Trump Demands Return of $9 Million from Reuters Subsidiary
Donald Trump is raising his voice over a $9 million contract the Department of Defense awarded to Thomson Reuters Special Services, LLC (TRSS). His demand? Hand back taxpayer money, pronto! The contract falls under ‘Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services’ and ‘Research and Development’ programs.
Trump hollers on Truth Social:
"DOGE: Radical Left Reuters pocketed $9,000,000 for 'large scale social deception.' GIVE BACK THE MONEY, NOW!"
This has got folks buzzing. TRSS, a branch of Thomson Reuters Corporation, attracted Trump and Elon Musk’s ire by seemingly turning government contracts into something fishy. Musk weighs in on X (formerly Twitter), exclaiming, “Reuters got paid millions for ‘large scale social deception.’ Total sham!”
The contract involves the Active Social Engineering Defense (ASED) Large Scale Social Deception (LSD) program. ASED aims at building up defenses against cyber shenanigans like phishing. The goal? Boost U.S. cybersecurity. But Trump isn’t charmed, fuming over these links between government gold and media giants.
A note on the contract hints that funds issued beyond 2020 involved emergency capacities related to COVID-19. Trump’s not keen to let bygones be bygones, recalling how recent Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) antics led to clawbacks for unexpected luxury expenses.
This accusation of a twisted partnership between media and government funding isn’t new. Politico received similar scrutiny in the past over cozy pockets holding government funds. Trump sees this as part of a wider pattern, where media outlets allegedly lean left, leaving a sour taste for many who thirst for genuine, unbiased reporting.
Cybersecurity or Social Engineering?
The ASED program was designed as a shield against digital trickery—specifically phishing attacks that prey on unsuspecting souls. From a cybersecurity standpoint, the project’s mission seems noble: safeguarding America’s digital fortress. Yet, the phrase ‘large scale social deception’ is causing an uproar. To some, it reads like an Orwellian nightmare; to Trump and Musk, it’s an affront to transparency.
Trump isn’t just rattling his saber for the sake of it. To him, the terminology reeks of manipulation, potentially marking media as part of an elaborate ruse. For a leader who champions truth, he views this contract as a glaring symbol of taxpayer dollars wandering off the beaten path.
- Critics question the use of ‘social deception’ in cybersecurity
- Trump supporters see it as potential manipulation of media
- Concerns raised about transparency in government contracts
Critics might label these reactions as over-the-top, yet in a world craving authenticity, it’s vital to question how contracts and clauses come to be. For Trump supporters, this isn’t just about a line in a contract; it’s a call for vigilance, ensuring that power rests with the people and not in the hands of hidden forces crafting cunning stories under the guise of protecting national security.
Media Neutrality Under Scrutiny
Trump’s outcry over the taxpayer-funded contract spotlights concerns about media neutrality. The $9 million spent on TRSS for what Trump dubs “large scale social deception” pours gasoline on the already blazing fire of right-wing critiques. Republicans have long pointed to media outlets like Reuters as cloaked in leftist robes under the guise of neutrality—a sentiment compounded by the federal funds that hint at partiality.
Consider Politico’s past tangled with USAID dollars—a fact not lost on those weary of media bias. An $8 million line-item for Politico Pro subscriptions sparked turmoil, riling up sentiments that these media bodies might be pocketing taxpayer cash to fund agendas not aligned with conservative ideals.
Trump’s vocal critiques craft a portrayal of outlets as emissaries of misinformation. To him, their taxpayer-backed affiliations seem to affirm a left tilt, undermining a fair and balanced media landscape. This isn’t mere finger-pointing—it’s a call to action for believers of unbiased news, who perceive these links as an affront to transparency and integrity.
"Can the media rise above perceived bias to win back trust, or will these allegations continue to define its modern-day plight?"
The clamor for unbiased reporting isn’t merely a wish; it’s a demand for recalibration in how news is portrayed and which voices control the conversation. As skies rumble with Trump’s demands, one question persists: can the media rise above perceived bias to win back trust, or will these allegations continue to define its modern-day plight?
- Center for Responsive Politics. Courier Newsroom: Fake News or Legitimate Journalism? 2020.
- Tapper J, Stelter B. CNN Segment on Courier Newsroom. CNN. 2020.
- Federal Election Commission. Future Forward PAC Filings. 2023.
- U.S. Department of Defense. Contract Award to Thomson Reuters Special Services, LLC. 2018.
- Federal Emergency Management Agency. FEMA Expenditure Report. 2023.