The Conservative Cave

LogDog75 (1,807 posts)

Heard on Stephanie Rhule this morning

Elon Musk, the world's richest man, is the biggest contributor to republicans. Her guest put it into perspective saying if you compare how much Musk is worth to the median American income, the amount Musk spent would be the equivalent of $32.

I did a search on how much he's spent and he's spent $366 million on republicans with $158m contributed to the Super Pac Senate Leadership Fund.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1002

The next time a MAGrAt drops the name George Soros, remind them of Musk.

RussBLib (11,082 posts)
1. According to the FEC
Soros has dropped around $102 million on Dem candidates and PAC’s. Maybe 1/3 of what Leon Skum has given.

https://democraticunderground.com/100221562173

the point of this is what

According to the DUmmies anybody can print a warrant at their local library or home so.

I heard you can print one off at FedEx, and they are changing their slogan to "The world on 24 business hours".

Bombshell Report Reveals How Major Banks Discriminated Against Conservatives

https://pjmedia.com/matt-margolis/2026/10/14/bombshell-report-reveals-how-major-banks-discriminated-against-conservatives-n4958302

Nine of the country's biggest banks spent five years running an outrageous campaign to cut conservatives, Christians, pro-lifers, and Trump supporters out of the financial system, and the federal government now has the receipts.

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) released its Debanking Review on Wednesday. Miranda Devine first broke the story in the New York Post. The 47-page report, titled "Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans," draws on a hundred thousand complaints and fifty thousand internal bank records from 2020 through 2025. It names JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citibank, Wells Fargo, U.S. Bank, Capital One, PNC, TD Bank, and BMO Bank.

Every one of them hid behind the same excuse: "reputation risk."

What did these banks fear? Bad press, protests, attacks from activist outfits like the Southern Poverty Law Center, and retaliation from regulators and politicians. So they purged anyone who might draw that heat. Christian organizations lost service over their views on abortion, LGBT issues, and traditional family values. Gun makers and retailers, Arctic oil and gas, coal, detention facilities, tobacco, and e-cigarette companies all saw financing dry up.

Hopefully lawsuits and extensive discovery processes will follow.

No agents jumping out of the shrubbery?

The DU chronicles: the quest for a shrubbery!


 

Leaked Call Exposes Environmentalists Trying To Deceive Congress And Kill Pro-Energy Agreement

https://www.dailywire.com/news/how-far-left-groups-plotted-to-kill-a-bipartisan-deal-and-hide-strategy-from-dems

Far-Left environmental groups sought to organize opposition to a bipartisan Senate permitting reform bill and keep their strategy from the Democratic lawmakers who negotiated it, according to a leaked transcript of a coalition call.

“We really have to have a pretty clear agreement by all parties that this is an effort to stop this bill, not to make it better,” Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity, said during the call.

The call, organized in part by the Sierra Club, drew 89 participants as environmental organizations debated how to respond to the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026. The legislation, introduced on September 30, was negotiated by Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) alongside Sens. Martin Heinrich (D-NM) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI).

The bill would overhaul federal environmental review and permitting procedures, establish deadlines for reviews and legal challenges, and provide greater certainty for projects that have already secured permits and financing. Its supporters argue that the changes would reduce delays, expand energy infrastructure, and help lower costs while retaining environmental and historic preservation safeguards.
...
Hartl later confirmed the transcript’s authenticity to Punchbowl and defended his remarks.

“I don’t want our strategy being relayed back to them, and now it is,” he told the outlet. “Someone on the call decided to betray all of us.”

Much of the opposition centered on provisions intended to make federal permits more durable and restrict the ability of courts and future administrations to revisit approved projects.
...
... During the call, an advocate with the National Wildlife Federation warned that once a project received authorization and a record of decision, the legislation would sharply restrict subsequent changes.

“Once a project is authorized and there’s a ROD, there are no changes whatsoever, period, to anything. Ever at any time ever,” the participant said, referring to a formal step in the federal environmental review process.

The legislation, however, does not simply prohibit every subsequent change under every circumstance. Its stated purpose is to provide greater certainty for permitted projects, while the sponsors describe exceptions for extraordinary circumstances, violations of law, and court orders.

This bill, as written, looks like it would significantly curtail enviros' ability to obstruct progress, decades overdue.