Oregon GOP leader cites false examples of government waste from parody X account
Sen. Daniel Bonham, R-The Dalles, talks during a legislative preview on Jan. 16, 2025, while Senate President Rob Wagner, D-Lake Oswego, and Senate Majority Leader Kayse Jama, D-Portland, watch. (Photo by Ron Cooper/Oregon Capital Chronicle)
Oregon's Senate Republican leader shared debunked claims from a social media parody account about federal government spending in a state-issued email newsletter decrying 'fear-mongering and misinformation.'
Sen. Daniel Bonham, R-The Dalles, dedicated the first 400 words of his official legislative newsletter on Monday night to 'cutting through the rhetoric' on several of President Donald Trump's recent executive orders.
'There has been a lot of fear-mongering and misinformation on Trump's recent executive orders,' Bonham wrote. 'While I am not surprised, the rhetoric is absolutely counterintuitive to having intellectually honest policy discussions. Agree or disagree, seeking truth around these policy decisions is important.'
He proceeded to describe examples of 'gross mismanagement' uncovered by Elon Musk's U.S. DOGE Service, a commission Trump created to slash federal spending. Bonham's examples included more than half a billion dollars spent on sushi, hundreds of thousands on coffee and thousands on paper coffee cups — but those examples, which have spread like wildfire on conservative social media, aren't real.
They originated with a Jan. 24, 2025, post on X, Musk's social media company, by a user named 'Not Elon Musk' that is clearly marked and reads as a parody account:
'Good morning X! My experience with DOGE has been totally wild so far. I told you yesterday about the $600 million per year the Pentagon was spending on Sushi…
Well, I just found another wild one! The Air Force was spending $1,280 per paper coffee cup! Like literally those ones you find at the office. $1280!!! We also found that $230k per month was being spent by the IRS on Starbucks Cinammon Roast K Cups, but everyone was working from home!
Anyway, back to work! Have a great day!'
Right-wing users spread those claims around the internet, posting on Facebook and TikTok but without the parody disclaimer.
And on Monday they made it to Bonham's newsletter.
In an email to the Capital Chronicle, Bonham said he didn't know those claims originated from a parody account. He said they're minor compared to billions 'squandered' by the U.S. Agency for International Development, which handles most overseas humanitarian aid.
'I'm not without fault, but I definitely didn't pull it from a parody account,' he said. 'Those examples were all over the internet — shared widely. Your question feels like a smoke and mirror attempt to not cover the real issue — the gross mismanagement of spending.'
The Air Force does have a history with expensive coffee cups, but they weren't paper cups: In 2018, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, pressed the agency for answers on why it spent nearly $1,300 apiece on special reheatable coffee cups that plugged into airplanes. The Air Force used them to heat coffee and soup on long flights and stopped buying them under congressional scrutiny in 2018, the Air Force Times reported.
After questions from the Capital Chronicle, Bonham sent his constituents a second newsletter on Wednesday morning, noting that he received questions about his analysis of federal spending. Moving forward, he wrote, he'll use official government sources like USASpending.gov and the Government Accountability Office, as well as the nonprofit fiscally conservative watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste.
And this time, as Bonham decried spending he disagreed with — money for trans health care in Guatemala, purchases of Politico Pro's legislation tracking and policy newsletters, and 'improper' payments of the wrong amount or made to the wrong person — he cited his sources.
