Politico's Response to Allegations That USAID Was Their Sugar Daddy Was a Total Disaster

You cannot make this up. Politico responded to the allegations that USAID was their sugar daddy and did not disappoint. It was an exercise in gaslighting and a terrible one at that. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) crew uncovered mountains of waste and fraud, which led to the agency being virtually shut down on Friday. It’ll be absorbed into the State Department, with most of its workers being furloughed.

Yet, USAID also spent millions on various media subscriptions. And while we won’t call it a funneling of cash per se, it pretty much was that, but with extra steps. The government was essentially running a state media operation, which is the Democrat-media complex personified. We knew it existed, and now we have literal receipts. Whoever drafted this deserves a raise because one must be extraordinarily dense to believe it. I think the copywriter was a good soldier here because it’s truly amazing (via Politico):

POLITICO has been the subject of debate on X this week. Some of it has been misinformed, and some of it has been flat-out false. Let’s set the record straight.
POLITICO is a privately owned company. We have never received any government funding — no subsidies, no grants, no handouts. Not one dime, ever, in 18 years.
Millions of people around the world read our journalism on POLITICO.com, POLITICO.EU and in newsletters. It is supported by advertising and sponsorships.
POLITICO Pro is different. It is a professional subscription service used by companies, organizations, and, yes, some government agencies. They subscribe because it makes them better at their jobs — helping them track policy, legislation and regulations in real-time with news, intelligence and a suite of data products. At its core, POLITICO Pro is about transparency and accountability: Shining a light on the work of the agencies, regulators and policymakers throughout our vast federal government. Businesses and entities within the government find it useful as they navigate the chaotic regulatory and legislative landscape. It’s that simple.
Most POLITICO Pro subscribers are in the private sector. They come from across the ideological spectrum and subscribe for one reason: value. And 90 percent renew every year because they rely on our reporting, data and insights.
Government agencies that subscribe do so through standard public procurement processes — just like any other tool they buy to work smarter and be more efficient. This is not funding. It is a transaction — just as the government buys research, equipment, software and industry reports. Some online voices are deliberately spreading falsehoods. Let’s be clear: POLITICO has no financial dependence on the government and no hidden agenda. We cover politics and policy — that’s our job.
We are so proud of our journalists and so proud of the connection we have with you, our readers.
We stand by our work, our values and our commitment to transparency, accountability and efficiency — the same principles that drive great journalism and great business.
Now, back to work.

This is true, unless you use Politico's own definition of "subsidy."
When parents get a voucher for their kids, if they spend it a Catholic school, POLITICO calls it a "subsidy" to Catholic schools.
If HHS spends my money on a POLITICO subscription, is that not also a subsidy? https://t.co/r3FDtvvwQ7 pic.twitter.com/F6tgT3DSZt
— Tim Carney (@TPCarney) February 6, 2025

Coulda fooled me… pic.twitter.com/CSx6DVzSFq
— John Ekdahl (@JohnEkdahl) February 6, 2025

Politico admitting government agencies buy scriptions to @PoliticoPro and that it doesn't bother them one bit: "POLITICO Pro is different. It is a professional subscription service used by companies, organizations, and, yes, some government agencies. They subscribe because it…
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) February 6, 2025