Doge uncovers $bilions democraps slush fund

Aaaaah, Jimmy Dore the american far right's go to expert on distributing misinformation. But don't take my word for it, let's see what grok ("musks AI") has to say about this, shall we.

So based on the below, there are only claims, no verified facts. of course claims are good enough if they fit the narrative and gets them clicks from the tards who eat it all up happily. I am not saying that they will never find billions of savings and some scams but up to this point it is only luke warm air and that is one of the reasons they were reigned in...... 

The exact wording I typed was (march 9th 2025, 0940CET): "what did doge find out about money waste in the US EPA"

Summary first:
"In short, DOGE’s findings on EPA money waste, as reported, center on a headline-grabbing $20 billion claim, some focus on discretionary spending (e.g., climate funds), and a push to slash personnel and DEI programs. But the lack of detailed, accessible evidence makes it tough to separate fact from spin. If you’re digging for more, the trail runs thin unless DOGE or the EPA releases a line-by-line breakdown—which hasn’t happened yet."

Full reply:
The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), spearheaded by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, has taken aim at identifying wasteful spending across federal agencies, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Since DOGE is an advisory group and not an official government entity, its findings are more about recommendations than enforceable actions. Based on available reports and statements, here’s what’s been claimed about money waste at the EPA under DOGE’s lens—though specifics are patchy, and some claims lack rigorous documentation.

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, appointed during the Trump administration, has been a key voice in this narrative. He’s claimed the EPA identified $20 billion in wasteful spending from the Biden administration’s tenure. According to a Fox News report from February 2025, Zeldin described this as money “tossed out the door” before the transition of power, likening it to “throwing gold bars off the Titanic.” He pointed to discretionary spending by eight EPA-affiliated agencies as the culprit, with one example being the Climate United Fund, which reportedly received nearly $7 billion. However, there’s no publicly available breakdown—like specific contracts, grants, or programs—to verify this $20 billion figure. Without that granularity, it’s hard to assess whether this is genuine waste or just spending Zeldin’s administration disagrees with philosophically.

Beyond Zeldin’s claim, DOGE’s broader approach to waste involves scrutinizing contracts, grants, and operational inefficiencies. Musk and Ramaswamy have used platforms like X to highlight what they see as systemic overspending, though their public statements often lean on generalities rather than itemized evidence. For instance, Musk has posted about cutting “unnecessary” programs across government but hasn’t singled out EPA-specific line items with hard numbers. One area DOGE has reportedly flagged across multiple agencies, including the EPA, is spending on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. An NPR analysis from February 2025 noted DOGE’s push to cancel such contracts, with potential savings cited in the tens of millions—but these were theoretical caps, not confirmed expenditures.

Another angle involves operational costs tied to personnel and infrastructure. Reports, like one from TIME in February 2025, mentioned significant EPA staff reductions—14,388 employees terminated per an EPA spokesperson’s statement to Politico—as part of Trump-era executive orders. While not directly attributed to DOGE, these cuts align with their efficiency ethos. The idea is that reducing headcount and closing redundant offices could save money, but there’s no clear data on how much the EPA specifically saved or whether these cuts compromised critical functions like pollution monitoring. Critics argue the savings might be offset by long-term risks, though no hard cost-benefit analysis has surfaced.

It’s worth noting that DOGE’s process lacks transparency, despite Musk’s claims of “maximal transparency” on X. Their website, doge.gov, mostly aggregates X posts and lacks detailed reports or audits. Some of their broader claims have been debunked or clarified—like an alleged $8 billion savings from an ICE contract that turned out to be worth $8 million, as TIME reported. This raises questions about the accuracy of their EPA-specific findings. Without a public ledger or audit trail, much of the narrative around waste hinges on Zeldin’s $20 billion figure and DOGE’s rhetorical push for cuts, rather than independently verified data.

In short, DOGE’s findings on EPA money waste, as reported, center on a headline-grabbing $20 billion claim, some focus on discretionary spending (e.g., climate funds), and a push to slash personnel and DEI programs. But the lack of detailed, accessible evidence makes it tough to separate fact from spin. If you’re digging for more, the trail runs thin unless DOGE or the EPA releases a line-by-line breakdown—which hasn’t happened yet.