'The more I research the worse it gets,' he wrote. 'On a positive note, while people are questioning sources of certain waste examples, more attention is brought to this glaring issue — and our nation will be better for it.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
11 minutes ago
- New York Post
The 21 cases left for the Supreme Court to decide, including transgender care
The Supreme Court is in the homestretch of a term that has lately been dominated by the Trump administration's emergency appeals of lower court orders seeking to slow President Donald Trump's efforts to remake the federal government. But the justices also have 21 cases to resolve that were argued between December and mid-May, including a push by Republican-led states to ban gender-affirming care for transgender minors. One of the argued cases was an emergency appeal, the administration's bid to be allowed to enforce Trump's executive order denying birthright citizenship to U.S.-born children of parents who are in the country illegally. The court typically aims to finish its work by the end of June. 7 The Supreme Court has 21 cases to resolve that were argued between December and mid-May. REUTERS Here are some of the biggest remaining cases: Tennessee and 26 other states have enacted bans on certain treatment for transgender youth The oldest unresolved case, and arguably the term's biggest, stems from a challenge to Tennessee's law from transgender minors and their parents who argue that it is unconstitutional sex discrimination aimed at a vulnerable population. At arguments in December, the court's conservative majority seemed inclined to uphold the law, voicing skepticism of claims that it violates the 14th amendment's equal protection clause. The post-Civil War provision requires the government to treat similarly situated people the same. 7 The oldest unresolved case stems from a challenge to Tennessee's law on transgender youth AP 7 The court is weighing the case amid other federal and state efforts to regulate the lives of transgender people, such as which bathrooms they can use, and pushes to keep transgender athletes from playing in girls' sports. The court is weighing the case amid a range of other federal and state efforts to regulate the lives of transgender people, including which sports competitions they can join and which bathrooms they can use. In April, Trump's administration sued Maine for not complying with the government's push to ban transgender athletes in girls sports. Trump also has sought to block federal spending on gender-affirming care for those under 19 and a conservative majority of justices allowed him to move forward with plans to oust transgender people from the U.S. military. Trump's birthright citizenship order has been blocked by lower courts The court rarely hears arguments over emergency appeals, but it took up the administration's plea to narrow orders that have prevented the citizenship changes from taking effect anywhere in the U.S. The issue before the justices is whether to limit the authority of judges to issue nationwide injunctions, which have plagued both Republican and Democratic administrations in the past 10 years. 7 Protesters confront law enforcement outside of a federal building and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention center in Los Angeles. Getty Images These nationwide court orders have emerged as an important check on Trump's efforts and a source of mounting frustration to the Republican president and his allies. At arguments last month, the court seemed intent on keeping a block on the citizenship restrictions while still looking for a way to scale back nationwide court orders. It was not clear what such a decision might look like, but a majority of the court expressed concerns about what would happen if the administration were allowed, even temporarily, to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the country illegally. Democratic-led states, immigrants and rights groups who sued over Trump's executive order argued that it would upset the settled understanding of birthright citizenship that has existed for more than 125 years. 7 A majority of the court last month expressed concerns about what would happen if the administration were allowed to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the country illegally. REUTERS The court seems likely to side with Maryland parents in a religious rights case over LGBTQ storybooks in public schools Parents in the Montgomery County school system, in suburban Washington, want to be able to pull their children out of lessons that use the storybooks, which the county added to the curriculum to better reflect the district's diversity. The school system at one point allowed parents to remove their children from those lessons, but then reversed course because it found the opt-out policy to be disruptive. Sex education is the only area of instruction with an opt-out provision in the county's schools. 7 LGBTQ+ veterans hold signs protesting the ban on transgender military members as they march in the World Pride parade in Washington, DC on June 7. Nathan Posner/Shutterstock The school district introduced the storybooks in 2022, with such titles as 'Prince and Knight' and 'Uncle Bobby's Wedding.' The case is one of several religious rights cases at the court this term. The justices have repeatedly endorsed claims of religious discrimination in recent years. The decision also comes amid increases in recent years in books being banned from public school and public libraries. A three-year battle over congressional districts in Louisiana is making its second trip to the Supreme Court Lower courts have struck down two Louisiana congressional maps since 2022 and the justices are weighing whether to send state lawmakers back to the map-drawing board for a third time. The case involves the interplay between race and politics in drawing political boundaries in front of a conservative-led court that has been skeptical of considerations of race in public life. At arguments in March, several of the court's conservative justices suggested they could vote to throw out the map and make it harder, if not impossible, to bring redistricting lawsuits under the Voting Rights Act. 7 The case about Louisiana congressional maps involves the interplay between race and politics in drawing political boundaries in front of a conservative-led court. AP Before the court now is a map that created a second Black majority congressional district among Louisiana's six seats in the House of Representatives. The district elected a Black Democrat in 2024. A three-judge court found that the state relied too heavily on race in drawing the district, rejecting Louisiana's arguments that politics predominated, specifically the preservation of the seats of influential members of Congress, including Speaker Mike Johnson. The Supreme Court ordered the challenged map to be used last year while the case went on. Lawmakers only drew that map after civil rights advocates won a court ruling that a map with one Black majority district likely violated the landmark voting rights law. The justices are weighing a Texas law aimed at blocking kids from seeing online pornography Texas is among more than a dozen states with age verification laws. The states argue the laws are necessary as smartphones have made access to online porn, including hardcore obscene material, almost instantaneous. The question for the court is whether the measure infringes on the constitutional rights of adults as well. The Free Speech Coalition, an adult-entertainment industry trade group, agrees that children shouldn't be seeing pornography. But it says the Texas law is written too broadly and wrongly affects adults by requiring them to submit personal identifying information online that is vulnerable to hacking or tracking. The justices appeared open to upholding the law, though they also could return it to a lower court for additional work. Some justices worried the lower court hadn't applied a strict enough legal standard in determining whether the Texas law and others like that could run afoul of the First Amendment.
