous sock puppet president spent more time on vacation then any other president in modern American history . . . Trump Deranged hardcore #blueanongE'r Stupid Fitz said nothing.

Reporters now joke that they actually have to work at the White House now . . . it was always sleepy time with Joe under his term.

source?

[sonofdaxjones]

  you're going to run to somebody like Snopes who is going to play the whole "Biden works every day" shtick . . . again, the reporters who cover the presidency have said emphatically the current work schedule runs laps around sleepy Joe's tenure.

[Stupid Fitz]

you're going to run to somebody like Snopes who is going to play the whole "Biden works every day" shtick . . . again, the reporters who cover the presidency have said emphatically the current work schedule runs laps around sleepy Joe's tenure.

I for one am shocked that reporters from Fox, OAN, and Newsmax (aren't these the only orgs he hasn't kicked out?) are saying positive things about Trump and negative things about Biden.

[sonofdaxjones]

We'll decide what a vacation day is!! #blueanon   

It's a lot less when our guy is in office . . . and a lot more when the guy we hate is in office 

[sonofdaxjones]

you're going to run to somebody like Snopes who is going to play the whole "Biden works every day" shtick . . . again, the reporters who cover the presidency have said emphatically the current work schedule runs laps around sleepy Joe's tenure.

I for one am shocked that reporters from Fox, OAN, and Newsmax (aren't these the only orgs he hasn't kicked out?) are saying positive things about Trump and negative things about Biden.

 

The Huff Post was riding on AF1 the other day, asking dumbass questions.

He wasn't called Joe "full lid" Biden for nothing 

[LickNeckey]

so no source?

[bucket]

Could have also been one of those situations where no news is good news?