Conservative
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
-
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
view the rest of the comments
Your fact check article you cited has been updated with corrections.
Thanks for the update. So it seems to have been legit payments then, neato.
Nothing in the article discusses the legitimacy of the subscriptions. It could simply be a way money was funneled.
Money can be exchanged for goods and services.
If we cannot make a determination of the legitimacy of subscriptions, we equally cannot conclude if it was funneled either.
That's why I used the word could. In this context it's used to express possibility.
Yep. It’s also possible this is a distraction from us remembering USAID was investigating Starlink in Ukraine for shutting off satellite access to help Russia.
It is, but it's far more likely you missed or didn't understand the word could.
So many possibilities!
There are but the most likely one is you not knowing what could means.
Maybe! The one about the guy getting unrestricted access to the group investigating his company for wrongdoing makes a lot of sense though.
Conspiracy theories must be quite common for people that don't know what could means.
Getting the feeling you’re just wanting to argue or something. It’s not a theory. USAID was investigating Starlink for aiding Russia by restricting Ukraine access. That is at minimum a conflict of interest.
https://gizmodo.com/elon-musks-enemy-usaid-was-investigating-starlink-over-its-contracts-in-ukraine-2000559365
I’m not here to squabble. If you are I suggest goading someone else.
Based on your actions I don't think you know what squabble means either.
Further USAID was not investigating starlink. They don't have authority to investigate starlink. They were investigating how the Government of Ukraine used the USAID-provided Starlink terminals & how USAID monitored the Government of Ukraine’s use of USAID-provided Starlink terminals.
Finally Starlink was never turned off for Ukraine they denied access up to Crimea because of US sanctions on Russia.