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Bill Cassidy Blew It
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. It's easy to forget that Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s assault on vaccines—including, most recently, his gutting of the expert committee that guides American vaccine policy—might have been avoided. Four months ago, his nomination for health secretary was in serious jeopardy. The deciding vote seemed to be in the hands of one Republican senator: Bill Cassidy of Louisiana. A physician who gained prominence by vaccinating low-income kids in his home state, Cassidy was wary of the longtime vaccine conspiracist. 'I have been struggling with your nomination,' he told Kennedy during his confirmation hearings in January. Then Cassidy caved. In the speech he gave on the Senate floor explaining his decision, Cassidy said that he'd vote to confirm Kennedy only because he had extracted a number of concessions from the nominee—chief among them that he would preserve, 'without changes,' the very CDC committee Kennedy overhauled this week. Since then, Cassidy has continued to give Kennedy the benefit of the doubt. On Monday, after Kennedy dismissed all 17 members of the vaccine advisory committee, Cassidy posted on X that he was working with Kennedy to prevent the open roles from being filled with 'people who know nothing about vaccines except suspicion.' [Read: The doctor who let RFK Jr. through] The senator has failed, undeniably and spectacularly. One new appointee, Robert Malone, has repeatedly spread misinformation (or what he prefers to call 'scientific dissent') about vaccines. Another appointee, Vicky Pebsworth, is on the board of an anti-vax nonprofit, the National Vaccine Information Center. Cassidy may keep insisting that he is doing all he can to stand up for vaccines. But he already had his big chance to do so, and he blew it. Now, with the rest of America, he's watching the nation's vaccine future take a nosedive. So far, the senator hasn't appeared interested in any kind of mea culpa for his faith in Kennedy's promises. On Thursday, I caught Cassidy as he hurried out of a congressional hearing room. He was still reviewing the appointees, he told me and several other reporters who gathered around him. When I chased after him down the hallway to ask more questions, he told me, 'I'll be putting out statements, and I'll let those statements stand for themselves.' A member of his staff dismissed me with a curt 'Thank you, sir.' Cassidy's staff has declined repeated requests for an interview with the senator since the confirmation vote in January. With the exception of Mitch McConnell, every GOP senator voted to confirm Kennedy. They all have to own the health secretary's actions. But Cassidy seemed to be the Republican most concerned about Kennedy's nomination, and there was a good reason to think that the doctor would vote his conscience. In 2021, Cassidy was one of seven Senate Republicans who voted to convict Donald Trump on an impeachment charge after the insurrection at the Capitol. But this time, the senator—who is up for reelection next year, facing a more MAGA-friendly challenger—ultimately fell in line. Cassidy tried to have it both ways: elevating Kennedy to his job while also vowing to constrain him. In casting his confirmation vote, Cassidy implied that the two would be in close communication, and that Kennedy had asked for his input on hiring decisions. The two reportedly had breakfast in March to discuss the health secretary's plan to dramatically reshape the department. 'Senator Cassidy speaks regularly with secretary Kennedy and believes those conversations are much more productive when they're held in private, not through press headlines,' a spokesperson for Cassidy wrote in an email. (A spokesperson for HHS did not immediately respond to a request for comment.) At times, it has appeared as though Cassidy's approach has had some effect on the health secretary. Amid the measles outbreak in Texas earlier this year, Kennedy baselessly questioned the safety of the MMR vaccine. In April, after two unvaccinated children died, Cassidy posted on X: 'Everyone should be vaccinated! There is no treatment for measles. No benefit to getting measles. Top health officials should say so unequivocally b/4 another child dies.' Cassidy didn't call out Kennedy by name, but the health secretary appeared to get the message. Later that day, Kennedy posted that the measles vaccine was the most effective way to stave off illness. ('Completely agree,' Cassidy responded.) All things considered, that's a small victory. Despite Kennedy's claims that he is not an anti-vaxxer, he has enacted a plainly anti-vaccine agenda. Since being confirmed, he has pushed out the FDA's top vaccine regulator, hired a fellow vaccine skeptic to investigate the purported link between autism and shots, and questioned the safety of childhood vaccinations currently recommended by the CDC. As my colleague Katherine J. Wu wrote this week, 'Whether he will admit to it or not, he is serving the most core goal of the anti-vaccine movement—eroding access to, and trust in, immunization.' [Read: RFK Jr. is barely even pretending anymore] The reality is that back channels can be only so effective. Cassidy's main power is to call Kennedy before the Senate health committee, which he chairs, and demand an explanation for Kennedy's new appointees to the CDC's vaccine-advisory committee. Cassidy might very well do that. In February, he said that Kennedy would 'come before the committee on a quarterly basis, if requested.' Kennedy did appear before Cassidy's committee last month to answer questions about his efforts to institute mass layoffs at his agency. Some Republicans (and many Democrats) pressed the secretary on those efforts, while others praised them. Cassidy, for his part, expressed concerns about Kennedy's indiscriminate cutting of research programs, but still, he was largely deferential. 'I agree with Secretary Kennedy that HHS needs reform,' Cassidy said. Even if he had disagreed, an angry exchange between a health secretary and a Senate committee doesn't guarantee any policy changes. Lawmakers may try to act like government bureaucrats report to them, but they have limited power once a nominee is already in their job. Technically, lawmakers can impeach Cabinet members, but in American history, a sitting Cabinet member has never been impeached and subsequently removed from office. The long and arduous confirmation process is supposed to be the bulwark against potentially dangerous nominees being put in positions of power. Cassidy and most of his Republican colleagues have already decided not to stop Kennedy from overseeing the largest department in the federal government by budget. Now Kennedy is free to do whatever he wants—senators be damned. Article originally published at The Atlantic
Los Angeles Times
16 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Immigration raids are threatening businesses that supply America's food, farm bureaus say
VENTURA, Calif. — Large-scale immigration raids at packinghouses and fields in California are threatening businesses that supply much of the country's food, farm bureaus say. Dozens of farmworkers have been arrested recently after uniformed federal agents fanned out on farms northwest of Los Angeles in Ventura County, which is known for growing strawberries, lemons and avocados. Others are skipping work as fear in immigrant communities has deepened as President Donald Trump steps up his immigration crackdown, vowing to dramatically increase arrests and sending federal agents to detain people at Home Depot parking lots and workplaces including car washes and a garment factory. It also comes as Trump sent National Guard troops and Marines to Los Angeles following protests over his immigration enforcement operations. Demonstrations have since spread to other U.S. cities. Maureen McGuire, chief executive of Ventura County's farm bureau, said between 25% and 45% of farmworkers have stopped showing up for work since the large-scale raids began this month. 'When our workforce is afraid, fields go unharvested, packinghouses fall behind, and market supply chains, from local grocery stores to national retailers, are affected,' she said in a statement on Thursday. 'This impacts every American who eats.' California's farms produce more than a third of the country's vegetables and more than three-quarters of its fruits and nuts. While the state's government is dominated by Democrats, there are large Republican areas that run through farm country, and many growers throughout the state have been counting on Trump to help with key agricultural issues ranging from water to trade. Primitiva Hernandez, executive director of 805 UndocuFund, estimates at least 43 people were detained in farm fields in Ventura and Santa Barbara counties since Monday. The number is from both the Mexican consulate and the group's own estimates from talking with family members of people detained, she said. Elizabeth Strater, the United Farm Workers' director of strategic campaigns, said her group received reports of immigration arrests on farms as far north as California's Central Valley. Lucas Zucker, co-executive director of the Central Coast Alliance United for a Sustainable Economy, said farmworker members reported that agents went to at least nine farms but were turned away by supervisors because they lacked a warrant. 'This is just a mass assault on a working-class immigrant community and essentially profiling,' Zucker said. 'They are not going after specific people who are really targeted. They're just fishing.' In response to questions about the farm arrests, Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement that the agency will follow the president's direction and continue to seek to remove immigrants who have committed crimes. On Thursday, Trump acknowledged growers' concerns that his stepped-up immigration enforcement could leave them without workers they rely on to grow the country's food. He said something would be done to address the situation, but he did not provide specifics. 'Our great Farmers and people in the Hotel and Leisure business have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace,' he said on his social media account, adding: 'We must protect our Farmers, but get the CRIMINALS OUT OF THE USA. Changes are coming!' The California Farm Bureau said it has not received reports of a widespread disruption to its workforce, but there are concerns among community members. Bryan Little, the bureau's senior director of policy advocacy, said the group has long pressed for immigration reform to deal with long-running labor shortages. 'We recognize that some workers may feel uncertain right now, and we want to be very clear: California agriculture depends on and values its workforce,' Little said in a statement. 'If federal immigration enforcement activities continue in this direction, it will become increasingly difficult to produce food, process it and get it onto grocery store shelves.' One worker, who asked not to be named out of fear, said he was picking strawberries at a Ventura County farm early Tuesday when more than a dozen cars pulled up to the farm next door. He said they arrested at least three people and put them in vans, while women who worked on the farm burst out crying. He said the supervisors on his farm did not allow the agents inside. 'The first thing that came to my mind is, who will stay with my kids?' the worker, who is originally from Mexico and has lived in the United States for two decades, said in Spanish. 'It's something so sad and unfortunate because we are not criminals.' He said he didn't go to work Wednesday out of fear, and his bosses told him to stay home at least one more day until things settle down. But that means fruit isn't getting picked, and he isn't getting paid. 'These are lost days, days that we're missing work. But what else can we do?' he said. Taxin and Pineda write for the Associated Press.
